exellent…

) Some individuals or companies have abused the TrackBack feature to insert spam links on some blogs (see sping). This is similar to

usefull

I didn’t agree with you first, but last paragraph makes sense for me

The administration keeps saying, ‘We’re fighting terrorists.’ But the Iraqis will get rid of those terrorists. The terrorists and Iraqis are unified against us.

The minute we’re gone, the war will be over.

That sounds to me that he actually believes that “the minute we’re gone, the war will be over”. The implication is that peace will break out, “the minutes we’re gone”. For that to happen the current terrorists/insurgents/freedom fighters/thugs (take your pick) would have to turn peaceful.

No, it isn’t. At all. As horrible and wrong as the attacks were, Bin Laden’s grievance is a legitimate one, namely, the presence of foreign troops in Saudi Arabia. As a matter of fact, that one of the main goals of AlQaeda is to rid Saudi Arabia of American military presence has long been acknowledged in US military and diplomatic circles, and has also been widely reported:

In 2004, the Saudi-based al-Qa’ida network and associated extremists launched at least 11 attacks, killing over 60 people, including six Americans, and wounding more than 225 in Saudi Arabia. Focused on targets associated with US and Western presence and Saudi security forces in Riyadh, Yanbu, Jeddah, and Dhahran.
Terrorist Group Profiles

(…)by complete mutual agreement between the U.S. and the Saudi government we can now remove almost all of our forces from Saudi Arabia. Their presence there over the last 12 years has been a source of enormous difficulty for a friendly government. It’s been a huge recruiting device for al Qaeda. In fact if you look at bin Laden, one of his principle grievances was the presence of so-called crusader forces on the holy land, Mecca and Medina.
Paul Wolfowitz interview with Vanity Fair, May 2003

Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for bombing the American embassies in Nairobi, Kenya and Dar es Salaam, Tanzania. The attacks killed hundreds of people and coincided with the anniversary of the first deployment of U.S. troops to Saudi Arabia in 1990. The U.S. troop commitment to Saudi Arabia has been one of the central motives behind al-Qaeda’s attacks against the United States.
Do Al-Qaeda’s East Africa Operations Pose a Threat to U.S. Interests?

One of bin Laden’s main grievances was the presence of U.S. military bases in Saudi Arabia, where the Islamic holy cities of Mecca and Medina are located. The U.S. withdrew from these bases in 2003, stating that they were no longer necessary for their campaign in Iraq – raising concerns that they had capitulated to bin Laden’s demands in an effort to stem attacks against US targets.
Osama bin Laden

I agree it’s unlikely … however, your statement is a lot like the “she wored a tight short skirt … she should expect to be raped”. If it’s total nonsense in that case, it is total nonsense here. Don’t try to legitmize terrorism (or the grievances of thos who engage in it) by projecting your opinions of Americas ills (foreign policy, corporate interest, and militarism) … if that argument has merit, then the USA couls use the same argument. We don’t like Iraqs foreign policy, oil interests, and human rights … so we invade them. Your attempt to legitimize the terrorists comments on our shortcomings can be used to legitimize all tht’s purportedly wron with our invasion of Iraq … can’t you see this?

When Saddam enquired as to our position regarding his impending invasion of Kuwait to redress his grievances against their alledged slant drilling into his oil fields, our response was that we had no position on the matter.

Let me get this straight … you post a statement that, at the very least, marginally validates Saddam’s invasion of Kuwait (in other vernacular, a “war of aggression over oil) but … one of the main agruments/complaints I read here DAILY is that our Iraq war is a “war of aggression over oil”. This sounds like speaking out of both sides of ones mouth.

I wonder why Bubble boy shows absolutely no concern for the wherabouts of Bin Laden.

To assume that because we haven’t found him (some say we have … killed him … and hide it to avoid “martyrdom” on his part … I disagree) we aren’t looking is dumb. I agree that perhaps we could allocate more troops to this if not for Iraq … why would Bush stop looking when, in finding him, he could have a 20 point jump in approval ratings?

And wwwwallace, IRI, Randy, Tank and Mighty Afro are the flying monkey army…

LOL ryan

HEY Google for chapman+Rove+wonkette
LOL
http://www.bumperactive.com/index.jsp

But a good way to test this theory, is to try actually going after the terrorists.

If the terrorists hate us so much and want to hurt us, I wonder why Bubble boy shows absolutely no concern for the wherabouts of Bin Laden.
Afterall Bin Laden did take responsibilty for killing 3000 American’s.

How many American’s did Saddam Hussein kill? I forget.

On the other hand, consider that since we invaded Iraq, we moved our military bases out of Saudi Arabia, as Osama & others wanted, and now we have them in Iraq, where the Iraqis don’t want them, either. (Remember the de-emphasized declaration by the provisional Iraqi government pursuant to the recent Cairo conference in which they declared we should leave Iraq?) When Saddam enquired as to our position regarding his impending invasion of Kuwait to redress his grievances against their alledged slant drilling into his oil fields, our response was that we had no position on the matter. Now we have permanent bases in Kuwait.