If yiu didn't fight in WW II.....

In article ,
on Mon, 01 Mar 2004 00:02:26 GMT,
Mike Marron attempted to say .....

"Pete" wrote:

Pete
Run away, insult, or answer the actual question. Your choice.

Pot Kettle Black.

Run away, insult, or answer the actual question. Your choice. Are you
saying that the USAF is exempt from sharing any blame for 9/11?

Please answer with a simple "yea" or "nay" right here --____________



Nay.



--
When dealing with propaganda terminology one sometimes always speaks in
variable absolutes. This is not to be mistaken for an unbiased slant.

"Mike Marron" wrote in message
news
"Pete" wrote:

Pete
Run away, insult, or answer the actual question. Your choice.

Pot Kettle Black.

(still no actual answer)

Run away, insult, or answer the actual question. Your choice. Are you
saying that the USAF is exempt from sharing any blame for 9/11?

Please answer with a simple "yea" or "nay" right here --____________

But...to *your* question, which I will be gracious enough to address...

'sharing any blame'
That talks to several different points.

The intelligence work before 9/11? Not the Air Forces baliwick. CIA, FBI,
INS, Justice....but not the uniformed services intelligence depts.

As events were happening? As has been laid out many, many times...The
timeline is online for all to see. The alert jets from Otis and Langley were
in the air as fast as (or faster than) humanly possible. 5 minute alert, in
the air in 4 minutes. Otis - NYC is a fixed distance. There is an upper
limit on F-15 dash speed.
You do the math.

Again....since your opinion is "the Air Force dropped the ball, BIG
TIME"...specifically, what do *you* think could or should have been done
differently?

Pete

"Pete" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote:

Pot Kettle Black.

(still no actual answer)

Wrong again. If you go back and read the 9/11 thread that you've
chosen to resurrect you'll see that I answered the question several
times back then. But since you've either missed my answer or
intentionally glossed over it in your usual manner; like I said we
should've prevented 9/11 by initiating a preemptive strike "wherever
terrorists hide, or run, or plan" (e.g: Afghanistan, Indonesia, Iraq,
etc. etc...) just like the Israeli's had wisely done way back in 1981
when they took out the Osiraq nuclear powerplant near Baghdad.

Run away, insult, or answer the actual question. Your choice. Are you
saying that the USAF is exempt from sharing any blame for 9/11?

Please answer with a simple "yea" or "nay" right here --____________

But...to *your* question, which I will be gracious enough to address...

Nothing "gracious" about it since it has taken ya what, two months to
FINALLY address the question?!

'sharing any blame'
That talks to several different points.

Now you're getting the picture. I'm the first to champion the cause of
the mighty U.S. Air Force, however, ya can't have it both ways. In
other words, you want to take all the credit when things go right
but point you finger at the "other guys" when things don't go right.
As I said, I remain convinced that the USAF was at least partly to
blame because not unlike Dec 7, 1941, the enemy caught all of us
INCLUDING the mighty USAF napping on the job, so to speak. Like
it or not, the horrific results of both surprise attacks at Pearl
Harbor and NYC/Washington DC speaks for itself!

The intelligence work before 9/11? Not the Air Forces baliwick. CIA, FBI,
INS, Justice....but not the uniformed services intelligence depts.

There ya' go again trying to pass the buck (sorry, but it doesn't work
that way and ya' can't have it both ways...see above). As I clearly
explained before, counterterrorism operations is indeed the Air
Force's "baliwick." While the President may have the final decision
whether or not to act, but in conjunction with other military services
and national agencies, Air Force Intelligence, Surveillance, and
Reconnaissance (ISR) specialists are heavily involved with
counterterrorism operations. Now, I don't know about you, but 3,000
dead Americans is proof positive enough for me that obviously the
Air Force ISR specialists and their civilian counterparts dropped the
ball BIG time somewhere along the line -- precisely like I've been
saying all along.

As events were happening? As has been laid out many, many times...The
timeline is online for all to see. The alert jets from Otis and Langley were
in the air as fast as (or faster than) humanly possible. 5 minute alert, in
the air in 4 minutes. Otis - NYC is a fixed distance. There is an upper
limit on F-15 dash speed.
You do the math.

Airborne in "4-minutes" is all hunky dory but since they reportedly
weren't even armed, what were the fighters gonna do if they merged
with the hijacked airliners -- RAM 'em? Besides, as I said "many, many
times" things never should've gotten to that point in the first place
and tragically it's all water under the bridge now. THREE THOUSAND
innocent Americans are dead and the world as we know it has been
changed (arguably for the worse!) for_ever.

Again....since your opinion is "the Air Force dropped the ball, BIG
TIME"...specifically, what do *you* think could or should have been done
differently?

Again (for the umpteenth time) see above.

"Mike Marron" wrote


Airborne in "4-minutes" is all hunky dory but since they reportedly
weren't even armed, what were the fighters gonna do if they merged
with the hijacked airliners -- RAM 'em?

Your argument starts out wrong, and just goes downhill from there. Of course
they were armed. These were jets 'on alert'. Since you've never actually
pulled alert duty, you might not know what that means.

Preemptive strike? On what? A house or apartment building in Boston or
Florida?

By your definition, the Air Force has already 'dropped the ball' by not
blowing up the next guy who pulls off a surprise attack. Indeed, ALL Air
Forces whose people are targeted by terrorists. The IAF fails weekly,
because some random palestinian blows up a bus.

Pete

"Pete" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote:

Airborne in "4-minutes" is all hunky dory but since they reportedly
weren't even armed, what were the fighters gonna do if they merged
with the hijacked airliners -- RAM 'em?

Your argument starts out wrong, and just goes downhill from there.

Because your debating skills, rhetoric and logic failed ya you simply
snip away my argument? BRILLIANT! And after you conveniently
snip away my argument, you are now attempting to prove that my
argument is "wrong" by the mere force of your assertion alone.
Therefore, there's no use in continuing this debate any furthur until
you stop snipping away all the stuff that you can't debate in a
intelligent and rational manner.

"Mike Marron" wrote in message
...
"Pete" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote:

Airborne in "4-minutes" is all hunky dory but since they reportedly
weren't even armed, what were the fighters gonna do if they merged
with the hijacked airliners -- RAM 'em?

Your argument starts out wrong, and just goes downhill from there.

Because your debating skills, rhetoric and logic failed ya you simply
snip away my argument? BRILLIANT! And after you conveniently
snip away my argument, you are now attempting to prove that my
argument is "wrong" by the mere force of your assertion alone.
Therefore, there's no use in continuing this debate any furthur until
you stop snipping away all the stuff that you can't debate in a
intelligent and rational manner.

Excessive snippage? Taking out the relevant parts?
Mikey...the part I was referring to, "but since they reportedly weren't even
armed", was obviously left in, as you can see above. And that is an
absolutely false assertation.

The rest of your post dealt with your 'preemptive strike', to which I also
referrered.

Did you have anything else to say?

Pete

"Pete" wrote:

Excessive snippage? Taking out the relevant parts?

[snip snip snip snip...]

Yep! Two can play your "snippity snip" game.

"Pete" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote:

Yep! Two can play your "snippity snip" game.

You can dance around all you wan...

[snip snip snip]

See how easy that was, snippey?

"Mike Marron" wrote in message
...
"Pete" wrote:

Excessive snippage? Taking out the relevant parts?

[snip snip snip snip...]

Yep! Two can play your "snippity snip" game.

You can dance around all you want, Mikey. But that doesn't disguise the fact
that you are absolutely and completely wrong.

So, were the two F-15's from Otis, and the two F-16's from Langley, armed or
not?

Pete

"Mike Marron" wrote in message
...
"Pete" wrote:
"Mike Marron" wrote:

Yep! Two can play your "snippity snip" game.

You can dance around all you wan...

[snip snip snip]

See how easy that was, snippey?

Whatever, Mikey.

Pete