The Bin Laden Card

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

Jim - everything I read is that three options where presented for the kill and Obama went with the assault option. It was his choice. He had all the accountablity and all the risk squarely on his shoulders. I think it was a ballsy call and I give him 100% credit for it. He deserves to play this card.

I can't give him credit for making a "ballsy" call. After 09/11, no one in their right mind would have refused to take the chance. I'll give him credit for making the "correct" call, but it was one of the easiest decisions any president has ever been faced with. He declined to get in the way of what obviously needed to be done. It was not a difficult decision. The SEALs were ballsy, not Obama.

[Jim in CT]

RIROCKHOUND, you stated that the USA started the war in the Pacific with Japan in the 1940s.

I contend that the opening shot in that war was when the 1st Japanese plane dropped a bomb onto a ship at Pearl Harbor. In my opinion, that was what started the war in the Pacific.

Clearly you disagree. Please tell me what you consider to be the opening shot of that war, and since whatever example you give will have occurred aftre Pearl Harbor, please tell me why Pearl Harbor wasn't the start of that war.

I have heard some bizarre things in my life. I have never heard anyone claim that the USA initiated the war with Japan in the Pacific theater.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I have heard some bizarre things in my life. I have never heard anyone claim that the USA initiated the war with Japan in the Pacific theater.

I didn't say that they initiated, started whatever.
The fact is that War was declared by GWB, (and FDR). In terms of Japan (if I recall, Germany declared war on us first, we followed suit) and Afghanistan, they were 100% justified, provoked by an attack.

I see a clear distinction between those situations and Iraq.
that's all...

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

I didn't say that they initiated, started whatever.
The fact is that War was declared by GWB, (and FDR). In terms of Japan (if I recall, Germany declared war on us first, we followed suit) and Afghanistan, they were 100% justified, provoked by an attack.

I see a clear distinction between those situations and Iraq.
that's all...

"I didn't say that they initiated, started whatever."

I must have somehting wrong with me, because that's twice this week I thought someone said somethiing (you and Spence) and maybe you didn't say it.

I asked this...

"Oh, Bush started the war in Afghanistan?
Do you think that FDR started the war with Japan in WWII? "

And you said this...

"Yes and Yes."

I also distinguish Afghanistan and WWII from Iraq. We were not attacked in a preemptive strike by Iraq, although they did fire at some American aircraft patrolling the no-fly zone, which could easily be called an act of war in my opinion. If my kid is flying that jet, I don't want his commander in chief giving a pass to some despot taking shots at him.

War was declared by Bush afetr we were attacked on 09/11 (and long aftre Al Queda declared war on us). Similarly, FDR declared war on Japan after Pearl Harbor (and aftre Japan declared war on us). If someone declares war on us and attacks us, and THEN we declare war on them and attack them, I don't see how you say we started that war.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I don't see how you say we started that war.

for #^&#^&#^&#^&s sake.

This all started because you took umbridge to JD saying Bush started two wars.

My final post and take on the matter.
Bush declared two wars during his term. One justified, one not.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

for #^&#^&#^&#^&s sake.

This all started because you took umbridge to JD saying Bush started two wars.

My final post and take on the matter.
Bush declared two wars during his term. One justified, one not.

Bryan, I'm sorry. In my opinion, there is a huge difference between launching an unprovoked attack, and responding to an unprovoked attack that someone else inflicts upon you. It seemed to me you weren't distinguishing between those 2 scenarios.

I agree that Iraq wasn't as immediate an imminent threat as the Taliban.

[RIJIMMY]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

I can't give him credit for making a "ballsy" call. After 09/11, no one in their right mind would have refused to take the chance. I'll give him credit for making the "correct" call, but it was one of the easiest decisions any president has ever been faced with. He declined to get in the way of what obviously needed to be done. It was not a difficult decision. The SEALs were ballsy, not Obama.

The "call" was the way they went in. I believe the options presented where
- bomb the compound
- drone
- seal attack

I also believe his advisors favored bombing. Since O wanted to be 100% they got him, he went with seals. Since it risked US lives and crossed Pakistan with our troops - I believe it was a ballsy call.

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

I also believe his advisors favored bombing. Since O wanted to be 100% they got him, he went with seals. Since it risked US lives and crossed Pakistan with our troops - I believe it was a ballsy call.

Had they failed Obama's presidency would have been effectively over right then and there, the national embarrassment would have been huge and done severe damage to our ability to fight terrorism and influence other nations.

For someone who the Right accuses of being anti-military it would seem that Obama has enormous faith in the skills and dedication of our warriors.

-spence