> Sam wrote: > I respect your opinion. > My opinion is that if we didn't go to war with Iraq we would have been > attacked again. >
If by "go to war" you mean invade Afghanistan, and by "attacked" you mean by AQ, then you are likely right based on reams of analysis. That is, AQ's ability to stage attacks in the US has been empirically driven by its ability to secure a solid command and control center from which to focus resources. By invading Afghanistan we, effectively, took out their HQ. Further we removed their funding and ease of international operations. Their trickle down of operations in Europe only exacerbated their troubles. In short, the invasion of Afghanistan and the disruption of their communication and funding networks has seriously hobbled them. That's the good news. The bad news is that they're reconsitituting that HQ and those networks in the mountains of Pakistan. Some estimates say they are 80-90% complete. This is why Bush finally sent some Hellfire missiles (as Obama suggested last summer) into those mountains, and why he's finally suggesting moving troops into Afghanistan (as Obama and others have been saying for years). ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;203748912;27390454;j Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/message.cfm/messageid:264616 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/CF-Community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
