bud

it's like you're asking me if we should support a criminal who has 'tried to' tidy the living room and wash the dishes after he has robbed a house. i'm not going to sit here and try to get into a ridiculous debate with you on your irrational thought process. the question is whether or not supporting to go to war in afghanistan would be supported by a so-called leftist. do any of your so-called leftist friends support the afghanistan war? what about the israeli wars? what about u.s. and canada's support for israel's wars? are those the characteristics of a leftist? in a rational and logical world, american woman is not considered leftist based on her stance on the above that i've listed.

leftists are known for being anti-war. so no, don't be ridiculous. i was stating that she's still arguing that the war was justified despite it being a failure. you're being ridiculous again. do you want me to close my eyes and pretend that there wasn't a military action? the nation building has been a failure as well, despite millions of dollars thrown into it. regardless, no rational leftist would consider bombing a country and then trying to rebuild it as something they'd agree with. which leftist argue this? look above for comments on nation building that follow unnecessary wars. you have once again elected to close your eyes to several other variables, take things out of context in order to blame the left. foxnews would be proud.

under harper's new bill, growing pot will give you a longer sentence than !@#ing little kids.

have you not supported the afghan war and continue to justify it despite being a big failure? have you not supported the on-going israeli occupation and their wars against the palestinians and lebanese? have you not supported u.s.' continuous support both militarily and politically for israel, despite their aggressive and hawkish behaviour? tell me how someone who supports the above can be called a leftist.

sorry to break it to you buddy; but if you state your positions on different political policies, that gives anyone the right to state where you stand on the political spectrum. you've supported the iraq war - but i could be wrong because i haven't been here long enough. you've supported the afghanistan war you've supported israel's illegal actions against the palestinians you've supported u.s.' support for israel's illegal actions you, my dear, are not a leftist.

how can a person who is pro-war and a zionist be considered a leftist? quit wasting time.

this isn't some internal feeling that only you can sense and only you are allowed to comment on. this is about your stance on various issues which is displayed for everyone here to see. you are pro-war and you are a zionist. that automatically puts you on the right.

this isn't some internal feeling that only you can sense and only you are allowed to comment on. this is about your stance on various issues which is displayed for everyone here to see. you are pro-war and a zionist. that automatically puts you on the right.

the old white people who consistently vote for them are dying and the ethnic groups are getting larger.

lols. you're not on the left.

it's about the groups who are supporting mulcair. the same ones who support wars and the settlements on palestinian land. the same ones who are in bed with harper. Independent Jewish Voices Canada (IJV) is the group who wrote the column. you guys must resist the urge to lump all jews into one group.

that's the title of the column i posted from the canadian.

this is interesting: With voting underway to elect the new leader of Canada’s New Democratic Party and just two weeks until the leadership convention, Independent Jewish Voices Canada (IJV) has discovered information indicating that key players at the highest levels in Canada’s Israel Lobby are backing the candidacy of Thomas Mulcair. This same apparent Lobby is also linked to the Stephen Harper's government prevailing pro-war agenda in the Middle East. The newly revealed Israel Lobby support for Mulcair’s NDP leadership bid includes donations from David Mayhood, a former chair of various fundraising programs at the United Israel Appeal Federation of Greater Toronto, an organization which raises millions of dollars for Israel advocacy and the “centrality of Israel” and partners with the Strauss Group, a company targeted for its questionable practices by the international Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement; and accolades from Shimon Koffler Fogel, CEO of the Canada-Israel Committee, who has called Mulcair “ courageous” for his one-sided support of Israel, because Mulcair has, in Fogel’s estimation, “consistently challenged the radical element that has sought to capture the soul of their party.” Others contributions to Mulcair’s campaign include one from Brent Belzberg, past co-chair of the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs (CIJA); the endorsement of former NDP MP Lorne Nystrom, who is currently a board member of CIJA; a donation from CIJA board member Joel Reitman; and another from Alvin Segal, who is a board member of the Canada-Israel Chamber of Commerce. link link luckily, support for mulcair continues to go down.

oops. looks like you missed a few paragraphs: there is no 'as others are hoping..' in the equation. it would obviously be easier for the PR department if they could show the latest incident is the work of 1 crazy person as opposed to the work of a group of soldiers. that's the point i tried to make. bad news travels faster than good news. in afghanistan, there is far more bad news which is a result of the occupation. a total of 5 afghan weddings have been bombed by u.s. planes. (the number of wedding bombings is according to the afghanis. some of the bombings were denied by the u.s., which were later found to have taken place) as i mentioned, it's about the disrespect the occupier shows towards those who are being occupied. koran burning, pissing on the dead afghans, keeping afghan body parts as souvenir and of course the thousands of civilians who have been killed by americans and other NATO members is what the afghans see and remember. building a school for girls in kabul is not going to cancel all the negatives. it doesn't make them lovable. i'm sure they're as much disliked (if not more by some) and i'm sure some blame taliban's actions on america's occupation. one thing you need to realize is that there is a big difference between the taliban and the americans. that is, the taliban is not a foreign occupier. your mentality of either them or us is the problem. why do the afghans have to pick between the americans and the taliban? let the afghans figure this out on their own. the occupation has not worked. after 10 years, what is there besides control over kabul? the number of civilian casualties per year continuse to increase since the occupation started. this is called a failure. time for the occupiers to cut their losses and get out as soon as possible. it's also time for the those who defend the occupations to accept that occupation doesn't work. so what do afghans think? here is what some of them think: Popular fury over the killing spree, which brought demands that the United States withdraw earlier than scheduled, could be exploited by the Taliban to gain new recruits. "We have benefited little from the foreign troops here but lost everything - our lives, dignity and our country to them," said Haji Najiq," a Kandahar shop owner. "The explanation or apologies will not bring back the dead. It is better for them to leave us alone and let us live in peace." what about when the u.s. leaves and the taliban regains more control? "The Americans said they will leave in 2014. They should leave now so we can live in peace," said Mohammad Fahim, 19, a university student. "Even if the Taliban return to power our elders can work things out with them. The Americans are disrespectful." the hatred for the occupier runs deep. "The Americans are not here to assist us they are here to kill us," said Najibullah, 33, a house painter in Kabul. "I hate the Americans and I hate anyone who loves them, so I hope there is no long-term partnership between our countries."

you can try to sweep these incidents under the rug and pretend they don't make a difference, but: U.S. Officials Debate Speeding Afghan Pullout Accelerating the withdrawal of United States forces has been under consideration for weeks by senior White House officials, but those discussions are now taking place in the context of two major setbacks to American efforts in Afghanistan — the killings on Sunday of Afghan civilians attributed to a United States Army staff sergeant and the violence touched off by burning of Korans last month by American troops. link

there is no 'as others are hoping..' in the equation. it would obviously be easier for the PR department if they could show the latest incident is the work of 1 crazy person as opposed to the work of a group of soldiers. that's the point i tried to make. bad news travels faster than good news. in afghanistan, there is far more bad news which is a result of the occupation. a total of 5 afghan weddings have been bombed by u.s. planes. (the number of wedding bombings is according to the afghanis. some of the bombings were denied by the u.s., which were later found to have taken place) as i mentioned, it's about the disrespect the occupier shows towards those who are being occupied. koran burning, pissing on the dead afghans, keeping afghan body parts as souvenir and of course the thousands of civilians who have been killed by americans and other NATO members is what the afghans see and remember. building a school for girls in kabul is not going to cancel all the negatives. it doesn't make them lovable. i'm sure they're as much disliked (if not more by some) and i'm sure some blame taliban's actions on america's occupation. one thing you need to realize is that there is a big difference between the taliban and the americans. that is, the taliban is not a foreign occupier. your mentality of either them or us is the problem. why do the afghans have to pick between the americans and the taliban? let the afghans figure this out on their own. the occupation has not worked. after 10 years, what is there besides control over kabul? the number of civilian casualties per year continuse to increase since the occupation started. this is called a failure. time for the occupiers to cut their losses and get out as soon as possible. it's also time for the those who defend the occupations to accept that occupation doesn't work. so what do afghans think? here is what some of them think: Popular fury over the killing spree, which brought demands that the United States withdraw earlier than scheduled, could be exploited by the Taliban to gain new recruits. "We have benefited little from the foreign troops here but lost everything - our lives, dignity and our country to them," said Haji Najiq," a Kandahar shop owner. "The explanation or apologies will not bring back the dead. It is better for them to leave us alone and let us live in peace." what about when the u.s. leaves and the taliban regains more control? "The Americans said they will leave in 2014. They should leave now so we can live in peace," said Mohammad Fahim, 19, a university student. "Even if the Taliban return to power our elders can work things out with them. The Americans are disrespectful." the hatred for the occupier runs deep. "The Americans are not here to assist us they are here to kill us," said Najibullah, 33, a house painter in Kabul. "I hate the Americans and I hate anyone who loves them, so I hope there is no long-term partnership between our countries."

i'm sure the americans are hoping that it is only the one guy who was involved. regardless, the afghanis are experiencing a large number of deaths of innocent afghanis by the occupier. according to United Nations Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA), there have been 12793 civilian casualties since 2007. of the 12793 killed, 3120 of them were killed by pro-government forces (NATO and U.S.). that's roughly around 25% civilians killed by the occupiers. lets also not forget the many more thousands who have been injured as a result and of course, lets not forget the disrespectful acts such as burning their holy books and pissing on dead afghans. who here thinks that the afghans can look past these experiences? how many of the relatives of these women and children who were killed will be joining the militant groups in afghanistan in order to get revenge? i am astonished by some people in this thread who have the attitude that the afghans should somehow be grateful for america being there instead of being angry at them and wanting them out.

are you serious? are you serious?

there are two versions. i guess we won't know until there is a full inquiry into the incident. hopefully the inquiry is done correctly.

there are reports coming out where some of the villagers are saying that more than one person was involved in this rampage. ‘Several drunk troops behind bloodbath, laughed on shooting-spree, burned corpses’ Gruesome new details are surfacing after 16 Afghan villagers including nine children were shot in their houses by at least one US serviceman. Witnesses to the atrocity now say that several drunken American soldiers were involved. Neighbors at the village where the killings took place said they were awoken past midnight by crackling gunfire: "They were all drunk and shooting all over the place," Reuters cites Agha Lala, a villager in Kandahar's Panjwayi district. Lala's neighbor Haji Samad lost all of his 11 relatives in the rampage, including children and grandchildren. He claims Marines “poured chemicals over their dead bodies and burned them.” Twenty-year-old Jan Agha says the gunfire “shook him out of bed.” He was in the epicenter of the horrible shooting, witnessing his father shot as the latter peered out of a window to see what was going on. "The Americans stayed in our house for a while. I was very scared," the young man told reporters. Lying on a floor, Agha says, he pretended to be dead. He added that his brother was shot in his head and chest. His sister was killed as well. “My mother was shot in her eye and her face. She was unrecognizable,” he said. link

why? we know they have very little positives. we know that they oppress their people. so what now? we should bomb the shit out of them? their internal politics are internal. they pose no danger to israel or any other country as both israeli and u.s. experts have repeatedly said.

there are too many 'bad apples' and too many dead civilians. every single one of these wars have turned out to be rotten. ladies and gentlemen, another failed war. the sad part is that, it doesn't matter how many times it's proven that these adventures do not work, there are still people who will support the next adventure. US soldier's killing spree puts Afghanistan on a knife-edge A US soldier has shot dead 16 Afghan civilians, nine of them children, in a night-time shooting spree in a village outside his base in southern Afghanistan, a rampage the Afghan president, Hamid Karzai, said was "impossible to forgive". The unprecedented attack on families asleep in their homes came as anti-foreign sentiment was already running high after Afghans discovered US troops had burned copies of the Qur'an at a military base whatever way you want to look at it, wars increase civilian casualties. whether they're killed 'accidentally' by the foreign invader (drones/bombs), or purposely by the 'bad apples' or by anti-government militant groups. wars still result in an increase deaths of civilians. isn't it time to abandon this shit?

bjork! http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5q1BvSZNbUg

how did you come to the conclusion that the farsi shiites are an oppressive majority?

THE MUSLIMS ARE TAKING OVER!!!!!111