Non-financial boards have been closed but will continue to be accessible in read-only form. If you're disappointed, we understand. Thank you for being an active participant in this community. We have more community features in development that we look forward to sharing soon.
"I thought it was going to help," Bush said. "I thought it would help remind people that if bin Laden doesn't want Bush to be the president, something must be right with Bush."http://www.publicbroadcasting.net/wnku/news.newsmain?action=article&ARTICLE_ID=884176Idiot. 'Bush good, bin Laden bad.'Like bin Laden cares who's president. Who was president when the U.S. embassies were bombed? Who was president when the USS Cole was hit? --------------------actually, bin Ladin would care. contrary to some of the Presidents supporters, bin ladin was NOT wanting Kerry, he was wanting Bush as President. Sounds backwards right? So, why?I will be glad to tell you. there is a tried and true doctrine in guerilla warfare called 'sharpening the conflict'. that doctrine states that the most authoritarian and reactionary faction within the enemy camp is who you want in power. the overreaching of that enemy faction will force the moderates within your own camp to close ranks with you.If your enemy elects' or appoints a 'moderate' they may try a negotiated way out of the conflict, and the radicals do not want this. It causes their faction to lose people to the factions that want to compromise.This is why Hamas set off four bombs in israel in 1996 just before the Israeli election. It caused Israelis to get spooked and they moved right and elected Netanyahu over Peres. Hamas knew that Peres was trying hard to come to an agreement with Arafat, they didnt want that. hence the bombings. Netanyahu got in, Arafat and other moderates were undermined, and Hamas succeeding in sharpening the conflict.Bush was right, bin Ladin's tape helped Bush win. That is exactly what bin Ladin wanted. Armed conflict.Dov
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |