RE: 34,000 (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

cuckoldmepls -> RE: 34,000 (11/25/2009 12:50:47 PM)

Failure is not an option in Afghanistan or Iraq. Although liberals certainly think it is. If we fail in Iraq, there will be an Islamic revolution led by insurgents and Iranian intelligence, that will end up creating a nuclear armed muslim superpower. They most likely will invade Kuwait again, and possibly even Saudi Arabia to eradicate any perceived American influence. After the tough time we've already had with just Iraq alone, there's no possible way the American people would have the willpower to go back in there again and stop them.

If we fail in Afghanistan, obviously the Taliban will return and set up terrorist training camps again, not to mention subjucate all women in the country to involuntary slavery, and cutting people's heads off that disagree with their fanaticism.

What I find ironic, is that this time around the liberals will probably support the President and admit that we need more boots on the ground. What hipocrates.



ThatDamnedPanda -> RE: 34,000 (11/25/2009 12:54:16 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Failure is not an option in Afghanistan or Iraq. Although liberals certainly think it is. If we fail in Iraq, there will be an Islamic revolution led by insurgents and Iranian intelligence, that will end up creating a nuclear armed muslim superpower. They most likely will invade Kuwait again, and possibly even Saudi Arabia to eradicate any perceived American influence. After the tough time we've already had with just Iraq alone, there's no possible way the American people would have the willpower to go back in there again and stop them.

If we fail in Afghanistan, obviously the Taliban will return and set up terrorist training camps again, not to mention subjucate all women in the country to involuntary slavery, and cutting people's heads off that disagree with their fanaticism.

What I find ironic, is that this time around the liberals will probably support the President and admit that we need more boots on the ground. What hipocrates.


Care to give us a list of the liberals who support intervention in Afghanistan now but did not support it under Bush? Or are you just making shit up again?



Moonhead -> RE: 34,000 (11/25/2009 12:55:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Failure is not an option in Afghanistan or Iraq. Although liberals certainly think it is. If we fail in Iraq, there will be an Islamic revolution led by insurgents and Iranian intelligence, that will end up creating a nuclear armed muslim superpower. They most likely will invade Kuwait again, and possibly even Saudi Arabia to eradicate any perceived American influence. After the tough time we've already had with just Iraq alone, there's no possible way the American people would have the willpower to go back in there again and stop them.

If we fail in Afghanistan, obviously the Taliban will return and set up terrorist training camps again, not to mention subjucate all women in the country to involuntary slavery, and cutting people's heads off that disagree with their fanaticism.

What I find ironic, is that this time around the liberals will probably support the President and admit that we need more boots on the ground. What hipocrates.

You mean like failure in Korea and Vietnam led to the whole of south east asia being controlled by communists?



willbeurdaddy -> RE: 34,000 (11/25/2009 1:45:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead


quote:

ORIGINAL: cuckoldmepls

Failure is not an option in Afghanistan or Iraq. Although liberals certainly think it is. If we fail in Iraq, there will be an Islamic revolution led by insurgents and Iranian intelligence, that will end up creating a nuclear armed muslim superpower. They most likely will invade Kuwait again, and possibly even Saudi Arabia to eradicate any perceived American influence. After the tough time we've already had with just Iraq alone, there's no possible way the American people would have the willpower to go back in there again and stop them.

If we fail in Afghanistan, obviously the Taliban will return and set up terrorist training camps again, not to mention subjucate all women in the country to involuntary slavery, and cutting people's heads off that disagree with their fanaticism.

What I find ironic, is that this time around the liberals will probably support the President and admit that we need more boots on the ground. What hipocrates.

You mean like failure in Korea and Vietnam led to the whole of south east asia being controlled by communists?


How could you respond and not mention "hipocrates". lmao



Moonhead -> RE: 34,000 (11/25/2009 2:56:09 PM)

That's Hippocrates, and I don't think he's relevant unless you're planning some bullshit argument about the Ottoman Empire burning the library at Alexandria to show their love of learning.



OrionTheWolf -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 6:47:09 AM)

~FR~

Currently there is no way to fail in Afghanistan, because there is no clearly defined mission. Maybe that will change, but I will not hold my breath because not a lot else has changed. The wrappers are different, but the substance is the same.

Someone said that a radical terrorist organization gaining nukes is only a threat to it's neighbors. Nukes being used anywhere is a concern to everyone.

From my readings it is the mountain areas along the border of Afghanistan and Pakistan that is the biggest concern. Troops in that area that can coordinate with the Pakistan military may actually assist some, but I am not convinced anything we do will help, and we definately should not be doing it with just limited material support from other UN nations. I hope the communication between the US Command and the British Command improves though, as some of the communication problems the US caused during some of the Iraq operation, led to some deaths and problems.



TheHeretic -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 7:05:28 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic
I wonder how long it will be before the anti-war crowd turns on him?



Not all that long it seems...
http://news.yahoo.com/s/huffpost/20091125/cm_huffpost/370458




rulemylife -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 7:51:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: InvisibleBlack

Since then - well - Al Qaeda no longer operates in Afghanistan (nor Pakistan, really) ...




Al Jazeera English - Focus - 'Al-Qaeda facilitates insurgency'
Oct 7, 2009



Some analysts believe that not only has Washington failed to curb al-Qaeda's influence, but the presence of US troops in Afghanistan has simply served to export al-Qaeda ideology to other groups – including the Pakistan Taliban.

"We have not only been unable to defeat al-Qaeda ... [but] we have taken them from Afghanistan to the FATA area [Pakistan's northern tribal areas) where their key leadership resides and now have a serious role in Afghanistan," says Hekmat Karzai, a regional security analyst.

Al-Qaeda message

Afghan officials believe that it is the spread of al-Qaeda's ideology - which brands the US so-called "war on terror" as a de facto "war on Islam" – which has strengthened and legitimised the Taliban.

General Abdel Meneem Farahie, head of the anti-terrorism unit in the Afghan interior ministry, believes there would have been more of a chance to effectively destroy al-Qaeda and its ideology had bin Laden had been arrested or killed in 2001.

"But today the situation has changed, and... al-Qaeda has recruited a new young generation [of supporters] and they have close links with bin Laden," he says.



rulemylife -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 8:10:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: willbeurdaddy

quote:

ORIGINAL; rulemylife
So what is the alternative?  Withdraw and let the Taliban rule again and re-open the terrorist training camps? 



See mefisto69. Eventually it will come to that anyway, better to do it sooner and not waste lives in the meantime.


Interesting.

Those troops were sent there as a response to the "wasting" of innocent civilian lives on 9/11 by terrorists the Taliban supported.

And there was great applause by conservatives for not only sending troops into Afghanistan but Iraq as well, as long as it was being done by a conservative President.

Now Obama is being criticized for withdrawing troops from Iraq and adding troops to Afghanistan by those same conservatives who can't seem to keep their message straight.




rulemylife -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 8:38:47 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

You mean like failure in Korea and Vietnam led to the whole of south east asia being controlled by communists?


While it pains me to agree with cuckoldmepls, the conflicts you mention were more ideologically based than based on the potential of a real threat, which I believe allowing the Taliban to re-take the country would be.






rulemylife -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 8:46:37 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

That's Hippocrates, and I don't think he's relevant unless you're planning some bullshit argument about the Ottoman Empire burning the library at Alexandria to show their love of learning.


I think he was just making a joke about the spelling error that was made, hipocrates instead of hypocrites in the previous post.





Moonhead -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 9:12:29 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

That's Hippocrates, and I don't think he's relevant unless you're planning some bullshit argument about the Ottoman Empire burning the library at Alexandria to show their love of learning.


I think he was just making a joke about the spelling error that was made, hipocrates instead of hypocrites in the previous post.




Don't worry, I got that: it was meant to be a joke.
As for the other though, wasn't there all of that blather about the domino theory in the '50s and '60s? I don't think Kissinger and his cronies finally shut up about that idiocy until long after the retreat from saigon.



rulemylife -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 10:16:07 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

As for the other though, wasn't there all of that blather about the domino theory in the '50s and '60s? I don't think Kissinger and his cronies finally shut up about that idiocy until long after the retreat from saigon.


No, you are right, that was what I was referring to when I said that Korea and Vietnam were ideologically based conflicts.

In Afghanistan the threat has already manifested itself as real and likely to become so again if the Taliban regain control.



DarkSteven -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 10:32:17 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: rulemylife

In Afghanistan the threat has already manifested itself as real and likely to become so again if the Taliban regain control.



With the exception of Kabul, I didn't realize that they ever relinquished control.



blacksword404 -> RE: 34,000 (11/26/2009 11:45:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Perhaps, but I don't see how an American military presence in Pakistan would do anything to make that less likely.


You control those nukes and those are nukes the can not use. Doesn't mean they can't try somewhere else but they would not be using these.



Moonhead -> RE: 34,000 (11/27/2009 4:58:10 AM)

Those are the only nukes they have, though, and If here's one bit of Pakistan the incompetent wankers running the country are trying to keep control of, guess where it is?



blacksword404 -> RE: 34,000 (11/27/2009 1:03:31 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Those are the only nukes they have, though, and If here's one bit of Pakistan the incompetent wankers running the country are trying to keep control of, guess where it is?


I can guess. We don't need any USSR style missing nukes.



slvemike4u -> RE: 34,000 (11/27/2009 1:07:17 PM)

Forgive me if I'm just having a senior moment here...but in the final analyisis did any U.S.S.R. nukes go missing?



blacksword404 -> RE: 34,000 (11/27/2009 1:09:10 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: slvemike4u

Forgive me if I'm just having a senior moment here...but in the final analyisis did any U.S.S.R. nukes go missing?


I remember that being the news then. Did they all end up accounted for?



slvemike4u -> RE: 34,000 (11/27/2009 1:14:35 PM)

I don't know..it was an honest question...lol.Guess my next stop is google [8|]



Page: <<   < prev  2 3 [4] 5 6   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.03125