DGDevin wrote:

Militarily, we can handle any war we start.

Only if America is very careful which wars it starts. BTW, you did
know I was talking to the smug Limey, right?

The United States Coast Guard is larger - in ships and personnel -
than all the navies of the world. Combined.

Even if that were true (and it's laughably wrong)¹ it would be
irrelevant since coastal patrol cutters are not equivalent to guided
missile cruisers or nuclear attack submarines.

I stand corrected. Thanks.


We have aircraft that can take off from South Dakota or Missouri,
fly to any place in the world, and deliver twenty-five tons of
guided munitions within thirty feet of the designated target. Then
return to base.

And yet a 6'5" man with the most wanted face on the planet has
managed to elude America for almost a decade.


False as to facts. Osama ben Laden has not eluded American searchers for the
simple reason that we've not been looking for him! This notion is a canard
promulgated by the critics of the Bush administration. Beginning the second
week in September, 2001, it has NEVER been the avowed policy of the United
States to kill, capture, or bring to justice Osama ben Laden. You cannot
find a single sincere quote from a member of the Bush administration
supporting such a conjecture.

When the emotions of 9-11 calmed down a bit, the avowed strategy of the
United States was to prevent another attack on the United States or civilian
interests abroad. Prior to 9-11, there had been about one major attack per
year: The attack on the USS Cole, the WTC bombing, kidnapping and killing of
US Ambassadors, attacks on our embassies, etc.

To implement this strategy of preventing attacks, tactics were developed to
hamper, mitigate, or eliminate terrorist's training, communication,
financing, sanctuaries, travel, and recruitment. For nine years, these
tactics were spectacularly effective.

If during the pursuit of these tactics, OBL ended up dead, that would have
been a plus, but killing or capturing OBL was never a goal.