Afghanistan - What is the objective?

Discussion in 'World Events' started by StrawDog, Mar 11, 2009.

  1. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    Maybe Max...IF you didn't get burned EVERYTIME. Ho Chi Mhin(or whatever his name is) to OBL.

    Almost every country/people you arm you wind up fighting 10-20 years later.

    Vietnam, Iraq, Afganistan.

    Learn a lesson from it, Fuck arming people, I know there's a whole bunch of people (actually a pretty small coterie) that make big fuckin bucks selling arms in the U.S, but it's not good for 99% of Americans.

    Americans pay for their arms to be made through their taxes - shipped to another country to arms browns to kill browns as Hitler would put it, then you gotta turn around and sacrifice your own boys and girls fighting these very arms/CIA trained fighters, you paid for with your taxes. Oh and then your taxes go up to pay for your sons and daughters to get killed fighting that war. Because some fucking politician/CIA Analyst thought it would be a good idea, and maybe the arms sales were tapering off.

    Karma's a bitch and it reciprocates pretty fucking quick with war.

    Doing nothing(as far as waging war) is exactly what is required in the age of nuclear weapons. A large standing army is a waste - esp for a well armed populace like the U.S. Keep the mobile stuff like airborne/Marines the powerful navy, etc. Take some of the money savings and invest in intelligence/security surrounding nuclear secrets and nuclear defense intelligence. And then, yes DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING. Let your people create wealth all over the world, the world thrives - you thrive. Primitive fuckers die on the vine. Catch them one at a time like rats they are - trying to come at you, coming at them is a waste, if you must then do it with spec ops only. YOUR OWN WARRIORS NOT SOMEONE ELSES. You'll just have to take them out 10 years after.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2009
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    And how's that workin for ya Buff?

    Maybe it should be "The Enemy of My Enemy, is my friend, is my enemy after my enemy is no longer my enemy".

    I can play quote games too.

     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2009
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    Wow.

    You named three -- one of which is suspect. We didn't arm Vietnam. The Soviets and the Chinese did that. We became involved after that arming had already begun.

    What about the dozens of countries we arm that don't fight us: Korea, Germany, the UK, Saudi Arabia, Israel, etc?

    The US has "fought" relatively few people in the past 50 years, so to claim we arm our future opponents is a bit of a stretch.

    And for the record, the US never armed bin Laden.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    I would not say this too loudly if I were an American. Bush made flouting the rule of law a national pastime.

    Do YOU cheer such an approach to life in the 21st century?
     
  8. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    You Armed and trained Ho Chi Mhin(? gr) during WWII to fight japs. He was VERY pro american at the time, then at the end of WWII you basically left him to fend for himself vs A LOT of opponents. You fucked him and he went commie.

    You didn't arm bin laden but he was an ally.

    S. Korea, Saudi, Israel, Germany are not your enemies...they are still getting WEAPONS. Some of them depend or have depended on the U.S for a STANDING ARMY. Titsuckers and a drain to the american people. Again, filling the pockets of weapons making industrialists.

    There is shit out there caused by the CIA, that we will never know the truth of. Perhaps the Mexican cartels would not be so powerful, without all that dope/weapons deals with south america...hmmm?

    I'm not anti-american. I'm Anti fucktard-american. Arms industrialists, CIA fucking FUCKING fratboys fucking thinking everyone is beneath them, is what's really causing this shit. An ignorant public just enables them.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2009
  9. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    Back to the topic.

    Let's Speak the Truth About Afghanistan

    What is the Taliban?

    So from the original pretext for invading Afghanistan, that of eliminating Al Qaeda, the game changed to a battle against the Taliban and again to a battle against the Pashtun alliance. The question is, why, when it was apparent that Al Qaeda ( all 300 of them

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    ) had disappeared into thin air, did the agenda change, and also the media spin changed to enable the new strategy?

    Indeed.

    So why is the US so intent to stay, and why is Obama escalating the Afghanistan conflict, which as we have shown, is nowhere near what the original reason for invasion was?

    (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eric-margolis/lets-speak-the-truth-abou_b_115591.html)

    In a nutshell. Greed, oil and gas. Never mind the thousands upon thousands of civilian deaths. Sad.
     
  10. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    Oh, bullshit.

    Your post is rife with factual errors (US aid to Taliban? Never happened. Taliban ended drug trade? Nope, it profited from it).

    God, I get so tired of reading this hackneyed, Marxist crap. Why do I bother?

    The US is getting what out of Afghanistan?

    And meanwhile, they are pledging how much blood and treasure?

    The US armed China to fight Japan, too. So is it the US's fault it "went commie" after the war and became and adversary? Seriously, this myopic this-equals-that reading of history is what passes for understanding on this site. It's laughable. Nobody makes people go communist. They chose to do that on their own.

    No, he wasn't.

    And if you had actually read anything written or said by bin Laden you would realize that even he denies this stupid, Leftist claim.

    Your statement was: "Almost every country/people you arm you wind up fighting 10-20 years later." I think I poked enough holes with the countries I mentioned to show how wrongheaded your statement is.

    That's right. Ramble about unnamed conspiracies now. That makes you really look like you know what you're talking about.

    Hm what? They sell drugs and buy guns with part of the profits. What are you implying?

    Then you must suffer from self-loathing quite a bit.

    What you don't know about CIA probably fills several books, all of which you could buy at the nearest book shop. It's clear you haven't availed yourself to that possibility though, have you?
     
  11. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    Debating 101. Then take the trouble, and refute it with some substance for a change. Otherwise. LOL
     
  12. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    So I have to disprove your claims?

    Claims based on a columnist from Huffington Post?

    You could read Ahmed Rashid's Taliban if you really wanted to know something about them. Or Steve Coll's Ghost Wars. Or Lawrence Wright's The Looming Tower. Or the 9/11 report. All of them show the US were not aiding the Taliban and that the Taliban used drugs to buy guns, just like the Northern Alliance and every other armed group in Afghanistan. But I doubt actual knowledge will change your eagerness to see everything in sinister economic terms.

    And missing from your kind words about the Taliban -- and the US resistance to them -- is the fact that the Afghans don't WANT them running their country or sitting at the table with those who do.
     
  13. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    Well that's what happens when you leave your "friends" high and dry , they generally have to turn to your enemies. I'm not going to argue details about it in this thread, particularly with someone in denial like you. It's simple logic at the strategic level.

    Right bin Laden tells the truth suddenly, on topics you like him to tell the truth on. He doesn't want to admit any doings with the U.S, it would undermine his Jihad following.

    And like a typical sciforumite you cherry pick to suit your pathetic argument. I said also that they are your responsibility. The ones that you continued to support, are happy to still suck off the U.S protection Tit, the ones you let go, point by point became hostile to you. Some countries can be let go after a long while, when all is forgotten, but do you REALLY want to be in Afghanistan for 40 years like Germany and Japan...assuming of course you could defeat these mountain people, getting tougher and tougher as they continue to have an enemy to fight.


    No conspiracy, so much has come to light! Drugs/arms/money-for-war, just a great bunch that CIA is!


    WTF that's ok with you? Fucktard alert!

    Nope, you suffer from selective amnesia, delusion, paranoia and perhaps judging from your posts - psychosis. Internet diagnosis are so much fun.


    I've actually read quite a bit on the subject, I followed the Oliver North trial in the 80s like it was the OJ trial and I was Canadian and like 10 years old at the time. A real awakening to the real world. Fuck yer Neighbor. It's not the way to operate individually or as a Nation.
     
  14. DiamondHearts Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,557
    And you know this how? Have you ever lived in Afghanistan?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vCCYJwLw3ik
     
  15. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    Right. So you get challenged on your bullshit appreciation of history and you're not going to argue details? OK. That's mature.

    To reiterate what I said earlier, I find it fascinating that you think that whenever the US leaves people "high and dry," they have no choice but to become communists. This is absolutely stupid. If it were true, then the Afghans would be communist, right?

    I admit the man has a questionable record when it comes to the truth, but my point is that his own statements agree with numerous primary and secondary sources on this topic. Try the books I mentioned above, or Milton Bearden's or Charlie Wilson's War. Bin Laden was never involved in the US operations in Afghanistan and the only people who say so are people like you who want to paint the US history as something it's not -- regardless of the facts.

    I have no problem with troops remaining there.

    You've shown me nothing but your ignorance.

    You've maintained your 10-year old comprehension skills apparently. And Iran-Contra hardly speaks to the overall gist you obliquely suggest.

    Right. You have to live somewhere before you can comment about it, right? That's totally illogical.

    And in my case, I can prove what I've stated. Initially, if you read Rashid's book or any other relevant source, you see that the Afghans initially welcomed the Taliban because they ended the feuding among the war lords and restored order. That order came with a price. In time, the Afghans came to hate the Taliban, because it was Wahhabi and radical, neither or which ever flourished in Afghanistan. Additionally, it must be noted that the Taliban were hated because they are also "external," in that most of the Talibs came from camps in Pakistan and weren't seen as genuine Afghans. The Pashtun also never fulled embraced them, see people like Karzai, who initially cooperated then defected (his father was killed by the Taliban).

    The bottom line is that nobody really likes the Taliban. Well, nobody except Pakistan, who funded them and propped them up against the Northern Alliance. Later bin Laden and his money was added to the Paki and drug-money-filled coffers. Without Pakistan and bin Laden the Taliban would never had ruled the country, and this is precisely why they can't hold territory now. They have very little local support.
     
    Last edited: Mar 12, 2009
  16. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    Your post is mostly Bullshit , but I will address this.

    I did not say they ALL go commie. I said "Enemies". Back then it was commies, now it's "Terrrists".

    Maybe it's you guys that constantly needs an enemy to fight. To justify that bloated military budget and unknown black budget.
     
  17. quadraphonics Bloodthirsty Barbarian Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,391
    Dude, that's only three countries. Surely you don't think that amounts to "almost every" country the US has armed over the past 10-20 years?
     
  18. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    And that's my point, Quad.

    The communist issue came up, N, because you seized on Vietnam and claimed they went communist because they had no choice after the US abandoned them. I asked if the same could be said of China. Never really got an answer on that. Elsewhere, I've shaken your tree with some actual sources. But yeah, my post is all "bullshit."
     
  19. StrawDog disseminated primatemaia Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,373
    If you flippantly disregard the professional integrity of the Huff without any kind of solid reasoning, why would I entertain your sources? (even though I have read some)

    Point me to some substantiation.
     
  20. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    lol Don't we all wish we could say "Man we only had to fight 3 countries, in 40 years...problems we created to serve the needs of only the elite in our country."
     
  21. nietzschefan Thread Killer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,721
    Whatever - Look China was WWII...I have no criticism for what was done in WWII. China was worth a shot because Nationalists were also fighting Japs.

    Post WWII is Nuclear age. Warfare is obsolete. Bitch slaping terrorists is the duty of police forces - Delta etc.

    Anyways I truly DO want the best for your country. I have a vested interest. Keep on this path and you are doomed.
     
  22. DiamondHearts Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,557
    I think living in Afghanistan and hearing the sentiments of common people helps. All this pro-US military rhetoric that Afghanis see them as liberators is completely false. All the allies the US has in Afghanistan who are merely mercenaries, if the Americans stop paying them, they will join the opposite side right away. There is a wide belief in Afghanistan and Pakistan that bomb attacks on civilians is a strategy used by the American's cronies to tarnish the image of the legitimate resistance. Drone attacks aimed at civilians killing majority women and school-age children in the thousands is another one of these strategies to punish the populace, and claim to be killing five year old 'terrorists', except this one is overt.

    America is more hated in Afghanistan today than Russia ever was, the same future awaits America too. By pushing Pakistan to the defensive, you will only strength the legitimate resistance of the Afghanis and bring in support from common people of Pakistan. Pakistan is already in the throes of another revolution, the US is precipitating its own demise.
     
  23. countezero Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,590
    How do you know my disregard is flippant or lacks solid reasoning?

    The fact is the Huff is a ideologically driven site that advances one political perception with suitably slanted stories and observations. It makes no attempt to be objective or non-biased. None. What's worse is that regardless whether the Huff is Left or Right, the article you linked to is little more than an unsubstantiated opinion piece, so you're doing little more than backing your opinion with other like-minded opinions. This is what passes for "argument" on this site. The problem is that you are not backing your opinion with documented facts.

    The books I listed are all scholarly works, written by people with excellent representations for research. Their sources can all be checked, verified or attacked because they are there, in print. But that's not even necessary, and you know it. You made a claim and so you should defend it. It's a fact the US never recognized the Taliban as the govt. of Afghanistan, so I think you will be hard pressed to find legitimate sources that show were giving them "aid," as you claimed.

    Are you serious?

    How about the fact the country was in a Civil War the entire time the Taliban ruled it. Or the fact the Afghans celebrated in the streets when they were driven away. I mean, you must have seen this, right? It was on television. Elsewhere, I don't see anyone agitating for the Taliban's return. But if you really want to me to dig up something that quantifies this, I can.

    You have no criticism for what was done in WW2?

    Then why did you write: "You Armed and trained Ho Chi Mhin(? gr) during WWII"?

    Agreed.

    But not living there does not mean a person cannot reach a reasonable conclusion about events there. One doesn't have to live somewhere before they can comment on a situation.

    And for the record, have you lived in Afghanistan, post-911?

    Really?

    Really? They would join the Taliban? No, they wouldn't. They fought the Taliban before the US got there. You should know this.

    That's typical conspiracy crap. The US is not Algeria, and the Taliban is not a legitimate resistance. Or are you saying they are?

    Now you sound like Sam. The US is not intentionally killing civilians and you have no proof they are, just addled ramblings.

    More lies. If this were the case, the Americans would be coming home in body bags by the thousands. Fact is they aren't.
     

Share This Page