After the failed Wazaristan treaty, it appears that NATO is at an impasse in Afghanistan (duh!).

The top news story today is about another Al-Qaeda tape and attacks on the US with IEDs (dropped from the sky I suppose).

Is this a build up to a change in strategy?

i still dont understand what the fuck NATO is doing in asia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO
The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation; also called the North Atlantic Alliance, the Atlantic Alliance, the Western Alliance, or the North Atlantic Treaty Organization) is a military alliance established by the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty on 4 April 1949. Headquartered in Brussels, Belgium, the organisation establishes a system of collective security whereby its member states agree to mutual defense in response to an attack by any external party.

The Devil Inside:

America was attacked by terrorists from Afghanistan. NATO is treaty-bound to defend her member by waging war in Afghanistan.

SamCDKey:

How would you suggest we defeat Al'Qaeda in Afghanistan?

Didnt the terrorists come from Saudi Arabia?

SamCDKey:

How would you suggest we defeat Al'Qaeda in Afghanistan?

You can't.

“ Originally Posted by Prince_James
SamCDKey: How would you suggest we defeat Al'Qaeda in Afghanistan?"

You can't.

Then what would you suggest, Sam?

Baron Max

Then what would you suggest, Sam?

Baron Max

A terrorist organisation feeds on fear.

Remove the fear and it dies a natural death.

A terrorist organisation feeds on fear.

And the Taliban didn't do anything to harm Afghani society?

Remove the fear and it dies a natural death.

How does one just turn off an emotion like fear, Sam? And don't you think that the Afghani women are rather fearful of Taliban rule in their country? How do you tell those women to stop being afraid?

Baron Max

And the Taliban didn't do anything to harm Afghani society?

Where were the Taliban before 1993?


How does one just turn off an emotion like fear, Sam? And don't you think that the Afghani women are rather fearful of Taliban rule in their country? How do you tell those women to stop being afraid?

See above.

Before 1993 the Taliban where having a civil war to gain control after the Russains withdrew in 1989.
How does that last post represent an answer to the question of what you would suggest?
Infact what do you think the change in policy will be?

Where were the Taliban before 1993?

Okay, Sam ....let's assume that every single problem in the world was caused by Americans, everything is their fault. Okay?

Now ........now that we've settled that little problem, the present situation is the one that we're discussing, okay?

What would you suggest that NATO do in Afghanistan ...NOW?

Baron Max

Okay, Sam ....let's assume that every single problem in the world was caused by Americans, everything is their fault. Okay?

Now ........now that we've settled that little problem, the present situation is the one that we're discussing, okay?

What would you suggest that NATO do in Afghanistan ...NOW?

Baron Max

America should pull out of Iraq and finish the job in Afghanistan, which was our ORIGINAL mission we NEVER accomplished. Osama Bin Laden is still at large. Ayman Al-Zawahri is still at large. The Taliban is still active. Al Qaida in Afghanistan is still active.

They caused 9/11 and what do we do? We let them go. What a great way to set an example for the War on Terror: "strike the heart of America and we'll disturb your base of power, but we'll let you live!!!"

Okay, Sam ....let's assume that every single problem in the world was caused by Americans, everything is their fault. Okay?

Now ........now that we've settled that little problem, the present situation is the one that we're discussing, okay?

What would you suggest that NATO do in Afghanistan ...NOW?

Baron Max

I would suggest they should pull out, both from Afghanistan and Iraq, and invest all the money they are willing to spend on war on a trained anti- terrorist cell with 3 departments:

1. Field Work
2. Research
3. Public Relations

The Field Work department is in charge of recruiting people for the purpose of getting information and keeping tabs on organisations involved in terrorist activities.

The Public Relations department should be involved in getting those countries involved which are known to have terrorist bases in them, like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and providing incentives for cooperation.

The Research department should be involved in coordinating the efforts of both departments by verification of the facts and establishing future directions.

Putting together an anti-terrorism organisation will do more to convince people that the US is genuinely interested in apprehending the terrorists and will eliminate radicalisation of people caught in the cross fire.

That is what I would do. IMO, a week in the library saves months in the lab.

Infact what do you think the change in policy will be?

I can see two possible directions right now:

1. The Iraq war has been hugely unsuccessful and the government needs something drastic to distract the attention of the people. Now If I were an amoral government, I would do this very simply by recreating what started the whole thing: i.e. a terrorist attack. But everyone knows that Al-Qaeda has been fragmented and lost its strength. So I would need to revive the group. A video is a good way to do it. After all can anyone tell when it was made and by whom?

2. Iran is a much wanted next target for the present administration. A connection between Iran and al-Qaeda would give credence to a global conspiracy against the US.

So I'd look out either for:

1. another terrorist attack, presumably by al Qaeda.
2. Some connection between al Qaeda and Iran.

The second one also has the advantage of putting the Sauds on their guard and willing to cooperate fully with the US, as well as eliminate any risk to the dollar (since Iran is converting all its oil earnings to euros in anticipation of being able to shift the oil currency).

I would suggest they should pull out, both from Afghanistan and Iraq, and invest all the money they are willing to spend on war on a trained anti- terrorist cell with 3 departments:

1. Field Work
2. Research
3. Public Relations

The Field Work department is in charge of recruiting people for the purpose of getting information and keeping tabs on organisations involved in terrorist activities.

The Public Relations department should be involved in getting those countries involved which are known to have terrorist bases in them, like Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and providing incentives for cooperation.

The Research department should be involved in coordinating the efforts of both departments by verification of the facts and establishing future directions.

Putting together an anti-terrorism organisation will do more to convince people that the US is genuinely interested in apprehending the terrorists and will eliminate radicalisation of people caught in the cross fire.

That is what I would do. IMO, a week in the library saves months in the lab.

So, how do we eliminate the fear (as you wrote in an earlier post), we run. Sam, that comes from the same instinct to survive.

We cannot eliminate fear from our instincts because we are wired to survive. Survival requires one of two things: Fight or Flight.

The world is not ready to simply co-exist with everyone having different beliefs and ideas. And, it won't happen until everyone realizes the gift of freedom.

As long as freedom is not a global policy, there will be wars.

Bottom line, Sam. You, and everyone who thinks like this, are just as gripped by fear as you say those who condone fighting are. You just simply deny it.

I can see two possible directions right now:

1. The Iraq war has been hugely unsuccessful and the government needs something drastic to distract the attention of the people. Now If I were an amoral government, I would do this very simply by recreating what started the whole thing: i.e. a terrorist attack. But everyone knows that Al-Qaeda has been fragmented and lost its strength. So I would need to revive the group. A video is a good way to do it. After all can anyone tell when it was made and by whom?

2. Iran is a much wanted next target for the present administration. A connection between Iran and al-Qaeda would give credence to a global conspiracy against the US.

So I'd look out either for:

1. another terrorist attack, presumably by al Qaeda.
2. Some connection between al Qaeda and Iran.

The second one also has the advantage of putting the Sauds on their guard and willing to cooperate fully with the US, as well as eliminate any risk to the dollar (since Iran is converting all its oil earnings to euros in anticipation of being able to shift the oil currency).

So we pull out, and still risk another attack. I thought the whole point was that we were creating more terrorism due to our presence. Yet, if we leave, we still should be on the lookout for another terrorist attack. I think I will stick to the idea that I would rather fight them on a battleground than in the streets of America (which by the way is happening on a very small scale anyway).

Great logic, makes a whole lot of sense to me!!

(which by the way is happening on a very small scale anyway)
Explain.

So, how do we eliminate the fear (as you wrote in an earlier post), we run. Sam, that comes from the same instinct to survive.

We cannot eliminate fear from our instincts because we are wired to survive. Survival requires one of two things: Fight or Flight.

The world is not ready to simply co-exist with everyone having different beliefs and ideas. And, it won't happen until everyone realizes the gift of freedom.

As long as freedom is not a global policy, there will be wars.

Bottom line, Sam. You, and everyone who thinks like this, are just as gripped by fear as you say those who condone fighting are. You just simply deny it.

Ruled by fear?

You guys are way beyond paranoid.

If a video will have you pissing your pants, you need to figure out where you left your balls.

Ruled by fear?

You guys are way beyond paranoid.

If a video will have you pissing your pants, you need to figure out where you left your balls.

I have nothing to be paranoid about.

Why do you wish us to leave, Sam?

I have nothing to be paranoid about.

Why do you wish us to leave, Sam?

Because it is a bad idea to be there?

I would suggest they should pull out, both from Afghanistan and Iraq, ...

And just let the Iraqis and the Afghanis fight it out and kill each other ...and continue to bomb civilians every day? You don't think anyone should protect and/or help those innocent people?

I'm not sure how anyone who values human life could suggest that strategy, especially in Iraq. It's tantamount to releasing criminals and murderers into the streets of Baggie-daddy ....how can anyone suggest that?

As to the rest of your post, I'm taking it all to mean that you want the USA to become isolationists.

Baron Max

And just let the Iraqis and the Afghanis fight it out and kill each other ...and continue to bomb civilians every day? You don't think anyone should protect and/or help those innocent people?

I'm not sure how anyone who values human life could suggest that strategy, especially in Iraq. It's tantamount to releasing criminals and murderers into the streets of Baggie-daddy ....how can anyone suggest that?

As to the rest of your post, I'm taking it all to mean that you want the USA to become isolationists.

Baron Max

No one elected you world police.

Whether you get out today or a hundred years later, innocent people will have died, will continue dying and will die after you leave.

Nobody in Iraq/Afghanistan wants you there (except the guys getting paid to say so).

No one elected you world police.

So ...do you hold the same philosophy for the Israeli-Palestinian issue? I.e., we should all leave them alone and let them work out their problems without our interference? ....and that means you, too, Sam!

Whether you get out today or a hundred years later, innocent people will have died, will continue dying and will die after you leave.

Do you hold that same philosophy for the police forces in big cities of the world? Just pull out and let 'em fight it out? I know you'll say something like, "But that's not the same thing!" ....but philosophically, Sam, it is and you know it.

Nobody in Iraq/Afghanistan wants you there (except the guys getting paid to say so).

People keep saying that, trying to make others believe it. But I'm curious, Sam, just how do you know exactly what all of the Iraqis want??? Can you explain that to me?

Baron Max

So ...do you hold the same philosophy for the Israeli-Palestinian issue? I.e., we should all leave them alone and let them work out their problems without our interference? ....and that means you, too, Sam!



Do you hold that same philosophy for the police forces in big cities of the world? Just pull out and let 'em fight it out? I know you'll say something like, "But that's not the same thing!" ....but philosophically, Sam, it is and you know it.



People keep saying that, trying to make others believe it. But I'm curious, Sam, just how do you know exactly what all of the Iraqis want??? Can you explain that to me?

Baron Max

Yes we should all pull out of the Israel Palestine issue too.

As for what the Iraqis want, its very simple.

Imagine you are an American. You live in a country where the rednecks and liberals cannot get along and are talking of divvying up the country.

The Iraqis arrive, put the liberals in charge and promise to stay for as long as it takes to solve the problem. Meanwhile you are fighting both the liberals and the Iraqis. Would you want the Iraqis around? Not forgetting that the redneck President was hanged by Iraqis.

Yes we should all pull out of the Israel Palestine issue too.

Then why do you continue to support the Palestinians??? If you really feel that way, then you shouldn't even have a single post about that issue. Hippo-critter??

As for what the Iraqis want, its very simple. Imagine you are an American. You live in a country where the rednecks and liberals cannot get along and are talking of divvying up the country.

The Iraqis arrive, put the liberals in charge and promise to stay for as long as it takes to solve the problem. Meanwhile you are fighting both the liberals and the Iraqis. Would you want the Iraqis around?

So, see? Even by that account, about half of the Iraqis would want the USA to stay and help them! But that's not what you said, is it?? Nope ...you lied, Sam, just to make a point. And that's not very nice of you.

Baron Max

Then why do you continue to support the Palestinians??? If you really feel that way, then you shouldn't even have a single post about that issue. Hippo-critter??

Supporting the civilian Palestinians or nonviolent Israelis is my right as a human being.

I'd do the same if I saw a boy beating a dog in the street.

But would I kill the boy or the dog or provide either of them with the means to kill each other? No,



So, see? Even by that account, about half of the Iraqis would want the USA to stay and help them! But that's not what you said, is it?? Nope ...you lied, Sam, just to make a point. And that's not very nice of you.

Baron Max

Fine the Iraqis put the rednecks in charge. They make a huge embassy and put 10-12 military installations all around in key spots. They prefer to sell American oil using Iraqi contractors or contractors friendly to them. You know what happened to the last guy who did not agree with them. They settle down for what looks like a very long time.

Is this what you want?

Supporting the civilian Palestinians or nonviolent Israelis is my right as a human being. I'd do the same if I saw a boy beating a dog in the street.

Good one, Sam! And that's exactly, precisely how President Bush sees the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan! I'm sooooooo proud of you, Sam.

Is this what you want?

No, ....what I want is to turn Iraqi into a smokin', ruined, hole in the ground that's so radioactive as to be unlivable for 100,000,000,000 years or more!

Unfortunately, no one is taking my advice in the matter. My government has decided to take a more pussy-assed attitude and allow a bunch of radical, Islamic pricks to kill American soldiers.

Baron Max

Good one, Sam! And that's exactly, precisely how President Bush sees the situation in Iraq and Afghanistan! I'm sooooooo proud of you, Sam.

No, ....what I want is to turn Iraqi into a smokin', ruined, hole in the ground that's so radioactive as to be unlivable for 100,000,000,000 years or more!

Unfortunately, no one is taking my advice in the matter. My government has decided to take a more pussy-assed attitude and allow a bunch of radical, Islamic pricks to kill American soldiers.

Baron Max

Senility is a terrible thing.

My sympathies are with you.

I'm sure you'd totally embrace anyone who came to save your country from itself.

SamCDKey:

You say "we can't defeat Al'qaeda" and then said we've all but crippled her.

Which one, pray tell, is it?

I would say our problem in Afghanistan is a lack of resolve. Americans are cowards when it comes to buckling down and facing an enemy which is roaching in caves and taking pot-shots of opportunity at us.

SamCDKey:

You say "we can't defeat Al'qaeda" and then said we've all but crippled her.

Which one, pray tell, is it?

I would say our problem in Afghanistan is a lack of resolve. Americans are cowards when it comes to buckling down and facing an enemy which is roaching in caves and taking pot-shots of opportunity at us.

You cannot defeat Al Qaeda because its a bogeyman. No one can defeat a bogeyman.

The problem in Afghanistan is that nobody wants you there but you are too stupid to realise it.

The problem in Afghanistan is that nobody wants you there but you are too stupid to realise it.

Nobody? Nobody in all of Afghanistan?

And you know this .....how?????

Baron Max

Nobody? Nobody in all of Afghanistan?

And you know this .....how?????

Baron Max

Actually you are absolutely right. The al-Qaeda probably hopes you never leave. Recruitment will never be a problem. Look at Iraq. Had anyone even heard of al-Qaeda in Iraq before the American invasion?

Look at Iraq. Had anyone even heard of al-Qaeda in Iraq before the American invasion?

Because no one had heard of it, doesn't mean it wasn't true.

Actually you are absolutely right. The al-Qaeda probably hopes you never leave.

Now that's odd ...in another post, you said that al-Queda is a bogeyman, yet here you're seeming to say that al-Queda is a real and actual armed force. Which is it, Sam? (You don't do so well arguing on your own, do you? No wonder you once relied so heavily on the opinions and thoughts of others!)

Baron Max

Because no one had heard of it, doesn't mean it wasn't true.



Now that's odd ...in another post, you said that al-Queda is a bogeyman, yet here you're seeming to say that al-Queda is a real and actual armed force. Which is it, Sam? (You don't do so well arguing on your own, do you? No wonder you once relied so heavily on the opinions and thoughts of others!)

Baron Max

Yes strange how the bogeyman appears wherever the US goes, isn't it?

Yes strange how the bogeyman appears wherever the US goes, isn't it?

Ahh, so now al-Queda is back to being a bogeyman, huh? Do you just flip-flop like that on any and all issues, Sam? Geez, what's the next flip-flop, you'll post to suport Israel against the Palestinians?! ....LOL!

Everything wrong with the world is America's fault, huh, Sam? And......

"Revenge is mine, sayeth the Muslims of the world."

Baron Max

Ahh, so now al-Queda is back to being a bogeyman, huh? Do you just flip-flop like that on any and all issues, Sam? Geez, what's the next flip-flop, you'll post to suport Israel against the Palestinians?! ....LOL!

Everything wrong with the world is America's fault, huh, Sam? And......

"Revenge is mine, sayeth the Muslims of the world."

Baron Max

Its like my job. You make notes of your observations and pretty soon a pattern emerges.

Its quite fascinating actually.

Its like my job. You make notes of your observations and pretty soon a pattern emerges.

What I find interesting about you, Sam, is that you seem to go around the world trying to fix all of the problems that you claim to see ......which is exactly what you accuse the US of doing, and you hate the US for it. Hippo-critter?

"Revenge is mine, sayeth the Muslims of the world."

Baron Max

SamCDKey:

So what do they want, government wise? An Islamic theocracy?

SamCDKey: So what do they want, government wise? An Islamic theocracy?

Of course she does! She's Muslim and that's what it says in the Koran ....that Muslims with control/rule the world.

But most of all, I think she's like most Muslims of the world .....she wants revenge on the west because the Muslims of the world couldn't keep up with the advancements of the modern world. They got left behind!

Baron Max

SamCDKey:

So what do they want, government wise? An Islamic theocracy?

Thats what the Taliban wants. And they're hugely unpopular (even though most of them are Pashtuns). So no, I don't think so.

They got left behind!

Baron Max

Like me?;)

Because it is a bad idea to be there?

Meaning?

Like me?

No, Sam, you and your Daddy were Americanized enough to make enough money through capitalistic means so as to live comfortably and to send you off to college in the US. But most Muslims haven't progressed to that stage of using capitalism for personal gain!

What's interesting is that's exactly what Osama bady did ....used the very thing that he claims to hate in order to make enough money to be able to attack the very thing that he used to gain his wealth. Yet, ya' know, even stranger is that not one of those rich radicals did anything to help their fellow Muslims that didn't bring death and destruction and hardship to them.

Baron Max

Meaning?

Waste of time?
Pointless exercise?
No good will ever come of it?

Its like my job. You make notes of your observations and pretty soon a pattern emerges.

Its quite fascinating actually.

Sam,

Either al-qaeda is a boogeyman or not, which is it?

The pattern appears to be on you. That pattern is you cannot decide why you think the US should leave Iraq, nor can you decide if al-qaeda is real or not.

If they are a boogeyman, then why should we fear another terrorist attack by them?

No, Sam, you and your Daddy were Americanized enough to make enough money through capitalistic means so as to live comfortably and to send you off to college in the US. But most Muslims haven't progressed to that stage of using capitalism for personal gain!

What's interesting is that's exactly what Osama bady did ....used the very thing that he claims to hate in order to make enough money to be able to attack the very thing that he used to gain his wealth. Yet, ya' know, even stranger is that not one of those rich radicals did anything to help their fellow Muslims that didn't bring death and destruction and hardship to them.

Baron Max

You know so much about Daddy and me, its like you're a mind reader. Amazing.

If they are a boogeyman, then why should we fear another terrorist attack by them?

Exactly.

Exactly.

Okay, so they do not exist. Then, who perpetrated 9-11?

SamCDKey:

Then what do you think they do want?

SamCDKey:

Then what do you think they do want?

Freedom from occupation.

There is very little in the way of anti-occupying attacks by any but the Taliban who want to get back into power.

As you say most Afghanis don't want the Taliban, are not we doing a good job?

There is very little in the way of anti-occupying attacks by any but the Taliban who want to get back into power.

As you say most Afghanis don't want the Taliban, are not we doing a good job?

Most Taliban are Pashtun. So are most Afghanis. Regardless of what they THINK of them, they will not give up their own tribesmen to a white man who is not one of their own.

SamCDKey:

So you say it is hopeless because we aren't Pashtuns?

she wants revenge on the west because the Muslims of the world couldn't keep up with the advancements of the modern world.

What is "modern" to you? When did the "modern world" start for you?

What is "modern" to you? When did the "modern world" start for you?

In that context, James, you can just pick most any time in history that you wish. There was a tiny, short stretch in history when the Muslims were actually something in the world .....but it wasn't long before they were left behind .........and you know it!

Baron Max

Most Taliban are Pashtun. So are most Afghanis. Regardless of what they THINK of them, they will not give up their own tribesmen to a white man who is not one of their own.

Most Japanese in the 40's thought in the same way, Sam. But look what happened ....then look at what Japan has become in the modern world. Now compare that to what Afghanistan is like. I simply have to ask; Which is better for the Afghanis?

Baron Max

SamCDKey:

So you say it is hopeless because we aren't Pashtuns?

No its hopeless because the Taliban are Pashtuns.

No its hopeless because the Taliban are Pashtuns.

So no matter what the Taliban want, keeping women subjugated, beating woem for minor offenses, keep girls out of schools, etc, the Pashtuns would support all of that???? And worse, you agree with them???

Baron Max

So no matter what the Taliban want, keeping women subjugated, beating woem for minor offenses, keep girls out of schools, etc, the Pashtuns would support all of that???? And worse, you agree with them???

Baron Max

Its just like Americans supporting the killing machine their government has become simply because it is American.

Ever hear anyone (even those against the war) say: I DON'T SUPPORT THE TROOPS!

Its just like Americans supporting the killing machine their government has become simply because it is American.

Ahh, so you DO support the Taliban forces in Afghanistan, huh? Ooooh, nice to hear you say so, Sam, even tho' I knew it all along. It's odd, don't you think, for you to support such discrimination and brutality against women of the nation?

Baron Max

It's odd, don't you think, for you to support such discrimination and brutality against women of the nation innocent people?

Baron Max

Its what I've always wondered about Americans.

How do they live with themselves?

SamCDKey:

So maybe we need to get rid of the Pashtuns, then? For surely, the Taliban is a force of evil in this world.

SamCDKey:

So maybe we need to get rid of the Pashtuns, then? For surely, the Taliban is a force of evil in this world.

According to them the US troops are. And they are supported by a majority of Americans.

So by your logic, instead of fighting the troops they should target the American people.

SamCDKEy:

If they feel so inclined, let them try. They will only hurry themselves off to the grave, as we are more mighty than they.

In fact, isn't it reasonable to expect one's enemy would want to do as such?

ANd certainly, you agree that the Taliban was not good, yes? And that the Taliban, through association with Al'qaeda, is deserving of being the target of America's vengeance?

ANd certainly, you agree that the Taliban was not good, yes? And that the Taliban, through association with Al'qaeda, is deserving of being the target of America's vengeance?

Following in the same vein what do you think of the US with its known association with both the Taliban and the Al-Qaeda?

What do they deserve?

SamCDKey:

What association with the Taliban? That our oil companies worked with them in hopes of gaining access to a pipeline deal?

And what association with Al'Qaeda?

I place no blame on those who associated with the Taliban before they knowingly aided terrorists who have attacked our sovereign soil and slaughtered our innocent civilians. However, I blame all who have ever associated with Al'qaeda so long as its mission has been anti-American.

SamCDKey:

What association with the Taliban? That our oil companies worked with them in hopes of gaining access to a pipeline deal?

And what association with Al'Qaeda?

I place no blame on those who associated with the Taliban before they knowingly aided terrorists who have attacked our sovereign soil and slaughtered our innocent civilians. However, I blame all who have ever associated with Al'qaeda so long as its mission has been anti-American.

In other words training, aiding and abetting terrorists is fine as long as they are pro-American.

Whenever did we "train, aid, and abet" terrorists?

When we were involved in helping freedom fighters kill Russian invaders?

Or what?

Whenever did we "train, aid, and abet" terrorists?

When we were involved in helping freedom fighters kill Russian invaders?

Or what?

My bad. I forgot the pro-American terrorists are called freedom fighters.

SamCDKey:

So you think it is a terrorist action to fight the USSR?

SamCDKey:

Answer me this: What should America do to win in Afghanistan?

You say that we'll never win over the Pashtuns. Accordingly, your suggestion for "anti-terrorism organizations" that don't make us go to war seems flawed.

Yet America must destroy Al'qaeda and they cannot tolerate the Taliban.

We seem then to be left with only one answer: Genocide.

Do you have a better suggestion?

SamCDKey:

So you think it is a terrorist action to fight the USSR?

I think one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

All the Indians who fought British occupation in India were terrorists to them and heroes to us.

Win in afghanistan?

What are your win objectives?

SamCDKey:

Answer me this: What should America do to win in Afghanistan?

You say that we'll never win over the Pashtuns. Accordingly, your suggestion for "anti-terrorism organizations" that don't make us go to war seems flawed.

Yet America must destroy Al'qaeda and they cannot tolerate the Taliban.

We seem then to be left with only one answer: Genocide.

Do you have a better suggestion?

I think the American society is staging its own collapse.

Its upto the Americans now what they wish to do, save it or destroy its very fabric.

SamCDKey:

Do you support anti-USSR "terrorism" in the 80's?

SamCDKey:

How are we staging our own collapse and how can we save ourselves from this supposed doom?

Spuriousmonkey:

Eradication of the Taliban and Al'qaeda's operations in Afghanistan. Also, a relatively stable government, without sharia law.

SamCDKey:

Do you support anti-USSR "terrorism" in the 80's?

I don't. And people who did are responsible of crimes against humanity.

Eradication of the Taliban and Al'qaeda's operations in Afghanistan. Also, a relatively stable government, without sharia law.

You can't win then. Just give up.

Spuriousmonkey:

Why so? On both accounts.

fantasies are not the same as reality. If you want impossible win objectives you can't win. Maybe the win objectives would have been real if you hadn't been the US. But you shoot first and then ask questions. That doesn't work in these countries. They are not impressed by that. It's always been like that for them. It just reminds them of all the dickhead nations who came before you and tried to do the same.

SamCDKey:

How are we staging our own collapse and how can we save ourselves from this supposed doom?


By forgetting that no country can survive social isolation today.

This is a step in the right direction
http://digg.com/world_news/US_generals_will_quit_if_Bush_orders_Iran_attack

Spuriousmonkey:

We destroyed the Taliban's entire government in a matter of two months. We killed many of their leaders. We have crippled Al'qaeda. Why can't we go further?

Also, the Afghanis respond just as well to a bullet as any others. They do not have metal skins.

SamCDKey:

How are we "socially isolated"?

Also, what does that entail?

SamCDKey:

How are we "socially isolated"?

Also, what does that entail?

No one agrees with US policy now, including many Americans.

The British have already pulled out of Iraq and I have no doubts they will soon realise that they should pull out of Afghanistan as well.

Americans are, for the first time in history, completely on their own.

SamCDKey:

WHy should we care about anyone but the Americans? They do not live in our nation and are, in many regards, hostile to our aims (so of course they denigrate us).

The British are cowards who will get attacked by the terrorists again.

And if we are alone, so what? What has any other country truly done for us?

We are the most powerful nation in the world - only our own sense of civilization prevents us from sterilizing the Middle East.

But tell us, once again, how we can apparently attain victory. Or do you believe it is hopeless? In which case, why should we not kill every last Afghani and say "this is our solution to our enemies"?

SamCDKey:

WHy should we care about anyone but the Americans? They do not live in our nation and are, in many regards, hostile to our aims (so of course they denigrate us).

The British are cowards who will get attacked by the terrorists again.

And if we are alone, so what? What has any other country truly done for us?

We are the most powerful nation in the world - only our own sense of civilization prevents us from sterilizing the Middle East.

But tell us, once again, how we can apparently attain victory. Or do you believe it is hopeless? In which case, why should we not kill every last Afghani and say "this is our solution to our enemies"?

You are only powerful in weapons technology. You still need the world to prop up your standard of living, since you produce far less than you consume.

I believe if you killed all the Afghanis you would find yourself very much a social pariah.

If you can live with that, that is your choice of course.

But you'd be too busy fighting a civil war to care.

In fact, SamCDKey, let me ask you to do this:

As you critique the US, surely you have a better vision for what the US is.

Thus I invite you to make a post sometime today where you detail in reasonable detail, everything the US ought to do foreign policy wise. Keeping in mind the natural desire for the US to want to be safe from terrorism and warfare brought to its shores. Also, to not cede power to radical Islamic groups in the Middle East, nor empower them otherwise.

In essence, how should America go about winning a war against terror and radical Islam? How can America triumph?

If such is impossible, why should we alter our course, which at least makes sure lots of these people die? Or should we switch to my Roman tactics?

SamCDKey:

You are only powerful in weapons technology. You still need the world to prop up your standard of living, since you produce far less than you consume.

As we only recently have switched, we could easily make up for this if we wanted to.

ALso, who is going to economically boycott us? Russia? China? The Middle East?

I believe if you killed all the Afghanis you would find yourself very much a social pariah.

Until we threw our money around a bit.

And since when did the world care about genocide? Re: The U.N.'s history.

In fact, SamCDKey, let me ask you to do this:

As you critique the US, surely you have a better vision for what the US is.

Thus I invite you to make a post sometime today where you detail in reasonable detail, everything the US ought to do foreign policy wise. Keeping in mind the natural desire for the US to want to be safe from terrorism and warfare brought to its shores. Also, to not cede power to radical Islamic groups in the Middle East, nor empower them otherwise.

In essence, how should America go about winning a war against terror and radical Islam? How can America triumph?

If such is impossible, why should we alter our course, which at least makes sure lots of these people die? Or should we switch to my Roman tactics?

I think the US has the right idea but the wrong methods.

The fact that so many people are beating down the doors to get in is the first sign that they are doing something right.

Almost everyplace the US has attempted change, they have made the mistake of knowing nothing about the people and have thus totally mucked up their efforts.

What the US should do, instead of exporting their democracy with troops, is to export their democracy with investments.

If they feel a country should be different from what it is, they should figure out ways of providing incentives to change the social paradigm. Support local industry, support local incentives. They won't gain anything to begin with, but the payoffs in long term will be tremendous.

Its like we do in science. Everyone researches and the government funds research to the best of its ability, but all research is available to all scientists everywhere. This is how the field moves rapidly forward.

If countries that discovered vaccines/drugs/research kept them to themselves, who would be the loser?

SamCDKey:



As we only recently have switched, we could easily make up for this if we wanted to.

ALso, who is going to economically boycott us? Russia? China? The Middle East?



Until we threw our money around a bit.

And since when did the world care about genocide? Re: The U.N.'s history.

I think a lot of Americans would care.

Like Rome, you would be destroyed from within.

SamCDKey:

So basically, we should spread the wealth around as a means of gaining advantage through presenting a positive social image to countries that benefit from our investments?

SamCDKey:

As we live in a Democracy, they'd be convinced that voting in the next guy would be fine.

SamCDKey:

So basically, we should spread the wealth around as a means of gaining advantage through presenting a positive social image to countries that benefit from our investments?

Nothing succeeds like success.

Weren't we doing that for about.....50 years?

I mean, aren't we still doing that? Last I checked, we have our finger in basically every pie with massive investments.

Some changes there has been for sure...somebody is wrapping nice profits.

(QUOTE)
Opium production in Afghanistan, which provides more than 90 percent of the world's heroin, broke all records in 2006, reaching a historic high despite ongoing U.S.-sponsored eradication efforts, the Bush administration reported yesterday.

In addition to a 26 percent production increase over past year -- for a total of 5,644 metric tons -- the amount of land under cultivation in opium poppies grew by 61 percent. Cultivation in the two main production provinces, Helmand in the southwest and Oruzgan in central Afghanistan, was up by 132 percent.

White House drug policy chief John Walters called the news "disappointing."
(QUOTE)

Full story http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/01/AR2006120101654.html

In fact, SamCDKey, let me ask you to do this:

As you critique the US, surely you have a better vision for what the US is.

Thus I invite you to make a post sometime today where you detail in reasonable detail, everything the US ought to do foreign policy wise. Keeping in mind the natural desire for the US to want to be safe from terrorism and warfare brought to its shores. Also, to not cede power to radical Islamic groups in the Middle East, nor empower them otherwise.

In essence, how should America go about winning a war against terror and radical Islam? How can America triumph?

If such is impossible, why should we alter our course, which at least makes sure lots of these people die? Or should we switch to my Roman tactics?


By invading the REAL bad guys: Saudi Arabia and Pakistan, two countries with the most extreme fundamentalist madrassahs in the Muslim world.

Where do Al Qaida and the Taliban always go to when fleeing Afghanistan? Pakistan. Which country's spy agency (known as the ISI) has close ties with the Taliban? Pakistan. Which country is ruled by a dictator who does not promote fairness in elections? Pakistan. Which country hid a nuclear weapons programme from the US? Pakistan. Which country aided North Korea, Iran, and ALMOST Libya in obtaining nuclear weapons technology? Pakistan.

From what country of origin did the majority of the 9/11 hijackers come from? Saudi Arabia. Where are the Sunni insurgents getting funding from? Private citizens in Saudi Arabia. Where is there not a democracy in the Middle East? Saudi Arabia. Which country restricts the rights of women and restricts freedom of religion? Saudi Arabia.

Before Iran or Iraq, the US should've invaded Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.