On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 15:10:39 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:43:00 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
...
On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 14:27:13 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom"
wrote:

"John H." wrote in message
om...

No one asked Salty for details, just an idea. Dowd has a great idea,
drop
in a team of Rangers or SEALs. That sounds cool. Is that what you'd
do?
Is
that what Salty would do?
--
John H


OBL worked out of that exact region while he was involved with fighting
the
Russians. So, you're right. Musharraf did NOT create the comfy retreat.
It
already existed. This is a fact. The situation remains the same to this
day.

As far as how to capture him, if he's still there, that's not my job. I
would be guessing and you would pick apart my ideas if I designated the
wrong kind of boots for the soldiers, even though you would also be
guessing.

But, our military knew how. Unfortunately, a mission was cancelled in
2005
due to concerns about annoying Musharraf. It was aimed at one of OBL's
big
shots, but also have nabbed him.

Cancelled because the SecDef had enough sense not to invade the country
of
an ally, especially given how wrong intelligence had been in the past.

You're the same guy that says we should have paid no attention to the
intelligence from Iraq.


I wonder why it got so close to the "go" stage. Why did they waste their
time? Pakistan has been a so-called "ally" since the 1970s, when we paid
them to build nuclear weapons. Their status didn't suddenly become news to
Rumsfeld and others in 2005.


One likes to be prepared to execute when seeking the SecDef's approval.
--
Red Herring


Rumsfeld had been involved with Pakistan for almost 20 years before that.
You think he only realized at the last minute that there was no way he could
touch them?


Perhaps to you that question made sense. Maybe even Salty could translate
it. You guys continue this thread with each other.

Bye.
--
Red Herring