Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Whether it is a mullah or a western beaurcrat or an influential buisness man who arms deals on the side..BOTH send unsuspecting young people into battle..and all battle is terrorism. I know of this very girly radio talk show host..a young man who is gaining influence.. He promotes and adores the savage game of ultimate fighting - but I can tell that he would start crying like an infant if confronted personally by violence - YET this little weasil promotes war and rule of law even if the law is unjust. These weasils go to the lowest and highest position in society - let the powers that be sacrafice their only son for the "cause" - they won't! Quote
ToadBrother Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 I'd love that solution. For it to actually work though, we'd need a law by which all these falks could be prosecuted - because there'll never be a time when a little successful "operation" wouldn't earn a few useful benefits to this bureaucrat, or that politician - the law that would deem these operations clearly and unmistakenly illegal and criminal, and anybody complicit in them, from organisation to execution - liable to criminal prosecution. Yes we can defend our country without messing up in others. Explain to me precisely how we're messing up Afghanistan? Could it actually have been more screwed up than it was in the period between 1989 and 2003? Quote
Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Explain to me precisely how we're messing up Afghanistan? Could it actually have been more screwed up than it was in the period between 1989 and 2003? It's none of our buisness if they are messed up. It's none of our buisness if they beat their woman - which in comparison to us, probably is the same amount of abuse...It does not matter if they grow and sell drugs - untill we stop peddling drugs (street and pharma) then we should shut up - until we have true democracy and a system of law that only enhances the rich status quo..we should also shut up and butt out. Quote
myata Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 I'll explain. Afghanistan had a working government that existed on its own. It was a nasty looking (to us) government, almost entirely inconsistent with (our) principles, but it was Afghan government and it didn't require 100,000 foreign troops, thousands of civilian death annually, and decade long civil war to work. We went their to change the way the country was, to remake it into our own image. To me, that's got nothing, zero to do with our security. Why did we go and what will we actually accomplish? To me these are irrelevant questions. We were not, nor are defending ourselves on our ground, and so this is a war of aggression and invasion, it should be deemed illegal, and its organizers and executors - sent to jail. This way, in time, there will be less wars. If we keep talking about why my "going" is so much better and necessary than theirs, you shouldn't count on it anytime soon, or ever. Quote If it's you or them, the truth is equidistant
Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 I know for a fact that we have un-elected men in high places who are very similar to the warlords of Afghanistan - They simply want to have a fight with the more primative Afghani warlords. It might be about who's got the biggest balls. The guy in the cave or his counterpart in the bank tower. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 I don't recall any chagrin but you have a different take on reality than me. That's a major problem these days. eg..."That is YOUR truth" - hence that is YOUR reality. If we can not agree on a common reality then we are doomed to this hell. Quote
ToadBrother Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 I'll explain. Afghanistan had a working government that existed on its own. It was a nasty looking (to us) government, almost entirely inconsistent with (our) principles, but it was Afghan government and it didn't require 100,000 foreign troops, thousands of civilian death annually, and decade long civil war to work. We went their to change the way the country was, to remake it into our own image. To me, that's got nothing, zero to do with our security. Why did we go and what will we actually accomplish? To me these are irrelevant questions. We were not, nor are defending ourselves on our ground, and so this is a war of aggression and invasion, it should be deemed illegal, and its organizers and executors - sent to jail. This way, in time, there will be less wars. If we keep talking about why my "going" is so much better and necessary than theirs, you shouldn't count on it anytime soon, or ever. You seem to be forgetting (possibly intentionally) that said government was in fact allowing an international terrorist organization to operate from its soil. Unfortunately, the goals for Afghanistan got confused. I don't think it should ever have been about making sure that girls could get an education and to stop the lopping off of body parts in soccer stadiums. It should have been about assuring that the country would no longer be a safe staging area for attacks by international criminals against other organizations. I guess the general idea was to get rid of the Taliban and try to set up a government that would ultimately not permit any further deliberate co-operation with Al Qaeda. But, of course, the Taliban isn't a government per se, but rather a fusion of tribalistic and religious elements that seeks to create a sort of fundamentalist Islamist regime stretching from norther Pakistan right to the Iranian border. Where the Afghan campaign has repeatedly failed is Pakistan, which seems completely incapable of controlling its borders, which for the Taliban, do not exist at all. But this is the problem with these kinds of wars. They get a kind of expectation creep. If this was just a war to kill every Taliban fighter that showed his head, with a large number of NATO soldiers with orders to go into Pakistan to blow them to pieces regardless of protestations from the nearly paralyzed and ineffectual government in Islamabad (even when under what was effectively a military coupe), we would be a lot further ahead. But because we have to pretend like we don't jump into Pakistan to pursue the Taliban, and thus pretty reserve such excursions for special ops, rather than having a proper military operation, we're doomed to failure. In other words, I'm fully in agreement with toppling the Taliban and keeping them toppled (only three countries ever recognized these guys as the legitimate government anyways). I just think that we're running it badly, and we (Canada and the rest of the NATO countries who are actually fielding meaningful combat forces) are shedding blood with no appreciable gain at the end of the day. The other thing I'd do is basically give Karzai a year to clean up the government with the threat that we'll force him and his cabinet into a helicopter and drop them in the middle of the nearest Taliban stronghold if he doesn't. We've clearly backed a crook, and if he is to remain the leader of Afghanistan, it ought to be with a loaded gun to his forehead. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 "Clearly backed a crook" Surprise surprise - we are all crooks these days. Quote
JaysFan Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Why is it evil to want to annihilate evil? Was it evil to annihilate the Nazis? Is it evil to execute murderers and rapists and child predators? Why am I evil to suggest that Taliban, all of its supporters, and all similar groups of people be dispatched without mercy? I hold hatred for our enemies, and our enemies are not simple people far away with different political opinions on the degree to which government should be involved in our economy. Our enemies are animals who besmirch all of our fundamental values. They torture and execute people without any rule of law - convert to the wrong religion? Well, off with your head! Need a few dollars to but a machine gun? Well, sell off your 12-year-old daughter! Girls trying to learn to read and write when they're forbidden? Well, throw acid in their faces! Belong to the wrong tribe? Well, let's plant IEDs around community centres and schools and markets! These pieces of garbage reject fundamental freedoms, of speech, of religion, of association, of sexual orientation, and of everything in between. They reject gender equalities. They reject education. They reject democracy. They reject everything that makes us great and that we hold dear. Only an extremist left-winger would refer to me as evil and hate-filled for wanting to EXTERMINATE these subhumans WITHOUT PREJUDICE. These barbarians (you dispute that they are barbarians!) should've been annihilated years ago. Unfortunately we always fight with our hands tied behind our backs - silly rules of engagements and absurd laws/rules of war that was always exploited by our enemies. Actually I believe most would label you (correctly) as a right wing extremist nut case who's worthy of being placed on a watch list for your own borderline genocidal supporting views and comments. Quote
Argus Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 It appears that the Conservative government ignored certain facts coming from the front lines and blah, blah, blah, blah blah. yawn Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Gabriel Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Actually I believe most would label you (correctly) as a right wing extremist nut case who's worthy of being placed on a watch list for your own borderline genocidal supporting views and comments. Show me ONE INSTANCE where I advocated genocide. Or you can continue on lying about my statements. I love how my desire to have our side destroy terrorists gets convoluted in your mind as being an endorsement of genocide. Quote
Argus Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 So, why are we in Afghanistan? We should just GTFO, right? We're in Afghanistan so they don't provide a base for terrorists to train and organize and come over here to blow us up. Unfortunately, the silly, naive Americans insisted on trying to establish some kind of democracy there. What they shoul dhave done - what we should do now - is find the biggest, meanest, nastiest guy who's reliable, and put him in charge. Let him kill anyone who disagrees, and then there'll be peace. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Actually I believe most would label you (correctly) as a right wing extremist nut case who's worthy of being placed on a watch list for your own borderline genocidal supporting views and comments. The British and the Americans allowed the Nazis to get a strong start and they supported evil because all empires are evil. The problem was when one evil became bigger than the other that evil had to fight evil - and in the end - the world still stinks of evil..I suggest that you understand this phenomena..that evil only lives if you fear it and believe in it. Those that go along with evil are usually suffering from cowardice - look at the war on terror . all the old white bankers were simply terrified and reacted badly without good judgement - so evil battles evil - good patiently waits for evil to destroy itself - fighting it just feeds it. Quote
Argus Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 (edited) Well first off they are not "subhuman" there DNA is the same as your. Second your describing everyone from Afghanistan like that. Third the term barbarians and savages has always been used by holier than thou assholes who think they're better than a people, and generally the assholes get there asses kicked by the "barbrians and savages" like the Romans getting shit kicked by the Germanic tribes, or the medieval Europeans getting beat by Genghis Khan. Let me get this straight - are you saying the Romans weren't more civilized than the Germanic tribes? That the medieval Europeans weren't more civilized than Genghis Khan? Edited November 19, 2009 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
JaysFan Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 (edited) Show me ONE INSTANCE where I advocated genocide. Or you can continue on lying about my statements. I love how my desire to have our side destroy terrorists gets convoluted in your mind as being an endorsement of genocide. Your own words from page 1.Unlike you, I'm unwilling to compromise democracy and freedom. You are a moral relativist, who thinks that it's inappropriate to judge child killers and religious extremists. In your view, all civilizations and societies are equal, just different.The reality? I'm unafraid and unapologetic to label these animals for what they are - BARBARIANS and SAVAGES that are only worthy only of annihilation. Take no prisoners. Destroy them and crush their towns. The only people who would be offended by such a statement are the animals and savages themselves, and their moral supporters (you, for example). Nutcase. Edited November 19, 2009 by JaysFan Quote
Argus Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 And just when our honourable PM was about to begin lecturing those lesser people on human rights and democracy during his forthcoming visit to China, Are you suggesting he shouldn't? Are you suggesting we're anywhere nearly, anywhere remotely in the same general vicinity as China? Or are you simply on another "I hate conservatives" rant? the news of torture scandal hit China's airwaves: http://news.ca.msn.com/top-stories/cbc-article.aspx?cp-documentid=22653917 (MSN news). Now he'll have lot more credibility there. You make it sound like China's "air waves" aren't controlled by the government, and that they didn't report on this story by design, specifically by a sniggering leadership who think they can smirk and say "but you see, you are as bad as us, so don't lecture!" China is a brutal, thugocracy. Making any attempt at comparing their human rights abuses to this merely marks your opinion as so out there that one can only laughat it and dismiss your opinion with contempt. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Gabriel Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Your own words from page 1. Nutcase. Who do you think I'm talking about in that statement? It's painful that in 2009 there are so many extremists like you who refuse to discern between the enemy and civilians. Clearly not every Afghani needs to be destroyed (I shouldn't have to even say that, but apparently people like you need clarification!). The Taliban and other extremist tribes who practise barbarism and savagery do need to be annihilated, however. I'm not sure why that's so offensive to your sensibilities. Actually... I do know why - you're a terrorist supporter. Quote
Argus Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 (edited) I'll explain. Afghanistan had a working government that existed on its own. It was a nasty looking (to us) government, almost entirely inconsistent with (our) principles,. You see, Myata doesn't like to judge the Taliban as inferior or wrong. He reserves all his vitriol and hairtrigger judgement for conservatives - being, apparently, entirely ignorant of the fact that everything he hates about conservatives exists tenfold in the Taliban. This is the weird thing about the Lefties. It's like: Conservatives dont' approve of gay marriage: They're evil! They're homophobes! Taliban believe gay people should be tortured to death: Mustn't judge them. Edited November 19, 2009 by Argus Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Let me get this straight - are you saying the Romans weren't more civilized than the Germanic tribes? That the medieval Europeans weren't more civilized than Genghis Khan? The mind of some young Jew called Jesus civilzed these barbarians. Any de-civilzation that took place within the mentioned empires only came with the falling away of Christian doctrine..Such as the embracing of the occult by the Germans and the Italians. Even the Jews put aside the teachings and doctines of Jesus - that also lead to a great de-civilzation of the tibe. Civilization is loving your neighbour..and your enemy - loving an enemy gives that enemy a choice - to love back or be consumed by their own hate - Gemany defeated Germany - The Roman empire destroyed the Roman empire. Quote
Gabriel Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 You see, Myata doesn't like to judge the Taliban as inferior or wrong. He reserves all his vitriol and hairtrigger judgement for conservatives - being, apparently, entirely ignorant of the fact that everything he hates about conservatives exists tenfold in the Taliban. This is the weird thing about the Lefties. It's like: Conservatives dont' approve of gay marriage: They're evil! They're homophobes! Taliban believe gay people should be tortured to death: Mustn't judge them. I was sickened by his parentheses... that our morality is only valid on our side of the Atlantic Ocean. As if equality for men and women, democracy, private property, protection from discrimination based on religion, race, ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, political affiliation, etc, etc... are values that are only REAL over on our side. How sick is myata? What a coward he is to be afraid to stand up for these NON-CONTROVERSIAL values. In order not to offend terrorists, he makes a point to indicate that these values are relevant only to us. Unbelievable. Quote
Gabriel Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Conservatives dont' approve of gay marriage: They're evil! They're homophobes! Taliban believe gay people should be tortured to death: Mustn't judge them. :lol: Quote
JaysFan Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 Who do you think I'm talking about in that statement? It's painful that in 2009 there are so many extremists like you who refuse to discern between the enemy and civilians. Clearly not every Afghani needs to be destroyed (I shouldn't have to even say that, but apparently people like you need clarification!). The Taliban and other extremist tribes who practise barbarism and savagery do need to be annihilated, however. I'm not sure why that's so offensive to your sensibilities. Actually... I do know why - you're a terrorist supporter. That's rich.. a genocide supporter issuing lectures to others..YOU have a lot in common with the Taliban yourself. Maybe we should classify you as a supporter of terrorism. Quote
ToadBrother Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 The mind of some young Jew called Jesus civilzed these barbarians. Huh? It was the Romans civilized most of the barbarians, and it's pretty questionable how many of these people they "civilized" were actually barbarians. The Gauls, at least, were already seemingly part of the way towards kingdoms with coinage and semi-centralized governments when Julius Caesar came along. At any rate; much of the Empire's European holdings were already "civilized", or more properly Romanicized, by the time Jesus came on the scene. Christianity was still a fledgling movement when Claudius conquered Britain, and it was several decades before after that before there were any meaningful number of Christians in the province. Any de-civilzation that took place within the mentioned empires only came with the falling away of Christian doctrine..Such as the embracing of the occult by the Germans and the Italians. Even the Jews put aside the teachings and doctines of Jesus - that also lead to a great de-civilzation of the tibe. Civilization is loving your neighbour..and your enemy - loving an enemy gives that enemy a choice - to love back or be consumed by their own hate - Gemany defeated Germany - The Roman empire destroyed the Roman empire. You may actually qualify as the most historically ignorant person on this board. You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. It's like you were dropping acid in history class. Quote
Oleg Bach Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 :lol: Only a feeble minded polically correct fool believes that gay marriage is marriage..that's like believing a dog is a cat. In this new world that we live in people now believe that dogs should have human rights - all because they grew up watching cartoons with talking animals..well maybe those that believe in pacification of the Taliban should just get a pet and forget about it. Maybe the Taliban that think we are all evil infidels should get an education. They well find out that only some of us are infidels and that they are infidels also. Quote
Michael Hardner Posted November 19, 2009 Report Posted November 19, 2009 That's rich.. a genocide supporter issuing lectures to others.. YOU have a lot in common with the Taliban yourself. Maybe we should classify you as a supporter of terrorism. I don't know what 'crush their towns' would mean if not genocide. I've never been to Taliban Town though, maybe there are no civilians there ? Quote Click to learn why Climate Change is caused by HUMANS Michael Hardner
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.