Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
- Thread starter tamarin
- Start date
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
That's correct, the fringe left are hypocritical lying corrupt elitists that have swayed large portions of the population by promising them a utopian society.
MikeyDB said:
That's correct, the fringe left are hypocritical lying corrupt elitists that have swayed large portions of the population by promising them a utopian society.
I think not said:
That's rediculous. True the legality of invading Iraq is questionable, but the US had a clear UN mandate to enter Afghanistan. No educated person could deny that. To say that we should not get involved in Afghanistan because of what the US is doing in Iraq would be equivalent to refusing to cooperate with a neighbour to save a drowning woman because the neighbour broke some othrr law which has no relationship to saving the drowing woman whatsoever. Iraq is Iraq. Afghanistan is Afghanistan. And in Afghanistan, as far as I know, the US has a clear and legitimate legal mandate, as does Canada. Iraq has nothing to do with US involvement in Afghanistan, so where's the problem?
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
Far better of course that they should adopt the policy and philosophies of the "fringe right" that employs "shock and awe" under the pretext of lies and misdirection...
As this right fringe would like it, kill them all...let god sort them out...but make sure America gets what it wants...
I think not said:
Far better of course that they should adopt the policy and philosophies of the "fringe right" that employs "shock and awe" under the pretext of lies and misdirection...
As this right fringe would like it, kill them all...let god sort them out...but make sure America gets what it wants...
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
All I know for sure is the World Trade Center wasn't a random selection.
From what I've been able to gather the US will still have a strategic presence around Kanduhar. The Dutch insisted on it. The Americans are just fulfilling their designated role.
MikeyDB said:
All I know for sure is the World Trade Center wasn't a random selection.
From what I've been able to gather the US will still have a strategic presence around Kanduhar. The Dutch insisted on it. The Americans are just fulfilling their designated role.
Machjo said:
You believe everybody has your clarity of thought Machjo? If you think the fringe left can look at things without using buzzwords like Big Oil, Big Business and the like, you're mistaken. The US is a direct contrast to their core belief.
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
Oh not at all, I consider the fringe right to be almost devoid of a moral compass, at best it's spinning in all directions out of control and stops for a brief moment to point where it suits them.
That doesn't negate the fact the fringe left has any semblance of reality.
MikeyDB said:
Oh not at all, I consider the fringe right to be almost devoid of a moral compass, at best it's spinning in all directions out of control and stops for a brief moment to point where it suits them.
That doesn't negate the fact the fringe left has any semblance of reality.
Big Oil and Big Business are what America's always been about ITN why must you shy away from admitting that you'd be happier than a pig in a wallow if everyone would just quietly lie down and let Corporate America steamroll over the world until there isn't a drop of clean water or breatheable air left for anyone....
It's what you want after all....
It's what you want after all....
"Encourages Member States to support efforts to ensure the safety and security of areas of Afghanistan no longer under Taliban control, and in particular to ensure respect for Kabul as the capital for all the Afghan people, and especially to protect civilians, transitional authorities, United Nations and associated personnel, as well as personnel of humanitarian organizations;"
I don't think we need to define success beyond the mandate though. As for poppies, Opium, etc. nowhere does the resolution say we need to transfrom Afghanistan into aperfect utopian busting world economy within the next two days.
If we limit ourselves to the mandate itself, then I think the mission is accomplisheable... "to support efforts to ensure the safety and security of areas of Afghanistan no longer under Taliban control, and in particular to ensure respect for Kabul as the capital for all Afghan people, and especially to protect civilians, transitional authorities, United Nations and associated personnel, as well as personnel of humanitarian organizations."
I think that's handleable. It's not even asking us to try to establish democracy there, or rebuild the nation, or even regain control of Taliban controlled regions. It's only asking to maintain stability where we already have control. I think that's the least we could do... no matter how much it costs Canada in lives and money.
I don't think we need to define success beyond the mandate though. As for poppies, Opium, etc. nowhere does the resolution say we need to transfrom Afghanistan into aperfect utopian busting world economy within the next two days.
If we limit ourselves to the mandate itself, then I think the mission is accomplisheable... "to support efforts to ensure the safety and security of areas of Afghanistan no longer under Taliban control, and in particular to ensure respect for Kabul as the capital for all Afghan people, and especially to protect civilians, transitional authorities, United Nations and associated personnel, as well as personnel of humanitarian organizations."
I think that's handleable. It's not even asking us to try to establish democracy there, or rebuild the nation, or even regain control of Taliban controlled regions. It's only asking to maintain stability where we already have control. I think that's the least we could do... no matter how much it costs Canada in lives and money.
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
Yes, it's in the best interests of Big Business to wipe out it's customer base. Get real.
MikeyDB said:
Yes, it's in the best interests of Big Business to wipe out it's customer base. Get real.
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
I won't deny the oil conspiracy theories because there might be some truth to them. But again, sometimes good intentions can intermix with the bad. Just as a thief could suddenly pull over to save a drowning woman, so even an administration with the worse intentions could have good intentions mixed in. As for Afghanistan, there wree legitimate reasons. Bin Landen was hiding there after 9/11 attacks. The US requested the Taliban to hand him over, which I think was more than reasonable, and the Taliban effectively told the US to f- off. At that stage the US saught UN permisison to attack Afghanistan, which I thought was praiseworthyseeing that it did in fact consult with the UN rather than just telling it to f- off (Granted bush did do that later for iraq, but that's anotehr story), and the UN, seeing that the US did in fact have a legitimate claim, and that the Taliban refused to cooperate, granted permission. At that stage, war was legit.
Now as for oil, if that is a side-objective of the US, fine, then we ought to keep an eye out for that. But as long as the eveidence isn't forthcomng, innocent until proven guilty. The ony reason I'm suspicious of US involvement in Iraq is due to how the US snubbed the UN, as if it was in a rush to get something. But as for Afghanistan, there is no such evidence of ill-intent there yet to suggest action need be taken right now.
MikeyDB said:
I won't deny the oil conspiracy theories because there might be some truth to them. But again, sometimes good intentions can intermix with the bad. Just as a thief could suddenly pull over to save a drowning woman, so even an administration with the worse intentions could have good intentions mixed in. As for Afghanistan, there wree legitimate reasons. Bin Landen was hiding there after 9/11 attacks. The US requested the Taliban to hand him over, which I think was more than reasonable, and the Taliban effectively told the US to f- off. At that stage the US saught UN permisison to attack Afghanistan, which I thought was praiseworthyseeing that it did in fact consult with the UN rather than just telling it to f- off (Granted bush did do that later for iraq, but that's anotehr story), and the UN, seeing that the US did in fact have a legitimate claim, and that the Taliban refused to cooperate, granted permission. At that stage, war was legit.
Now as for oil, if that is a side-objective of the US, fine, then we ought to keep an eye out for that. But as long as the eveidence isn't forthcomng, innocent until proven guilty. The ony reason I'm suspicious of US involvement in Iraq is due to how the US snubbed the UN, as if it was in a rush to get something. But as for Afghanistan, there is no such evidence of ill-intent there yet to suggest action need be taken right now.
Oh come on now ITN....
500,000 dead Iraqi women and children wouldn't make a dent in your "market" now would it?
Of course not, because this "customer base" is AMURICA" and the efort isn't to sell anything to the rest of the world but to import the flavor of "American Democracy" that sees rampant poverty beside exhorbitant wealth.
Don't play the "humanist" song here ITN, there's nothing humanistic about the two hundred military incursions and uncounted "covert" ops (CIA) that the US has practiced since over the past century and a half...
500,000 dead Iraqi women and children wouldn't make a dent in your "market" now would it?
Of course not, because this "customer base" is AMURICA" and the efort isn't to sell anything to the rest of the world but to import the flavor of "American Democracy" that sees rampant poverty beside exhorbitant wealth.
Don't play the "humanist" song here ITN, there's nothing humanistic about the two hundred military incursions and uncounted "covert" ops (CIA) that the US has practiced since over the past century and a half...
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
Sorry, Mikey, but I thought this thread was about Afghanistan, not Iraq.
If it was an Iraq thread, maybe I'd tend to agree with you a little more. But I fail to see how Afghanistan relates to Iraq. IAfghanistan is a perfectly legitimate mandate.
MikeyDB said:
Sorry, Mikey, but I thought this thread was about Afghanistan, not Iraq.
If it was an Iraq thread, maybe I'd tend to agree with you a little more. But I fail to see how Afghanistan relates to Iraq. IAfghanistan is a perfectly legitimate mandate.
Machjo
You really beleive a thief would make the effort to save a drowning woman????
A thief is a person who has only one interest and that's his/her personal welfare PERIOD.
This person has decided that the laws morals and ethics of anyone and everyone else place far far behind getting "theirs"....
Think United States of America
Sure how silly of me....Iraq Iran the Sudan, Darfur all this has nothing to do with Afghanistan....
Please avoid looking at the larger picture...I'm sure you won't like what you see.
You really beleive a thief would make the effort to save a drowning woman????
A thief is a person who has only one interest and that's his/her personal welfare PERIOD.
This person has decided that the laws morals and ethics of anyone and everyone else place far far behind getting "theirs"....
Think United States of America
Sure how silly of me....Iraq Iran the Sudan, Darfur all this has nothing to do with Afghanistan....
Please avoid looking at the larger picture...I'm sure you won't like what you see.
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
I'm more of a humanist than you will ever hope to become. I realize 500,000 dead doesn't make a dent, and the solution of the fringe left? One Hundred million dead in the 20th century to ensure the evil empire doesn't get a shot at the market.
Face it MikeyDB, your ideology is a dying breed, perhaps in several hundred years when man has evolved to the point to shed negative emotions it may be plausible, in the meantime there is nothing you and your ilk can do about it.
Carry on.
MikeyDB said:
I'm more of a humanist than you will ever hope to become. I realize 500,000 dead doesn't make a dent, and the solution of the fringe left? One Hundred million dead in the 20th century to ensure the evil empire doesn't get a shot at the market.
Face it MikeyDB, your ideology is a dying breed, perhaps in several hundred years when man has evolved to the point to shed negative emotions it may be plausible, in the meantime there is nothing you and your ilk can do about it.
Carry on.
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
Then let's look at it from your perspective. Let's suppose the only reason the thief wants to save the drowing woman is to get at her handbag. Does that mean you would refuse to help him to save her?
Two results:
1. Her chances of drowning are increased due to less help.
2. Even if sh eis saved, the chances of teh thief stealing her handbag is increased since you buggered off.
The other option is that you help the thief to save the drowning woman. Two results:
1. Her chances of survival are increased.
2. The thief might think twice about taking her hadnbag now that you're standing next to him
So are you suggesting that while you don't trust the US in Afghanistan, you'd rather let Afghanistan fall to bits AND leasve the US there without anyone to keep an eye on them?
It would seem to me then that that distrust of the US would in and of itself be a very good reason to support Afghanistan if you truly care aobut it...or are you just looking out for Canadian short term interests?
Afghanistan is legitimate, the US has asked for help, so shy can't we provide it. It's not like we're licking the US' boots here, if that's what concerns you. We went in at UN, not US, request. Canada and the US are equals, partners, in Afghanistan, and not Canada as the US' lap dog.
MikeyDB said:
Then let's look at it from your perspective. Let's suppose the only reason the thief wants to save the drowing woman is to get at her handbag. Does that mean you would refuse to help him to save her?
Two results:
1. Her chances of drowning are increased due to less help.
2. Even if sh eis saved, the chances of teh thief stealing her handbag is increased since you buggered off.
The other option is that you help the thief to save the drowning woman. Two results:
1. Her chances of survival are increased.
2. The thief might think twice about taking her hadnbag now that you're standing next to him
So are you suggesting that while you don't trust the US in Afghanistan, you'd rather let Afghanistan fall to bits AND leasve the US there without anyone to keep an eye on them?
It would seem to me then that that distrust of the US would in and of itself be a very good reason to support Afghanistan if you truly care aobut it...or are you just looking out for Canadian short term interests?
Afghanistan is legitimate, the US has asked for help, so shy can't we provide it. It's not like we're licking the US' boots here, if that's what concerns you. We went in at UN, not US, request. Canada and the US are equals, partners, in Afghanistan, and not Canada as the US' lap dog.
I just want to point out, I love Canada, I'm patriotic, but I do not believe in looking out for Canada's best interests at the expense of the rest of the world. Just as I'd be prepared to sacrifice my life to save another, I'd just as quickly sacrifice Canada for the good of the world. As for Afghanistan, we're not even asking for anything remotely close to sacrificing Canada. We're merely asking to fulfill a moderately worded UN resolution. Is that too much for Canada to sacrifice for mankind? Is that really asking for too much?
Re: RE: Afghanistan: a war that can't be won
You have it all backwards. Here's something for you to ponder while banging your keyboard, the Fringe Left is a disease, the United States is the cure.
MikeyDB said:
You have it all backwards. Here's something for you to ponder while banging your keyboard, the Fringe Left is a disease, the United States is the cure.