> We are not talking about holy war, but unholy alliance.
> Why didn't Bush invade Saudi Arabia and Pakistan?
i was not arguing that the government of saudia arabia or pakistan was
involved in (either) attack against the wtc, just making the point that
it was just as ridiculous for bush to base his invasion of iraq that
saddam was in cahoots with al qaeda. they are an international
terrorist organization and has recruits from many islamic countries. i
never suggested we should a country which is on our side.
bin laden renounced the saudi government partly because they allowed
american troops in during the gulf war. i personally know that when
turkey denied the us military a staging
post, they secretly used jordan to base their A-10 (warthog) tank
killers.
pakistan is a different case, musharraf is caught in a delicate
balancing act between pressure from bush and fighting his own
insurgency.
>They both have weapons of mass destruction.
The Saudies have WMD?
actually the us has been supplying the saudis with high tech weapons
for decades, saddam also.
pakistan has agreed to stop exporting nuclear technology.
no one guessed that Hussein was hiding, the fact that he _didn't_ have
an active WMD program.
not true, i read a pentagon report, before the invasion, that said just
the opposite and predicted many of the problems that would result if we
attempted to occupy iraq. it is likely that some of the wmd were in
syria, but we didn't invade syria, based on unconfirmed intelligence.
yes, one can conclude that there are large error bars concerning secret
nuclear programs.
>There were no Iraqis among the hijackers!-)
They didn't need to leave their country to fight the US, they just had
to work with Hussein.
of course, but point is iraq was not responsible for 9/11. we can
discuss whether the gulf war was even justified.
> The company I work for does a lot of government contracts and flew
> members of the royal family out of the US after 9/11.
That was a good think, IMHO. We didn't need a mob incident based on
stupid associations of the Royal family with the actions of their
enemies.
true, but they were extremely arrogant and demanding passengers the
entire flight to both crews.
> Then there is the famous quote in The Formula (1980) ... in which
> ArAmCo (Arab American Company) wants to suppress the formula for
> synthetic oil, and Brando replies... "WE ARE THE ARABS!
Ah, the magic of cinema. :-) You do know that movie is based on a
magical view of chemistry, right?
of course. but i do not doubt that corporate industry has impeded
progress in research and develop of more competitive products, or
bought the rights.
____________________________________________________________________________________
Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows.
Yahoo! Answers - Check it out.
http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469
_______________________________________________
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
