What Islamic country has declared Al Quada a "terrorist" organization? None
It's an Islamic country governed by Islamic society and we have no right to change that
Canada, U.S. should leave Afghanistan: expert
- Thread starter Praxius
- Start date
What Islamic country has declared Al Quada a "terrorist" organization? None
It's an Islamic country governed by Islamic society and we have no right to change that
Yep to bad alright. But it's spilled milk. Now we have Obama and things sounds as though they will change.
I don't think they have regrouped with a much bigger force. They fight a much different war than what we've been used to. It takes time for us to figure it out, adapt our methods and deploy in a manner that will bring success on the battle field.
If anything, the Taliban should be quaking in their flip flops as we meet the demands of the soldiers with better suited hardware, planning, and a huge new deployment in troops. As they secure regions, peace will follow and cities will be come calmer and get about the business of living instead of fighting a war.
Instill a higher standard of living in a group of people and they won't want to give it up very easily.
Yeah that's a problem. Way to many people sitting on their asses complaining about what they see on TV and the Internet while our country is at war. My Dad told me that during WWII an able bodied man not in the military was a coward in the eyes of the public.
Way too many people want a free ride.
Politicians will do exactly what the most vocal group tells them to do. Not the majority, the most vocal group. I can't think of more than a handful that should be in our nations capital running our country. Of course we have the government we deserve.
Not too clear on NATO are we? ;-)
We belong to a group, with a pledge that anyone who is attacked within that group can call on the rest of the group to come to it's defense.
We're not misguided even slightly about Afghanistan. Perhaps you don't know or perhaps you've been misguided, I'll set you straight right here.
A terrorist group, Al Qeada committed the attacks on the US. The US is a member of NATO and of course our closest friend, trading partner, ally and the closest people of our kind to us on the planet.
In our agreement if someone attacks them, it's is just like attacking us and we will respond just as they will should we face the same situation. That's the way it is and so for good reason.
Al Qeada isn't a country but a group, and as such can't have war declared upon them. But as a group they can be hunted down and brought to justice or killed which ever being the case. Any country that supports them will either give them up or suffer with them.
Other wise it would simply be an easy matter to avoid repercussions for attacking any country. Simply claim your military is a terrorist group and what can you do? That dog don't hunt!
Tracing the terrorists backward from the act to the place where they set out from led to Afghanistan. Not by lies that Bushco made up, not by suspicion or innuendo but by factual investigation leading right back to Afghanistan. 18 of the 19 terrorists were trained in Afghanistan. Trained to do just the kind of thing they did 09/11/2001.
The Taliban being the only form of acting government if you want to call it that, in Afghanistan were asked to hand over Ossama bin Laden to the US along with any Al Qeada. They refused. After being warned of the consequences, they continued to refuse. These are the consequences.
No imperial invasion, no oil barons, no slaves, crusades or hordes.
A country that hosts and trains terrorists to attack anyone in North America needs to have their ass kicked as far as I'm concerned.
And that is exactly what is happening in Afghanistan right now.
The Taliban not only choose to allow for the export of terrorism from Afghanistan, but have shown they are an extremist and brutal regime based on, fueled by and promoting hatred. The later part I would feel isn't my concern if the former didn't effect me. As it stands, screw the Taliban.
That's why we're there. Any questions?
Al Qeada isn't a country but a group, and as such can't have war declared upon them. But as a group they can be hunted down and brought to justice or killed which ever being the case. Any country that supports them will either give them up or suffer with them.
I'm very clear on Canada's obligations to NATO. Are you?
You statement above obviates Canada's obligation, much like say going after Somali pirates if they hijack a Danish ship. It may be dictated by the gov't "flavour of the day", but it's not an obligation.
NATO's intent has never been to become a "bounty hunter"
If you are deluded enough to think this is a "NATO" operation, then one would think that the full force of NATO should be there including;
Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, - all members of "NATO"
Were they excused for "recess" and never came back? Beyond the fact that Greece, Hungary and Portugal have larger armed forces than Canada, you'd think they would have contributed?
Turkey (who has a much more vested interest in the region) committed to half the amount of troops Canada did. Make sense to you?
So, sorry, the NATO committment angle doesn't wash even to back up an irrational argument. Next, rationalization no doubt be a NORAD committment, so save your breathe that won't wash either
I'm very clear on Canada's obligations to NATO. Are you?
You statement above obviates Canada's obligation, much like say going after Somali pirates if they hijack a Danish ship. It may be dictated by the gov't "flavour of the day", but it's not an obligation.
NATO's intent has never been to become a "bounty hunter"
If you are deluded enough to think this is a "NATO" operation, then one would think that the full force of NATO should be there including;
Estonia, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Portugal, Slovakia, Slovenia, - all members of "NATO"
Were they excused for "recess" and never came back? Beyond the fact that Greece, Hungary and Portugal have larger armed forces than Canada, you'd think they would have contributed?
Turkey (who has a much more vested interest in the region) committed to half the amount of troops Canada did. Make sense to you?
So, sorry, the NATO committment angle doesn't wash even to back up an irrational argument. Next, rationalization no doubt be a NORAD committment, so save your breathe that won't wash either
He's not that great an expert if he thinks there has never been a modern and stable nations-state of Afghanistan.
Its march to liberalization had the hickups of the early 50's, but was pretty stable and progressive under its constitutional monarchy.
If we don't consider Afghanistani citizens equal human beings to us who deserve our help, then why doesn't Col. Ethnosupremist over there just advocate whiping out all these apparently lesser people.
Borders define laws, not humanity.
Its march to liberalization had the hickups of the early 50's, but was pretty stable and progressive under its constitutional monarchy.
If we don't consider Afghanistani citizens equal human beings to us who deserve our help, then why doesn't Col. Ethnosupremist over there just advocate whiping out all these apparently lesser people.
Borders define laws, not humanity.
If Kurdish excursions continue into Turkey (NATO member), how many divisions are we expected to send? Or would that count? Kurdistan isn't a country, but rather a group of "terrorists"
"The Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan (PKK), also known as KADEK and Kongra-Gel, is considered by the US to be a terrorist organization
"The Partiya Karkerên Kurdistan (PKK), also known as KADEK and Kongra-Gel, is considered by the US to be a terrorist organization
No. but hopefully I've provided some answers for you and given you the impetus to do some actual research
unforgiven,
Quite the rant. Complete nonsense but entertaining. Do you believe everything governments tell you? The majority of Canadians and Americans do not believe the official stories because the are not credible. Plans to invade Afghanistan were drawn up long before 911 for reasons that had nothing to do with Al Qeada or the Taliban. But did you notice that Bush & Co. wanted to invade Iraq instead but were almost forced to go to Afghanistan first? Do you remember Bush saying he was not interested in Bin Laden? He wasn't important. He just wanted to go after Hussein.
The whole official story, from 911 to Iraq and Afghanistan, is so full of holes you would think Chaney personally shot the text with his 12 gauge. But if you still believe that stuff after all the evidence to the contrary, then nothing will change your blind faith in a bunch of criminals guilty of crimes against humanity.
Quite the rant. Complete nonsense but entertaining. Do you believe everything governments tell you? The majority of Canadians and Americans do not believe the official stories because the are not credible. Plans to invade Afghanistan were drawn up long before 911 for reasons that had nothing to do with Al Qeada or the Taliban. But did you notice that Bush & Co. wanted to invade Iraq instead but were almost forced to go to Afghanistan first? Do you remember Bush saying he was not interested in Bin Laden? He wasn't important. He just wanted to go after Hussein.
The whole official story, from 911 to Iraq and Afghanistan, is so full of holes you would think Chaney personally shot the text with his 12 gauge. But if you still believe that stuff after all the evidence to the contrary, then nothing will change your blind faith in a bunch of criminals guilty of crimes against humanity.
"Our interests there are very limited. As long as Afghanistan is not a sanctuary for terrorists that have the aim and capability to attack us in the West, we don't really care that much about what happens in that country,"
I think one of the problems with the west is that they only think about what is in their own interests. That is why they can turn a blind eye to Rwanda, Palestine et al. This guy (and those who agree with him) is part of the problem. We should start concerning ourselves with what is in the best interest of humanity. Every single soldier I have spoken with believes we are doing good in Afghanistan. That is good enough for me.
I think one of the problems with the west is that they only think about what is in their own interests. That is why they can turn a blind eye to Rwanda, Palestine et al. This guy (and those who agree with him) is part of the problem. We should start concerning ourselves with what is in the best interest of humanity. Every single soldier I have spoken with believes we are doing good in Afghanistan. That is good enough for me.
I think you confusing the term "Canadians" with "Dope Smokers" and "Americans" with "Conspiracy Nut Jobs".
Your statement should read The majority of dope smokers and conspiracy nut jobs do not believe the official stories because the are not credible. Yes, that definitely sounds better.
Yes I am very clear on Canada's obligations to NATO.
No it doesn't. I thought you said you knew what Canada's obligations to NATO were. I am not sure what you mean by this statement but you should know that there are international laws that obligate a Canadian vessel that is able to assist a Danish ship or any other for that matter that is under distress by pirates or any other mishap for that matter.
Now I suppose would be a good time to go to the NATO site and have yourself a read so that you don't make mistakes like that again.
Who said they are?
So you're saying NATO isn't in Afghanistan? Or that NATO is there except there are some NATO countries that aren't there?
Please, take a look at who is there.
Their reasons are their own. I suspect we would have a much larger contingent over there if we could support it.
Yeah with a war going on in Iraq I suspect they do have other things on their mind do you?
NATO is in Afghanistan regardless of your acceptance of that. We're a part of NATO and we're a part of the force there. I haven't seen a single thing in what you posted to refute what I posted. You are wrong on a number of points which you are free to review at your leisure. I would suggest a reading of the NATO site a priority for you.
Oh yeah the agree with me or the government is telling lies treatment eh?
You can attempt to tie Iraq together with Afghanistan but people know there two different things. That's why Chretien said no to Iraq but went into Afghanistan. That you have offered up your considered opinion as undisputable truth while providing not a shred of evidence contrary to any of the points I made makes you out to be some what of a hypocrit.
Further that you consider anyone not agreeing with your opinion to have blind faith in the government shows just how ignorant you are.
Feel free to provide your alternative version of 911 and I'll be glad to reconsider your opinion.