Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Bin Ladens main demand is met by Bush......no Dem response whatsoever...

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 09:48 AM
Original message
Bin Ladens main demand is met by Bush......no Dem response whatsoever...
In Bin Ladens Fatwa he demanded the US leave Saudi Arabia, "Land of the two holy places." Bush did so as he invaded Iraq.

The following text is a fatwa, or declaration of war against the US, by Osama bin Laden. The fatwa is entitled "Declaration of War against the Americans Occupying the Land of the Two Holy Places." (Medina and Mecca) http://www.pbs.org/newshour/terrorism/international/fatwa_1996.html

When Bush attacked Iraq he simultaneously, quietly, pulled US troops from Saudi Arabia:
Bin Laden's main demand is met: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2003/04/30/wsaud230.xml

US pulls out of Saudi Arabia (As per Bin Ladens main demand)
Tuesday, 29 April, 2003, 15:16 GMT 16:16 UK http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2984547.stm

Amidst all this, "cut and run," crap why do democrats never mention this, that Bush caved to Bin Ladens main demand as he attacked Iraq? Hey "democratic strategists" or whatever they call you on Faux or CNN, why don't you ever mention this truth as the sock puppets are attacking you as 'cut and run appeasers'? Bush appeased Bin Laden, Bush cut and ran. This is the main reason that Bin Laden hasn't hit the US in the last five years. Do you even know this? Its soooo fucking huge and it is NEVER EVER mentioned anywhere. Whats wrong with these democratic pundits? WAKE THE FUCK UP!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
The Count Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 09:53 AM
Response to Original message
1. Too busy instituting the draft, I guess.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 09:56 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. This happened in April 2003
PRINCE SULTAN AIR BASE, Saudi Arabia — In a major shift in American focus in the Persian Gulf, the United States is all but ending its military presence in Saudi Arabia.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,85446,00.html

even faux admitted it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 09:56 AM
Response to Original message
2. Good point
It's been made here a few times on DU, but it hasn't really sunk in too much.

bin Laden also hated Saddam because he was a secular Muslim... and, lo & behold, Saddam is also out of power now, too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 10:14 AM
Response to Reply #2
5. And all that Iraqi oil is off the market.
That certainly isn't hurting the House of Saud, the binLaden Group, or Exxon-Mobil. Funny how that works out for Osama and George.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Oreegone Donating Member (726 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 10:01 AM
Response to Original message
4. It is the least he could do
It is the least he could do for an old friend of the family.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
karynnj Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 10:15 AM
Response to Original message
6. I assume some Democrats would have agreed to leave Saudia Arabia
much earlier - based on the cultural and religious significance. Doing the opposite of Bush usually is not a bad idea - but in this case our bases in Saudi Arabia were an unnecessary irritant. (OBL would have found another reason to be angry with us though.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NewJeffCT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 10:31 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. While that is true
The timing makes it look like capitulation to the world outside the US.

Similarly, when North Korea started rattling their sabers about the nuke program a few years ago, Team Bush soon made an announcement that they were "redeploying" some of our soldiers out of the DMZ in Korea. While it may also have been a good move, the timing was awful and again makes it look like we're appeasing, only North Korea this time.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
niceypoo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-20-06 11:58 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. I agree but the fact remains, Bush capitulated
With all their "No appeasement" and "Cut and run" talk this is the ultimate hypocracy, yet I have never ever heard a democrat on TV mention it. I don't understand it at all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 04:52 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC