Bush's Kandahar?

If true, this story boils my blood. However, a lot of things need to add up for that to happen. Basically, the story is that there was intelligence that senior Al-Qaeda members were having a meeting in Pakistan. We knew about the meeting and were preparing a raid to capture or kill them.

When the number of people involved became hundreds, it was called off because it looked like a small invasion of Pakistan and could damage relations with that country as well as being too risky for personnel.

That I can totally understand. However, if you choose not to strike there, you had better fucking make sure you follow each and every person out of that meeting and strike them when it's safer. But fast forward to today, Ayman al-Zawahri isn't in custody or in the ground.

So there are a ton of questions that I have. Was al-Zawahri even there? If not or no Al-Qaeda members were there, then it was called off correctly. What were the circumstances that made it too risky? Were there too many civilians around? Was it a crowded area that would make it difficult to tell friend from foe? I can't speak for Navy SEALS members, but I'm going to make a blanket statement and if there are any SEALS out there that would like to correct me, please feel free.

Navy SEALS would gladly risk whatever it takes to bring in senior Al-Qaeda members unless it's taking civilian life. These guys train constantly to protect America from all threats. When a threat is detected, they go in and capture or kill that threat. Simple as that. However, if anyone calls off that mission, there'd better be a good fucking reason for doing it. Relations with Pakistan don't mean shit to me as much as getting al-Zawahri and Bin Laden.

If either of them were found, Musharraf would have some heavy explaining to do since on TV he has said "if you know where al-Qaeda is in my country, show us where he is and we'll both get him"

Travis
travis@rightwinglunatic.com