William Ashley Posted January 8, 2011 Author Report Posted January 8, 2011 Maybe if the Afghan "civilians" weren't so hospitable to the Taliban they wouldn't be in harm's way. I'm getting tired of the forces of civilization having to fight with both hands tied behind our backs while they plunge airplanes into buildings. The Taliban had nothing to do with 911. Quote I was here.
Saipan Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 The Taliban had nothing to do with 911. Yes, it did. Hiding Al-Quida. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 The Taliban had nothing to do with 911. In other news: Nixon had nothing to do with Watergate. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest American Woman Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 The Taliban had nothing to do with 911. They refused to turn bin Laden over to the U.S. for trial. Quote
DogOnPorch Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 They refused to turn bin Laden over to the U.S. for trial. Remember, in some folk's books...WW2 started due to Polish aggression. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Topaz Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 They refused to turn bin Laden over to the U.S. for trial. Correction, the Taliban DID offer to turn OBL to the a third country, if the US would stopping bombing Afghanistan and provide evidence against OBL. Today, there isn't actual proof that OBL did it and he said he didn't because he doesn't kill women and children. Is it lies? Can't be anymore lies than Bush told. http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/T944PGV7VLCQQ82EH Quote
DogOnPorch Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 Correction, the Taliban DID offer to turn OBL to the a third country, if the US would stopping bombing Afghanistan and provide evidence against OBL. Today, there isn't actual proof that OBL did it and he said he didn't because he doesn't kill women and children. Is it lies? Can't be anymore lies than Bush told. http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/T944PGV7VLCQQ82EH Yes...nasty Poland and their military aggression...lol. Quote Nothing cracks a turtle like Leon Uris.
Guest American Woman Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 Correction, the Taliban DID offer to turn OBL to the a third country, if the US would stopping bombing Afghanistan and provide evidence against OBL. Today, there isn't actual proof that OBL did it and he said he didn't because he doesn't kill women and children. Is it lies? Can't be anymore lies than Bush told. http://www.topix.com/forum/religion/islam/T944PGV7VLCQQ82EH That's not a "correction" to what I stated; it's something entirely different. The Taliban refused to turn bin Laden over to the U.S., as I stated; the U.S. didn't ask for him to be turned over to some unnamed third country for who knows what kind of trial. As for "actual proof," that's what trials are for, which is why the U.S. wanted him turned over. Generally one doesn't take the accused's word for it, if he did indeed actually say that (which is total news to me). As far as I've seen, in his 'desire to kill as many infidels/westerners/Americans as possible,' he's never made a disclaimer regarding women and children, and all the tapes that are supposedly him take credit for the attacks. Quote
Saipan Posted January 8, 2011 Report Posted January 8, 2011 Correction, the Taliban DID offer to turn OBL to the a third country What "third country"? if the US would stopping bombing Afghanistan and provide evidence against OBL. OBL provided that by his own claim. Al-Quida start the bombing. On several places. And the Ally's (including the UN) patience run out. Quote
wyly Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 the blatent hypocrisy here is the USA shelters and refuses to extradite Luis Posada Carriles, accused bomber of tourist nightclubs and a civilian airline...and this is the best part, the US is refusing extradition on grounds he may be tortured ...no issues deporting an innocent canadian to be tortured in Syria and another to Sudan no problem there but deport a cuban to face criminal terrorism charges well that just won't do Quote “Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill
bush_cheney2004 Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 ...no issues deporting an innocent canadian to be tortured in Syria... None at all...the "innocent canadian" (who skipped out on mandatory Syrian military service) was deported to his nation of birth according to US law, and Canada helped them do it. Prison in Syria is not torture. Next time he will book a direct flight home...because now he can afford to do so thanks to Canadian taxpayers. Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
William Ashley Posted January 9, 2011 Author Report Posted January 9, 2011 Yes, it did. Hiding Al-Quida. Where are you getting this false premise from. The Taliban did't hide Al-Quida. The Taliban even offered to turn Osama bin Laden over to extradition to face justice in Pakistan, one of the countries that recognized them at a state level. Quote I was here.
William Ashley Posted January 9, 2011 Author Report Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) That's not a "correction" to what I stated; it's something entirely different. The Taliban refused to turn bin Laden over to the U.S., as I stated; the U.S. didn't ask for him to be turned over to some unnamed third country for who knows what kind of trial. As for "actual proof," that's what trials are for, which is why the U.S. wanted him turned over. Generally one doesn't take the accused's word for it, if he did indeed actually say that (which is total news to me). As far as I've seen, in his 'desire to kill as many infidels/westerners/Americans as possible,' he's never made a disclaimer regarding women and children, and all the tapes that are supposedly him take credit for the attacks. Dude you ignorance of international law thats been around for over a 100 years is astounding, if America would of only followed international law all this mess and all the innocent dead people could have been avoided. There is a legal process to lawful extradition. Asking a country you don't even recognize to turn over people in their care (as all people are when in another country) to face "uncertain justice" without evidence is preposterous, and no reasonable person would do such things. It would be breach of humanitarian law, something the US and citizens of the US such as yourself should read up on if you ever want to have a shred of credibility in any discussion amongst civlized intelligent humans. The FBI actually stated a pakistani general that was a british and american intelligent asset was "the source" of the attacks funding. This person was%2 My post here was hacked and cut... but I'll try to repeat what was put in the post before it was hacked. As stated I listened to both sides of the story rather than senseless media sensationalism and war propaganda. I visited the taliban foreign affairs page...amongst other places in the days leading up to the invasion. They pleaded, and I mean pleaded. I have no doubt in my mind that the Taliban had nothing to do with 911. Their voices are still in my head in recollection - it was a voice that really had so much emotion it touched your very soul and the meaning transcended the situation. Its the voice you would expect to hear from someone about to be crushed by tank - mixed with a little child who is about to be hit for something they didn't do. Or a person who is going to have their sensitive body parts mutiliated all in one. Also I am alarmed someone had to hack my post to support lies and propagada. One day people will look back on these things and scorn people like the person who hacked my post for betraying humanity. Edited January 9, 2011 by William Ashley Quote I was here.
bloodyminded Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Then you're definitely against liberals, 'specially Michael Ignatieff's policies. But against 99% of NDPs as well. Nope. Not only are you wrong, but you know you're wrong. Which begs an obvious question or two. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
bloodyminded Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Maybe if the Afghan "civilians" weren't so hospitable to the Taliban they wouldn't be in harm's way. I'm getting tired of the forces of civilization having to fight with both hands tied behind our backs while they plunge airplanes into buildings. Or maybe killing civilians is bad, and we don't have to assume they all deserve it. Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
Guest TrueMetis Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Or maybe killing civilians is bad, and we don't have to assume they all deserve it. I love how having complete technological superiority becomes "having to fight with both hands tied behind our backs" just because we want to avoid killing civilians. I'm also enjoying how we've apparently become the "forces of civilization" nothing more civilized than a nation kicking the shite out of a bunch of third worlds extremists, it be like calling me civilized after I kicked the crap out of a four year old. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Dude you ignorance of international law thats been around for over a 100 years is astounding, if America would of only followed international law all this mess and all the innocent dead people could have been avoided. It's always wonderful to run into that one exceptional person who has all the answers -- and such a shame that your talents are being wasted on a web board when you could be changing the world. FYI, my comment was a correct statement. What the Taliban had to do with 9-11 was its refusal to hand over bin Laden. Now you can argue the specifics of that demand, but it doesn't make my statement any less correct. It would be breach of humanitarian law, something the US and citizens of the US such as yourself should read up on if you ever want to have a shred of credibility in any discussion amongst civlized intelligent humans. I've said nothing other than to point out what the Taliban had to do with 9-11, and beyond that, I have absolutely no desire to discuss it with the likes of you. So I'll leave you to make your own determinations about me, since you obviously already have. Carry on, Dude. Quote
jbg Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 I love how having complete technological superiority becomes "having to fight with both hands tied behind our backs" just because we want to avoid killing civilians.Query, is it worth the loss of our military to avoid killing their civilians? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Guest TrueMetis Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Query, is it worth the loss of our military to avoid killing their civilians? I assume you mean that lost of our military personnel or something to that effect, to which I answer. Yes, and I say that as someone who plans on joining the military pretty soon. Think about it, hundreds of civilians could be alive if we just stopped bombing the shite out of suspected enemy strongholds before taking them, which might increase our loses by one or two troops or if the troops are just a little bit more careful we may not lose any more troops. Quote
Saipan Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 I love how having complete technological superiority becomes "having to fight with both hands tied behind our backs" just because we want to avoid killing civilians. I'm also enjoying how we've apparently become the "forces of civilization" nothing more civilized than a nation kicking the shite out of a bunch of third worlds extremists, it be like calling me civilized after I kicked the crap out of a four year old. If your four year old have vest full of explosives I wouldn't kick him. No sir. I'd take shot at 200 yds. Quote
Saipan Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Think about it, hundreds of civilians could be alive if we just stopped bombing the shite out of suspected enemy strongholds before taking them, which might increase our loses by one or two troops or if the troops are just a little bit more careful we may not lose any more troops. Did you serve in any military? Quote
Guest American Woman Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Query, is it worth the loss of our military to avoid killing their civilians? I have problems with this question. When you say is it "worth" it, seems to me you are placing more value on one life than another. Civilian lives are "worth" every bit as much as our military's lives. It may be arguable whether or not it's our obligation/human nature to look out for our own and protect our own above others' lives, but I don't see that as the lives of our own being "worth" more. Seems to me they are two different concepts. Having said that, we went into Afghanistan with the promise of putting civilian life first and foremost. We promised to do all that we could to protect their lives. We owe it to them to full fill that promise. That doesn't mean I think we shouldn't be able to use our superior military power; it means we should use it justly. Quote
Saipan Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 When you say is it "worth" it, seems to me you are placing more value on one life than another. I do. Just as does the enemy. War is not Olympic games. No Silver, no Bronze. Except on tomb stone. Quote
Guest American Woman Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 (edited) I do. Just as does the enemy. War is not Olympic games. No Silver, no Bronze. Except on tomb stone. Never said it was an Olympic game, but like Olympic games, it has rules. I have plenty of criticism for the enemy in this war for targeting civilians; we expect them to have more regard for civilian lives than for military targets and criticize them because they don't. If we place more "worth" on our lives, then we can hardly expect groups like Hamas to do differently, and we can hardly criticize them for going after civilians instead of military targets. We owe it to the civilians, who are completely innocent and had nothing to do with 9-11, to place as much worth/value on their lives as we did the innocent civilians killed on 9-11. If we don't, we are no better than they are. And I believe we are. Therefore, we owe it to them to fulfill our promise, and thankfully there are military leaders/troops who agree. Edited January 9, 2011 by American Woman Quote
bloodyminded Posted January 9, 2011 Report Posted January 9, 2011 Did you serve in any military? He just infomed us that he plans to, which means that so far he has not. Do you read people's posts before you ask questions? Quote As scarce as truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand. --Josh Billings
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.