Reply #93: Bush refused to take out Zarqawi before the war...

[headache]

Speaking of this, if anyone is more familiar with the Kerry campaign, is there any concentrated effort to address Bush’s most recent and blunders in the ‘war on terror’? Last week, of course, there was the exposition about systematic ransacking of entire buildings housing equipment and materials that could be used to make nuclear weapons in Iraq, following occupation See e.g., http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3738452.stm. I have yet to see any major U.S. television network news story tackle this matter.

More importantly from this week and specifically yesterday are the administration’s decision regarding terrorist target Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The administration has directed “precision strikes” in Fallujah in recent weeks, which includes blowing the living daylights out of the civilian housing in the city, in an attempt to smoke out al-Zarqawi. http://www.oudaily.com.../ Among other results, clerics there, who have insisted al-Zarqawi was not in the city, are now calling for resistant civil disobedience, see e.g., http://www.taftmidwaydriller.com.../

It is documented that Bush could have prevented this hostility by and against the citizens of Fallujah, if he’d bothered to take on al-Zarqawi earlier, instead of letting him loose to puff up his case for invading Iraq. As you may know, in an article appearing on http://slate.com.../, which quotes and analyzes a March 2, 2004 MSNBC article titled “Avoiding Attacking Suspected Terrorist Mastermind” http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4431601/..., “Bush had three opportunities, long before the war, to destroy a terrorist camp in northern Iraq run by . But the White House decided not to carry out the attack because, as the story puts it: ‘he administration feared destroying the terrorist camp in Iraq could undercut its case for war against Saddam’ ”

With the Bush administration failing to pull the trigger on both Zarqawi and Bin Laden at numerous opportunities before this invasion, Bush has permitted these independent terror organizations to collude possibly increasing the threat against the U.S. , Al-Zaqawi was most recently and according to analysts, viewed “as independent, someone who shared some aims with bin Laden but also considered himself a competitor” recently swore allegiance to Osama Bin Laden & Co. See http://www.boston.com/news.../ . Well, I guess Bush is a uniter not a divider…who knew he it would be for the ‘terror network’ at the time.

Is there a reason we haven’t heard about this connection? Was this story debunked or something?

While we’re at it. Folks should remind the public again, as is often noted here, that Bush was on the longest leave taken by a sitting prez in August 2001, lasting about a month, particularly at the time of the warning that an attack might take place "inside the United States.". http://slate.com/... And of Foreign Policy in Focus’ paper, http://www.fpif.org/papers/04terror/index.html, which addresses key vulnerabilities, misallocation of resources,a nd pretty much failures of the Bush administration’s approach.

Oh yeah, and on a petty note, we should never miss the opportunity to remind the redneck hawks among the voting population that Bush was a Male Cheerleader.