Raj Feridun <rferid@NOSPAMyahoo.co.jp> wrote in message news:<ao33o0h0qv9do4sole75e2is4mhgm46hbb@4ax.com>...
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2004 20:08:47 +0900, Michael Cash
> <mikecash@buggerallspammers.com> wrote:
> 
> >On Wed, 27 Oct 2004 17:53:28 +0200, "b"
> ><nospam.bengabenga@caramail.com> brought down from the Mount tablets
> >inscribed:
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>> Because for the statement to make sense Bush would have had to
> >>> surrender to Bin Laden within 40 days of September 11, 2001.
> >>
> >>
> >>Isn't this what happened in way ? by entering these fundamentalist Muslim's 
> >>frameset/ vision of the world and calling for a semi-holy war against 
> >>"terror" ?
> >>wasn't this what Bin Laden wanted somehow, being recognized as a champion in 
> >>the fight against his great Satan ? 
> >
> >While one can argue that point and do so in quite a compelling
> >fashion, it doesn't serve to validate the parallel here.
> 
> OK, how about effectively abandoning the pursuit of Bin Laden in
> Afghanistan, thus allowing him to escape to Pakistan, and
> concentrating all the military power on Saddam Hussein instead?
> 
   There are more American troops in Afghanistan today than there were
in March of 2003.


 Michael