So why hasn't Bush captured him yet?


Different circumstances. bin Laden was operating in public soon after his
declaration of war. The Sudanese had him and offered him to us.


Ah well, it was "different circumstances" wasn't it? For one thing, he
had not committed any crimes against the U.S. as yet.

Just like the "different circumstances" that Bush ordered US troops out
of eastern Afghanistan where they were pursuing Bin Laden... after he
had claimed responsibility for Sept 11th let me remind you...

Fact: The President of the U.S. cannot simply order any person on earth
killed.


NOYB wrote:
That's not a fact. That's an opinion.


That was not expressed well... the President of the U.S. does not have
the legal authority to simply order any person earth killed. The term
for that is "murder" and it's frowned on.




Fact: Bush has *still* not managed to capture of kill Bin Laden


Could be another opinion. Where is he?


Oh right.


Fact: there is no proven link between Iraq and anti-US terrorism


There are dozens of proven links...but you've chosen not to believe them.


Wrong. There are no proven links. None. That's why, instead of offering
proof and having everybody say, "Oh you were right, so sorry" and that's
the end of the issue, you are continuing to rant & rave.

You have chosen to believe a fairy tale, and to stretch back 20+ years,
in the attempt to justify Bush's invasion.

DSK