he said bin Laden in the last debate. On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 11:34 PM, Michael Dinowitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dictionary. Invasion does not have to mean conquer/subjugate/regime change. > A thief invading your house does not mean to stay. He wants in and out. And > yes, the term is used that way all the time. Some may assume that it means > conquer/subjugate/regime change, but.... > As for the Pakistani governments support of the Taliban and other Islamist > forces, we're seeing more and more evidence of it day by day. > > Spanish intelligence document says Pakistan 'helped arm Taliban' > http://quqnoos.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1716&Itemid=49 > http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/spain/3116894/Spanish-intelligence-document-says-Pakistan-helped-arm-Taliban.html > > Let me look at Obama's statements again to see if he mentioned Bin Ladin or > just terrorists. > > On Sun, Oct 12, 2008 at 12:24 AM, Judah McAuley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 8:26 PM, Michael Dinowitz >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> > And the difference between striking and invading is? They're synonymous. >> >> I thought it was rather clear and obvious. You invade a country when >> you mean to conquer/subjugate/regime change it. We invaded Iraq, we >> meant to overthrow the government. You are going after elements of >> that country, particularly its government or forces associated/allied >> with it. >> >> In this case the discussion is about an offensive against groups that >> are not associated with the Pakistan government (we hope) and there is >> no goal or plan to depose the government or take control of any >> portion of their land. It is a strike within the territory of >> Pakistan, but not aimed at Pakistani interests. That is a clear and >> obvious difference. >> >> Still a serious situation. We'd be far better off working with the >> government of Pakistan to coordinate efforts in that area. Which is >> what Obama said he would do. The issue was whether Obama would violate >> the territorial integrity of Pakistan if he knew where Bin Laden was >> and Pakistan was unwilling or unable to help/authorize the strike. >> >> > And yes, there's an IF there but he did say it. Threaten it even. >> >> He said he would do it if that was the only choice to get Bin Laden. >> Its a tough call for me, honestly. I'm generally on the pacifistic >> side of things and I worry about inflaming anti-western ideology in >> Pakistan considering all that is in play in that region. None the >> less, we are talking about a man that pretty much tops the worlds most >> wanted list and who presumably was behind one of the largest assaults >> on the US in history. So everything taken together, I think you >> probably have to roll the dice and go after him, even if it means >> upsetting an ally who has very complicated dealings at home. By no >> means an easy decision though. >> >> Judah >> >> > >
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Adobe® ColdFusion® 8 software 8 is the most important and dramatic release to date Get the Free Trial http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;207172674;29440083;f Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:273760 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
