Question for Red and the rest of the tree huggers?

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by TwistedTiger, Aug 18, 2009.

Page 7 of 7
  1. martin

    martin Banned Forever

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2003
    Messages:
    19,026
    Likes Received:
    934
    i am not in a chinese political prison either, but i can say without reservation that i wouldnt like it.

    dont pretend we cant judge something if we are not there. we know damn well what the taliban is, what they do, what they stand for. any person in their right mind knows that they are a miserable murderous regime of horror.

    dude, i am annoyed by the rampant amount of religion in new york city, i would truly go nuts under the taliban.

    i dont recall saying that. i would certainly understand that a war of freedom has its costs. for real though i simply would not live in afghanistan, i would leave, no matter what the cost.

    of course i dont give a damn about these women. but you are arguing that they should be upset that americans are there. you are the one arguing that their lives are made worse for american intervention. thats absolutely an infantile way to see things. you are opposing american policy to oppose it. perhaps you watch too much of your anti-establishment hero comic guy.

    is i was an afghan i would appreciat that americans had given me missiles to fire against communist invasion.

    i have bad news for you dude. i am gonna have to assess a 1 year ignore penalty on you. i feel bad for you because i am one fascinating son of a bitch. seeya in august 2010.
     
    martin, Aug 19, 2009
    #61
  2. TwistedTiger

    TwistedTiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2003
    Messages:
    14,073
    Likes Received:
    4,977
    That sounds exactly like what Bush or Cheney would say. You tree huggers have got to be really disappointed with that kind of attitude from your far left super heroes.
     
    TwistedTiger, Aug 19, 2009
    #62
  3. shane0911

    shane0911 Helping lost idiots find their village

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Messages:
    37,793
    Likes Received:
    23,951
    Ahh but you miss the point amigo, they will be on American soil and with American rights as some slimy defense lawyer trying to get them absolved of their crimes. They need to stay in Gitmo.
     
    shane0911, Aug 19, 2009
    #63
  4. LaSalleAve

    LaSalleAve when in doubt, mumble

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    44,037
    Likes Received:
    18,027
    the point i have been trying to make from the get, is don't be naive enough to think that everyone in the middle east would just open their arms to americans. maybe a few did, but look what we do, we go to afghanistan in the 80's we use them, and instead of mujuhadeen ruling, the taliban takes over. We come back in 2002 or late 2001 whenever it was, and run the taliban out, but now the country is run by drug dealing warlords. We invade iraq shortly after, and let the country go nuts, libraries are burned to the ground, museum's with irreplaceable artifacts are looted, and trashed, an entire culture is damn near wiped out because of a stupid congress, and administration that invaded them for either oil or vengance. Maybe you would look upon americans as liberators, but i can tell you, from the people i have talked to who have spent years over there, middle easterners do not really look too highly on americans, especially when they have occupied their country, and show no signs of leaving. am i in favor of the taliban or saadam, no, but i really didn't care either way. those people have hated each other for centuries, and nothing, i repeat, nothing we will ever do will change that, we may put a band aid on it for a few years, but that wound will start to bleed again.

    maybe i shouldn't have called you a clueless retard, but some of the drivel you posted sounded pretty damn clueless. you may be right about the taliban being a murderous regime, but to people in the middle east, so is america.

    be safe until next august.
     
    LaSalleAve, Aug 20, 2009
    #64
  5. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    It's as if martin and LaSalle are talking about two different Talibans . . . and in fact they are. Taliban is simply the Islamic word for religious student. Many of the taliban are simple religious zealots trying to advance their religion in their on country. They did not attack America and like they did once before with the Russians, they fight foreign armies on their soil. They have done this since time of Alexander the Great, most notably to the British in the 19th century. Most countries leave Afghanistan alone for that reason--they got nothing we need and the mountainous land is impossible to hold in a guerrilla war. LaSalle is correct about these taliban fighters, when we leave they will no longer be an issue and will go back to growing opium and killing each other.

    But the bad Taliban (capital T) became a political entity that controlled the country and supported terrorism by providing Al Qaida with a base and defending them from US retaliation post 9/11. They helped bin Ladin attack us. So we are going after the Taliban leadership to behead the serpent. martin is correct concerning these Taliban. They must be hunted down and dealt with.

    But it is futile to attempt to kill every religious student in the middle east . . . and unnecessary. It is equally futile to attempt to kill every Afghan with a rifle. They change sides all the time and warring is part of their culture. We need only to eliminate Al Qaida and the Taliban leadership, then pack up and go home. We are never going to turn Afghanistan into a Jeffersonian democracy. Just turn it into a place where they will tell future anti-American terrorists to get lost rather than risk having the Americans come back again.
     
    red55, Aug 20, 2009
    #65
  6. Beaux-Bo

    Beaux-Bo Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,219
    Likes Received:
    78
    WOW!!! I agree with Red on a political subject.

    Almost, I take issue with “we go kill the Taliban/AQ head and then go home”. We have a habit of doing that (or trying to do that). It does not work.

    It did not work in Iraq. We go into a city (area) kill all bad guys and then leave. Bad guy returns when we leave and torture the people that helped us “rid” their streets of bad guys. Next time we have to go in no one trust us and it is harder to “rid” their city of bad guys but we do. Then we leave again and bad guys come back.

    But when we went in, cleared the city, stayed and built schools and infrastructure the city began to stand up and thrive. The question is how long do you stay? It was working in Iraq. Violence was down drastically, their ****ed up government was trying to figure it out. But since BO has pulled all our troops out of the cities again violence and bulling has taken over in the cities. BO promised the bad guys, “Hey when I am in, we are leaving. Bad guys says cool we are coming back in”

    We did this in Afghanistan. We went in and helped them get rid of the communist then just left the region in a vacuum. That vacuum was filled by the Taliban. Now we are back again. We will have to go back to Iraq too at some point. May take 10 years but we will have to go back because we left a vacuum and it will be filled by some really bad people that want to do us harm.
     
    Beaux-Bo, Aug 20, 2009
    #66
    1 person likes this.
  7. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    At some point, and soon by American popular opinion, we have to leave Iraq and Afghanistan to their own people. They may never be peaceful democracies. They never have been. There isn't a democracy anywhere in the Arab world. Never has been one in Afghanistan either. In the middle east countries are ruled by strongman dictators. They can be benevolent monarchs and allies like in Jordan and Saudi Arabia or they can be despots and enemies like Saddam or Ahmanutjob.

    When we leave, some strongman is going to take power and stop the violence by ruling with an iron boot. The only question is which faction rises to the top. In Afghanistan it matters little, it has been and will be for some time an islamic tribal federation ruled by one warlord or another.

    In Iraq we may have replaced the secular western-looking dictator with a radical islamist dictator.

    It's a fools errand to measure American success on whether these two countries will remain democratic and safe. They never have been and never will be. We should measure our success on what is in our best interests. Killing our enemies then cutting our vast expenses by coming home.
     
    red55, Aug 20, 2009
    #67
  8. Beaux-Bo

    Beaux-Bo Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jan 13, 2004
    Messages:
    1,219
    Likes Received:
    78
    Well said.

    I might add that under that scenario, we (as citizens and government) need to be prepared to periodically go kick someones ass who is either harboring or helping people prepare to hurt our citizens. I think Clinton proved that lobbing a scud missile into the desert is not going to keep us safe.
     
    Beaux-Bo, Aug 20, 2009
    #68
  9. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,736
    Sometimes it does. Reagan lobbed one at Khadaffi and the boy got religion.
     
    red55, Aug 20, 2009
    #69
Page 7 of 7

Share This Page