Re: What are we doing in Afghanistan?
- From: "Sanity RE" <sanity-clause@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 6 Oct 2005 07:04:40 -0700
Shava_X wrote:
> On Tue, 04 Oct 2005 18:23:49 -0700, Sanity RE wrote:
>
> >
> > Shava_X wrote:
> >> On Mon, 03 Oct 2005 14:12:06 -0500, That Guy wrote:
> >>
> >> > Why are US soldiers still in Afghanistan? Are we still looking for OBL
> >> > there? Or are we trying to manufacture a government for them like we are in
> >> > Iraq?
> >>
> >>
> >> i believe the official line is that U.S. troops are hunting down and
> >> destroying the last remnants of Al-Queda and the Taliban.
> >>
> >> In an NPR clip some time ago, a U.N. adviser who was supposed to be
> >> providing assistance to the Council that was crafting Afghanistan's new
> >> Constitution admitted that He and His colleagues didn't really know what
> >> was going on. They (the U.N. Staff) would answer questions, but were
> >> completely lost as to the process that was going on around them.
> >
> > "I don't know." is my favorite answer. I support the troops, not the
> > wars; and anyone that doesn't understand how I can do that learned
> > nothing from the Vietnam era. Troops in a combat zone fight to defend
> > eachother and have no time for intellectual niceties like politics.
> >
> > I am STILL waiting to see the "proof" Dubya boasted he had that Osama
> > was behind the 9-11 attack to justify the attack on Afghanistan in the
> > first place. Looks to me like just more lies, not the "lawful orders"
> > US Troops are oath bound to obey. Gulf of Tonken Resolution - Weapons
> > of Mass Destruction - the Lucitania WAS carrying munitions in its hold
> > - the USS Maine was scuttled not sunk by the Spanish, ect.
> >
> > "War is a racket." - Smedley Butler, USMC retired, winner of TWO
> > Congressional Medals of Honor!
> >
> > Peace,
> > Sanity RE
>
>
> True, the Bush Administration has never publicly released much of the
> evidence it claims to have indicating the Bin Laden was behind the 9-11
> attacks. Certainly not enough to make successful argument in court. But
> most other nations, including France, Germany and Canada, seem convinced.
Nations do not think and cannot be convinced, the Whitehouse does not
say anything, and the French went through the hell of ridding
themselves of a feudal aristocracy and turned around and elected
Napoleon emperior... I have a mind of my own and am not part of a mob
of loyal drunken sports fans ready to kill to defend the honor of their
home team, regardless of what the cheerleader president shouts.
> France and Canada even sent troops to Afghanistan. So i suppose i can
> give the benefit of the doubt in that situation. (Or am i giving to much
> trust and credit to France et al?)
WAY too much credit to politicians.
>
> The Clinton Administration sought, and received an indictment against Bin
> Laden for the first World Trade Center Attack. The indictment was kept
> secret, and i think the Grand Jury in general might have been held in
> secret. It would be reassuring if the Bush Administration would do the
> same, get an indictment from a Grand Jury, even if the Grand Jury has to
> held in secret. But i doubt the Bush Administration would even consider
> doing that ...
Innocent women and children, thousands of 'em, were slaughtered in
Afghanistan and Iraq and written off as inconsequential "collateral
damage" by Dubya's Cabal. The families of those people do not see the
slaughter as inconsequential! History repeats. Get real, the
constitution and government being set up in Bhagdad is seen by the
whole Arab community and many others as no more valid than the puppet
government the US set up in Siagon in the 60s.... The form of
government Iraq choses will be just that, THEIR CHOICE, not Dubya's.
The United States WILL withdraw from the Middle East in disgrace, and
the only question is: "When?"
>
> Iraq, yeah, that was a load from the start. Even before the Invasion, it
> was nearly impossible to make a convincing argument for it with out
> disregarding much of reality. The new arguments in favor of the Invasion
> go even further in that respect. "The World is a safer Place". The 9-11
> commission found that Saddam had effectively denied Al-Queda requests to
> set up training camps in Iraq and for material support. But now the CIA
> has determined that all of Iraq has turned into one huge training camp,
> and once (hopefully it is not a question of if) the U.S. leaves Iraq,
> thousands of well trained terrorist will spill out into the rest of the
> world. Yeah, safer indeed...
The US presence in Iraq is no bar against 'well trained terrorists
spilling out.' The US presence CREATES the training ground! 2½ years
into the Iraq war and the 7 mile road between Bhagdad and the airport
still isn't secure........
>
> Some people think war is just a mechanism for generating profit, a racket,
> others don't :
> "We make war that we may live in peace" --Aristotle
I am not moved to approve of war by the opinions of dead people. War is
not Peace.
> Each war is probably unique in its combination of factors ...
This particual "war on terrorism" is the topic of discussion, not some
metaphorical war that is prolly something or other.
Waging Peace,
Sanity Clause RE
.
- References:
- Re: What are we doing in Afghanistan?
- From: Shava_X
- Re: What are we doing in Afghanistan?
- From: Sanity RE
- Re: What are we doing in Afghanistan?
- From: Shava_X
- Re: What are we doing in Afghanistan?
- Prev by Date: Communicating on Usenet was (Re: Feeling sorry for Lynndie?)
- Next by Date: Re: OMMMMMMMMMMMMMM
- Previous by thread: Re: What are we doing in Afghanistan?
- Next by thread: Re: What are we doing in Afghanistan?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
