Yeah 100,000 civilians, had to die during the war and 30,000 since after the US came up with faulty documentation to go to war with Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
Iraq is a whole different story than Afghanistan.
supporting our troops??
- Thread starter progressive
- Start date
Yeah 100,000 civilians, had to die during the war and 30,000 since after the US came up with faulty documentation to go to war with Saddam Hussein and Iraq.
Iraq is a whole different story than Afghanistan.
Re: RE: supporting our troops??
The Americans got Hussein and the Taliban to where they are......they helped make them the ruthless killers they are, and when they no long serve a purpose for the American agenda, they are removed......the states has been doing this for over a hundred years.
I think not said:
The Americans got Hussein and the Taliban to where they are......they helped make them the ruthless killers they are, and when they no long serve a purpose for the American agenda, they are removed......the states has been doing this for over a hundred years.
So Jersay, you really believe less death was occurring under the silent black hole of Saddam ???
Headlines didn't come your way under his reign, did they ?
Headlines didn't come your way under his reign, did they ?
Progressive has fact there. Hussein was supported by America when he took over and when he had his war against Iran.
Not the Taliban, but they rose from the situation, as America was supporting the Mujhadeen in their fight against the commies.
Not the Taliban, but they rose from the situation, as America was supporting the Mujhadeen in their fight against the commies.
progressive said:
What it is really all about is irrelevant to give support to your troops. By support, you can send them an email telling them they hope they return quickly and without harm. They are Canadians progressive, they signed up with your armed forces because they beleieved in something, whatever that is to each one soldier is different. You can debate the politics till you're green in the face, what do the soldiers have to do with it when they are following orders? You think they get to pick and choose their "moral" battles?
Jersay said:
Progressive doesn't have fact and neither do you. Americans were way down on the support level for Saddam. The Russians and French were their primary support and to a lesser extent the UK, the evil empire came almost near the bottom of the barrel.
Nope, I think last time it was around about 300,000 but foreign governments knew what the heck was going on in Iraq, and in other places now, but they do nothing because they do not care unless it becomes a threat to them.
So that is why these despots who collapse that have been supported by America, Britain, Russia, France, Japan, China, these countries as well as the U.N should hold as much blame for not doing something to stop these people from abusing their people, but they do zippo.
The world's double standard.
They weren't Taliban. They were Mujahadeen at the time, good equating other places, just because these massacres occur, you don't stop them by being lazy and doing crap all about them. You do something.
ITN, you are wrong on this case,
Re: RE: supporting our troops??
I believe Progressive has a sound realistic and objective slant on the mission we,re involved in with respect to Aghanistan, we are there consolidating lines for the empire. Control of the region is paramount for the empire no other reason exists. ITN would have us get the facts straight before we enter debate, this would load the outcome,we must have as full a discovery of our involvment as we can. Our man, or is he, Peter Mckay said today that national debate might frighten our people in the field and crush thier moral, this is exactly the tactic employed in the states to quell debate and silence dissent, you know what they say about the silence of good men.
I think not said:
I believe Progressive has a sound realistic and objective slant on the mission we,re involved in with respect to Aghanistan, we are there consolidating lines for the empire. Control of the region is paramount for the empire no other reason exists. ITN would have us get the facts straight before we enter debate, this would load the outcome,we must have as full a discovery of our involvment as we can. Our man, or is he, Peter Mckay said today that national debate might frighten our people in the field and crush thier moral, this is exactly the tactic employed in the states to quell debate and silence dissent, you know what they say about the silence of good men.
RE: supporting our troops
ITN you have mentioned those three thousand poor souls many times they are history,can we not spend some effort and time to consider those who are about to die.
ITN you have mentioned those three thousand poor souls many times they are history,can we not spend some effort and time to consider those who are about to die.
Re: RE: supporting our troops??
Jersay, the US didn't have relations with Iraq until 1983-04. Wikipedia isn't an accurate source of history.
Debate is never quelled in the US you blow hole. Most of the opposing news you ever get originates from the States.
Jersay said:
Jersay, the US didn't have relations with Iraq until 1983-04. Wikipedia isn't an accurate source of history.
darkbeaver said:
Debate is never quelled in the US you blow hole. Most of the opposing news you ever get originates from the States.
as an average.
of course that also recognizes some of them will be of "more wholesome goodness" than you! Of course, it is not goodness that decides who lives and dies though, is it?
of course that also recognizes some of them will be of "more wholesome goodness" than you! Of course, it is not goodness that decides who lives and dies though, is it?
Actually it isn't moral by Afghani law. As usual you make claims about something you don't understand. Under a shura all hostile acts are suppose to cease, it is the same as a white flag in Western society. The people who attacked our troops during the shura are the epitome of whats wrong with Islam.
With regard to the mission in 'ghan. I've done my time there and while I don't feel that every Canadian has to agree with the mission, I do feel that if you're to offer an opinion you should at least understand WHY were there. Furthermore if you don't support the mission, at least support the troops by standing behind them. If you blather on about recalling them, and how you don't support that mission, that has a huge impact on morale, something a soldier relies on while in a shithole for months on end. If I were in Afghanistan on this roto now i'd be extremely pissed that my fellow Countrymen aren't behind me, even though I wear the uniform of the nation and am putting myself in harms way for the betterment of the World. Feel free to disagree with the War, but there are less crass ways of doing so, ones that don't undermine both our national image and the welfare of the troops on the ground.