Sorry not boxing but Bin Laden is dead.

[marbleheadmaui]

You have doubled the number of troops since Obama took power and have been there nigh on a decade. You are fighting people that basically want their nation to be free from foreign invaders. The number of Al Qaeda in Afghanistan is estimated to be a few dozen at best. It was poorly planned, you don't try to catch terrorists by invading a nation. What should have happened is that we provided some evidence that Bin Laden and co caused 9-11. We refused to do this and chose to invade regardless. Now if you regard that as legitimate and correct behaviour then that is your call. I view it quite differently. You want to try someone then you need to show the evidence. We didn't do it then and just this week we once again used a bullet rather than try to bring a man to trial.

As for trying to change the world, I am not trying to do that. I have my own work to do and post here for leisure. This is just what I enjoy doing. Actually it would be a great honour to high five Mr Chomsky. He is one of America's true heroes.

But as I proved earlier, we weren't merely trying to catch terrorists. We were changing the gov't as well. There is PLENTY of evidence Osama sponsored 9/11 and the Cole Bombing and the Dual Embassy Bombings of 1996 and the Khoabr Towers bombings of 1996 and the one where he tried to kill me (among others) the WTC bombing of 1993.

Again, the notion that WAR is simply another crime flies in the face of 1800 years of Western thought as well as common sense. War is war. Sherman was right, it really cannot be refined.

Noam Chomsky is an immoral slug. Anyone who supported the Khmer Rouge is despicable.

I'm done for the night. Thanks as always for your thoughts...such as they are

If we were so set on the Taliban a legitimate case should have been made. Not just "give us the terrorists or we will invade". That is equally barbaric and is the rhetoric of a bully. There is better evidence that Bin Laden was behind other attrocities, but the evidence concerning 9-11 has always been vague. We responded to 9-11 too quickly and without respect to appropriateness. We wanted blood and it was blood that we found. It could and should have been handled far more delicately. Don't get me wrong, the Taliban is awful and I think there is good reason to get rid of them, but they had never really been on the agenda prior to 9-11.

We are obviously on different pages regarding this and that is fair enough. I'm really not looking to change the world or even change minds, I just seek to put my point of view out there. It's just what I do. We have very different views on Chomsky and I don't think I have ever read or heard of him supporting the khmer rouge. You have likely made a mistake there. He has been accused of underestimating the extent of the genocide, but that as far as the criticism goes. If you can show a source stating otherwise I am more than happy to be persuaded otherwise.

In other words Chomsky is a Cambodian Holocaust Denier, is THAT your defense? It is not that "he has been accused." It is that he did it and later was forced to admit it! Te 1977 article "Distortions at Fourth Hand" is one place.

He is typical of the Academy in the US today. He is brilliant in an incredibly narrow portion of the field of linguistics and simply another propogandist otherwise.