Rumors that Bin Laden is dead.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/23/terror/main2035766.shtml

Most analysts dismiss it.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,215301,00.html


Just another way for Bush to save face before the election.

 

Everything is called "convenient" timing. The capture of Saddam. The killing of Zarqawi. The release of every video. Yet looking back, do they really look so convenient? Hardly.

And how could Bush take pride in OBL dying of natural causes? How is this a victory?

 

It doesn't give him any glory, but it let's him off the hook after telling Pakistan he would go in and get him.

And yes the timing of capturing Sadam and the death of Zarqawi did seemed to be timed for the most political benefit.

I'll never forget "dead or alive" and "smoke him out", big talk for a little man, whose family is friends with the Bin Laden family. And five years later, 2600+ American military killed, thousands of Arab Muslims dead and three middle eastern countries bombed, the US billions in war debt and we still don't know where he is.

 

gardener you summed that up so nicely. What was it really all for?

 

The definition of a convenient time seems to be just about any time.

 

That goes for when Bush want's to declare war on a soveirgn nation as well Pepik.

 

Please send my apologies to the Taliban.

 

The US didn't limit itself to war with just the Taliban, they decided they wanted to control Iraqi oil rights as well, and to allow Israel to play bully in the area with their support also.

If the Taliban was our highest priority why do we only have approx. 9.000 troops in Afghanistan as opposed to the approx. 148,000 in Iraq?

 

Then why don't we control Iraqi oil rights? Did we forget?

And I find it hard to consider Israel a bully for responding when people invade it and kill its citizens. Can you explain why private armies in neighboring countries have the right to fire hundreds of rockets at Israeli cities?

 

We do control Iraqi oil rights.

http://www.reclaimdemocracy.org/weekly_2003/oil_corporations_iraq_immunity.html

 

this may sound a little conspiracy theory, but I think maybe oil rights is less a part of the Iraq issue than we are being led or not led to believe. It looks more like the US has invaded Iraq (not that it's the right reason) for military positioning in the middle east than any other reason. especially when you consider the proximity to Iran, pakistan, afgan., syria, lebanon, isreal etc. Iraq is quite in the middle area of all of the countries where war is either in progress or imminent. did we invade Iraq for military postition is there a larger war on the horizon that the U.S. and possibly other countries know about. oh, yeah, I highly doubt Osama is dead this rumor happens ever 6 to 18 months. just my thoughts. love.

 

Your link doesn't say that we control Iraqi oil rights. Feel free to try again.

 

That doesn't make sense - why would we need proximity to Afghanistan when we are already in Afghanistan? And Iraq wasn't the first US military base in the region anyway. They already had a few.

 

makes sense to me considering the proximity to iran, who have been working on nuclear weapons for quite some time. Do you really believe that the world hasn't known about this for more than the last six months? Of course they have what better position to be than right next to the guy who wants to punch you in the face. I also know that Iraq wasn't the first US military base in the region, but it is the first place under complete or almost complete control of the US military in our recent times.

 

Well, it's true that this is partly about military positioning in the Middle East, but I'm still convinced that it's mainly about oil. Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world after Saudi Arabia, and Iran is third or forth. If Iraq's main export had been broccoli, you can bet that the US wouldn't have invaded it.

BTW, welcome back, sunshine and pearls-I, for one, have missed you.

 

I am surprised nobody mentioned Bill Clinton. The timing of bin Laden death rumor and the Fox News Chris Wallace interview. Clinton has the most to gain from trying to cover up his blowing opportunities to capture/kill bin Laden how many times???? Conspiracy theorists where are you???

 

anyone ever considered Bin Laden planted the report because searchers were getting close? Or were percived to be getting close? Propaganda and paranoia works in both directions.

 

I agree with the first point, but that's the problem. Afghanistan borders Iran. And the second point is obviously wrong, for the same reason - Afghanisan.

And the idea that the US is going to invade Iran is not convincing anyway. There are people who think the US should attack Iran to prevent it developing nuclear weapons, but nobody wants to invade it.

 

Afghanistan had no oil and it got invaded, so that theory doesn't seem to work. But in the sense that if Iraq had no oil they wouldn't have acquired $30 billion of weapons and used them to attack neighboring countries, they yet I guess it was a factor.

 

yes, but don't you remember, Talibans didn't allow the gas pipeline the US wanted to track from Caucaso through Afghanistsan...?? so, just a few months after Karzai was democratically elected, they signed the lovely pipeline agreement....but now afhghnistan people can enjoy democracy...helped by the nato troops over there just for peacekeeping...