No, I'm saying that what you wrote seems to show a great lack of knowledge regarding the Muslims that are hell bent on taking over the world and destroying Western Civilisation along the way.

Incidentally, you seem to think that a robust Intelligence Program that infiltrates militant Islamic groups can instantaneously be created and that we can do this effectively without the ability to survey their communications or associate with people who do bad things. As Peter pointed out; we decided to not do those things and instead take very nice pictures from orbit. It'll take quite a bit of time to re-invigorate those abilities. More so since every action along those lines appears to require a political fight with the Democrats in Congress as well as a media fight for public opinion. Essentially, about the worst way to conduct meaningful intelligence operations.

__________________
-livin' in the terminally flippant zone

I never said we shouldn't do this or that to infiltrate terrorist groups. I say do whatever it takes. The Europeans are doing it quite effectively and it's usually a much smarter approach than sending a big portion of our military to invade another country based on cherry-picked intelligence.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

That European Intelligence that you speak so highly of is the "cherry picked" intelligence that was used. In fact, the British have never rescinded their claim that Hussein was pursuing uranium in Nigeria and other weapons platforms. In addition, that exceptional European Intelligence, German this time, provided us with the "inside man" that made many erroneous claims about Saddams chem/bio capabilities on which we acted.

Unfortunately, hindsight is 20/20 and not foresight. It's easy enough to, after the fact, armchair quarterback decisions made based upon valid intelligence at the time. At least this time things weren't treated as a criminal investigation and then agencies prohibited from sharing data (they do that well enough on their own).

Trying to pin intelligence failure on "one day chopping trees and squirrel hunting" while ignoring the deliberate defunding and hamstringing of Intelligence Agencies in the 90's is ridiculous.

__________________
-livin' in the terminally flippant zone

The Germans tried hard to get the US to understand they didn't find Curveball credible. The US didn't care.


You forgot pre-Crusades, and pre-Roman conquests, not to mention Christian attempts to conquer the world, which not only has been more effective than Muslim conquest, but still holds control of most of the territory they conquered. The Crusaders came from European countries, converted by the sword to Christianity. And, even worse, the insidious Christians still hold those lands.
Gimme a break. Talk about paying for the sins of the father. When do we invade Mongolia since Genghis Khan tried to conquer the world?

__________________
1984 300TD

As far as I can tell, only the Vatican is a Christian country.

And only Iran is a Muslim country.

__________________
1984 300TD

If you look at the various constitutions of the governments, few (if any) western democracies assert a Christian foundation of gov.

If you look at Muslim-dominant countries I don't think you will find any that don't specifically mention islam as the foundation of their system of gov.

I'm more than willing to be proven wrong.

B

Suadi Arabia is funding all this, I beleive the Royal family is quite Muslim.


I don't really think the Vatican is sending people with bombs on them into shoping centers, and doing all of that terrorist type stuff. But I could be wrong.

__________________
2016 Corvette Stingray 2LT
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

As tankdriver hinted at, the Germans were not pushing for war like the US and British governments were, quite the opposite. What I was really talking about is how Europe has been able to infiltrate and round up suspected terror cells on its own territory. They seem pretty good at that and that should be our priority as well. Only a retard would truly believe that invading an unrelated foreign country will somehow keep the terrorists that attacked us from attacking us again, yet this was the logic when going into Iraq. I'm not making any armchair quarterback decisions after the fact here. I was strongly against the war before it even started and I was very disappointed with how the majority of the American public let itself get so brainwashed, even labeling anti-war people as unpatriotic... truly disgusting.

Clinton certainly shares some of the blame for not dealing with Al Qaeda more effectively sooner, but the bottom line is that it happened 9 months after Bush's inauguration and he had plenty of time to start any intelligence reforms that were needed. He didn't even try and he resisted changes and inquires into what happened even long after 9/11 to hide his true incompetence.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

Clinton was against intelligence reforms before he was for them.

B

I'm unclear to which time period you're talking about. Post 9/11 there have been many terrorist plots uncovered both here and abroad. Sometimes it's British Intelligence, as in the case of the airliners plot, sometimes it's American Intelligence. Usually in all cases it's a joint effort. Prior to 9/11 we were very reliant upon foreign intelligence as we had abdicated ours.

You still seem to think that a robust intelligence program can be implemented in a few months. I would suggest to you that we'll be several decades getting back the abilities that we lost during the 90's. One of the dumbest things we did was destroy our intelligence gathering abilities after the demise of the USSR. It was further compounded by administrative walls placed between agencies.

__________________
-livin' in the terminally flippant zone