Al Qaida Endorses John Mccain

[MissyP89]

h/t to Breitbart.com and BG45.

[quote]WASHINGTON (AP) - Al-Qaida supporters suggested in a Web site message this week they would welcome a pre-election terror attack on the U.S. as a way to usher in a McCain presidency.

The message, posted Monday on the password-protected al-Hesbah Web site, said if al-Qaida wants to exhaust the United States militarily and economically, "impetuous" Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain is the better choice because he is more likely to continue the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

"This requires presence of an impetuous American leader such as McCain, who pledged to continue the war till the last American soldier," the message said. "Then, al-Qaida will have to support McCain in the coming elections so that he continues the failing march of his predecessor, Bush."[/quote]

Read more [url="http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93VA3B80&show_article=1"]here[/url].

Edit: Sorry for misspelling al-Qaida...

Edited October 22, 2008 by MissyP89

[kamiller42]

If true, this doesn't look good for Obama. They are admitting Obama is weak. They believe they would be able to strike at America, and a president Obama would not respond. Ouch. "For a vulnerable America, vote Obama!"

[Winchester]

Would they really "endorse" the candidate they want to win?

[Paddington]

McCain must pal around with terrorists.

[Aloysius]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1683537' date='Oct 22 2008, 04:03 PM']If true, this doesn't look good for Obama. They are admitting Obama is weak. They believe they would be able to strike at America, and a president Obama would not respond. Ouch. "For a vulnerable America, vote Obama!"[/quote]
really? I read that they want to keep us exhausting ourselves on these wars that we can't afford so that our status as the world's superpower will eventually be depleted... and that they think Obama would pull us back into a more defensive (less offensive and thus exhausting) position...

[BG45]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1683616' date='Oct 22 2008, 06:35 PM']really? I read that they want to keep us exhausting ourselves on these wars that we can't afford so that our status as the world's superpower will eventually be depleted... and that they think Obama would pull us back into a more defensive (less offensive and thus exhausting) position...[/quote]

That's the way I read it too.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='Aloysius' post='1683616' date='Oct 22 2008, 05:35 PM']really? I read that they want to keep us exhausting ourselves on these wars that we can't afford so that our status as the world's superpower will eventually be depleted... and that they think Obama would pull us back into a more defensive (less offensive and thus exhausting) position...[/quote]
Reverse psychology. I guess it doesn't work on everyone.

That defensive position we had on 9/10/01 worked well. Didn't it? "I see nothing! I know nothing!"

[Adrestia]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1683900' date='Oct 22 2008, 10:00 PM']Reverse psychology. I guess it doesn't work on everyone.

That defensive position we had on 9/10/01 worked well. Didn't it? "I see nothing! I know nothing!"[/quote]
Are you joking?

[BG45]

[quote name='tgoldson' post='1683911' date='Oct 23 2008, 12:04 AM']Are you joking?[/quote]

I don't think he is...which is sad. I hate the politicizing of three thousand innocent dead from 98 separate nations.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='tgoldson' post='1683911' date='Oct 22 2008, 11:04 PM']Are you joking?[/quote]
Do you think pulling back and hiding behind our borders is a real strategy? Al Qaeda is not going to stop if a weak president is in office. That will simply make their "mission" easier. They want to say they want McCain because they really Obama.

Am I missing something here?

[Adrestia]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1683937' date='Oct 22 2008, 10:20 PM']Do you think pulling back and hiding behind our borders is a real strategy? Al Qaeda is not going to stop if a weak president is in office. That will simply make their "mission" easier. They want to say they want McCain because they really Obama.

Am I missing something here?[/quote]
I do not understand why you characterize our 9/10/01 foreign policy as "pulled back and hidden behind our borders."

[Hassan]

[quote name='tgoldson' post='1683957' date='Oct 22 2008, 10:32 PM']I do not understand why you characterize our 9/10/01 foreign policy as "pulled back and hidden behind our borders."[/quote]

Yeah. To portray America's pre 9/11 foreign policy as isolationist is just totally contray to reality.

And no, he's not jokeing. The right wing tolking points went out recently that this is "reverse psychology" so the right wing echo chamber will be parroting it for a bit.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='tgoldson' post='1683957' date='Oct 22 2008, 11:32 PM']I do not understand why you characterize our 9/10/01 foreign policy as "pulled back and hidden behind our borders."[/quote]
Because our foreign policy in regards to terrorism was to handle it like a police matter. We would only act when an incident would occur. We would not pursue the perpetrators. When there were no incidents, the police force would sit at the police station and wait. It didn't work. It gave us 9/11. We should have acted when we had credible evidence, which was before 9/11.

[Adrestia]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1683965' date='Oct 22 2008, 10:37 PM']Because our foreign policy in regards to terrorism was to handle it like a police matter. We would only act when an incident would occur. We would not pursue the perpetrators. When there were no incidents, the police force would sit at the police station and wait. It didn't work. It gave us 9/11. We should have acted when we had credible evidence, which was before 9/11.[/quote]
They [i]did[/i] act before 9/11, they just missed.

edit for clarity:
They = the US government.

Edited October 23, 2008 by tgoldson

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='kamiller42' post='1683965' date='Oct 22 2008, 09:37 PM']Because our foreign policy in regards to terrorism was to handle it like a police matter. We would only act when an incident would occur. We would not pursue the perpetrators. When there were no incidents, the police force would sit at the police station and wait. It didn't work. It gave us 9/11. We should have acted when we had credible evidence, which was before 9/11.[/quote]
I agree. But I don't think our reactionary approach worked well, either. I think there needs to be a happy medium. Right now, we go out and accuse everyone who may disagree with us as being an "enemy of the free world."