RE: Collateral murder (Full Version)

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



Message


Zonie63 -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 5:19:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

And how is that, the US kills thousends of innocent muslims, just like the Nazi's did with Jews... only difference is that the US doesn't has gaschambers... but they've got their drones and guantanamo bay.

US supports terrorism like no other country does so yes it is terrorist nation no.1

The world is also waiting for the US to make its foolish mistake of war... possibly with Iran.



Believe me, if the U.S. was really as bad as you say they are, then there would be no Iran today. The country would not exist; it would be an uninhabitable wasteland.

A lot of Americans complain that our government is too nice to the rest of the world. If we really wanted to be "terrorist nation number 1," then we would have conquered the whole world by now (or at least wiped out billions in the attempt).

Since that has not happened, then we can see that your analysis is wildly off-base.






Zonie63 -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 5:28:18 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


~ FR ~

Is it safe to assume that certain posters on this thread are actively engaged in petitioning their governments to cease being accessories to these attacks by sharing intelligence with the U.S.?

K.



I would wonder the same thing.





Zonie63 -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 5:33:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

Its simply true... facts can be found anywhere;)

Or do you know a countrie wich supports terrorism even more?


I wasn't going to bring this up, but since you asked, I know that your country harbored the Kaiser, the leading terrorist of World War I, so I guess that puts the Netherlands in one of the top spots among countries which support terrorism.

And the Kaiser was indirectly responsible for the fall of the Romanovs, the rise of the Bolsheviks, and the rise of the Nazis. And the Netherlands supported him, giving him a safe haven until he died of natural causes in 1941 (shortly after the Nazi takeover of that country).

Given the number of deaths (millions) caused by the Kaiser in World War I, and since the Netherlands supported him, I would say that your country supported terrorism more than the United States.




Tuub -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 5:42:44 PM)

The Netherlands never supported that guy;) We only stayed neutral.

But lets go back to the US, they supported the most violent regimes in the past, wich already makes the US more evil then the Netherlands...

Today the US supports groups like Al-Qaeda... and they support these violent regimes of Saudi-Arabia and Israel;)

So... who's worse?


BTW. the US is convicted of state terror;) Netherlands is not.




Tuub -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 5:45:36 PM)

Lol haha, the US wouldn't even come close if they tried to conquer the world xD

And yes you are terrorist nation number 1.

US supports countries that violate human rights, the US supports terrorist organisations and the US itself commits terrorist acts... they even where convicted in the past for state terrorism.

Like i said, Simple as that.

And wich countrie would be terrorist nation no.1 in your opinion then?




BamaD -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 5:49:19 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

The Netherlands never supported that guy;) We only stayed neutral.

But lets go back to the US, they supported the most violent regimes in the past, wich already makes the US more evil then the Netherlands...

Today the US supports groups like Al-Qaeda... and they support these violent regimes of Saudi-Arabia and Israel;)

So... who's worse?


BTW. the US is convicted of state terror;) Netherlands is not.

That is totally untrue.
Killing people in Al-Qaeda cannot be confused with supporting them.
We played a large part in the destruction of the Nazis.
We opposed Pol Pot.
And the Rowanda genocides.
And on and on
Netherlands pretended it wasn't thier problem cause they were "nuetral"
Neutral is a nice word for afraid.




BamaD -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 5:52:32 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

Lol haha, the US wouldn't even come close if they tried to conquer the world xD

And yes you are terrorist nation number 1.

US supports countries that violate human rights, the US supports terrorist organisations and the US itself commits terrorist acts... they even where convicted in the past for state terrorism.

Like i said, Simple as that.

And wich countrie would be terrorist nation no.1 in your opinion then?

When was the US convicted of state terroism and by whom?




Zonie63 -> RE: Collateral murder (2/15/2013 7:32:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

The Netherlands never supported that guy;) We only stayed neutral.


Neutral or not, your government did give him a safe haven and protection, so that's a sign of support.

quote:


But lets go back to the US, they supported the most violent regimes in the past, wich already makes the US more evil then the Netherlands...


The most violent regimes? We didn't support Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, and they, along with Communist China, were probably the most violent regimes in history. We didn't support the most violent regimes.

The Netherlands is a member of NATO, too, so your government is in bed with evil.

My only point here is not so much to compare the Netherlands to America and which one is more evil, but I'm just pointing out how silly it is to declare America "terrorist nation #1" or "more evil than" the Netherlands or some other nation - as if there's some kind of contest as to who is the most evil. Besides, the Netherlands has made their mark on America, and tens of millions of Americans are of Dutch ancestry (including myself). So, in a very real sense, we are the "evil" that you created.

quote:


Today the US supports groups like Al-Qaeda... and they support these violent regimes of Saudi-Arabia and Israel;)

So... who's worse?


I actually agree with you about Saudi Arabia, but for different reasons. I think part of the reason terrorists declare open season on America is because they see us as weak and vulnerable. They recognized that when Saudi Arabia and other nations imposed an oil embargo on the U.S. in the 1970s and then kept jacking up the price. We put ourselves in that position and wanted to stay there, for some reason. So now we're stuck having to support that regime. We should try to find a way out of it, though.

As for Israel, that's a tough nut to crack. I think the U.S. has tried to act as a mediator and work out diplomatic solutions to the problems in this region, but they never really seem to work for very long. I'm not sure what the solution is, and it doesn't seem that we're doing any good there anyway. I think a lot of U.S. support also comes from the religious right, and those who are religious have always had strong feelings about that particular territory.

quote:


BTW. the US is convicted of state terror;) Netherlands is not.


Cite?






WingedMercury -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 4:02:11 AM)

It's probably a pretty trite comment, but when you say things like "the preeminent western power on earth" it rather sticks in my craw. I guess you mean "the most powerful militarily' and I am not denying that. But I can assure you that on this side of the Pacific, many people see yours as one of the sick societies .... economically you're in trouble, social welfare is (compared to many) pathetic (many Americans see that as a strength), a large percentage of Americans believe in Creationism and want it taught in schools as a science, and their right to bear arms is just so staggeringly outdated.
Don't get me wrong. I don't dislike America or Americans. On my visits there, I have been very impressed with and thankful for their hospitality. I admire the nation's technical skills and I love to read Longfellow. I just feel sorry for so many of them.




Politesub53 -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 4:35:32 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A little refesher course. Al-Q... was never 'based' in Afghan. And you must know this.....

The Taliban however, was. Look kinkroids, OBL wanted to 'hit' the US. The Taliban did NOT !! The Taliban wanted bring down Islamic govts. in bed with the west.

OBL asked them if he could recruit from its members. The Taliban needing his money...agreed. OBL got 2. That's right cybersluts, TWO men is all OBL was able to recruit. That was the re-birth of what ?

Al-Quada...believe it or not, the term Al-Quada was brought out of mothballs by the CIA to give the world or 'put a face' on our attackers.

The real story: Here

An 'agency' created before history and brought back straight out of the CIA disinformation playbook. Got it ?

"Before Sept 11, 2001, you could hardly find a mention of Al-Qaeda in the US Media. But, immediately after the dramatic attacks both the electronic and print Media began to speak of this hitherto almost unknown entity with such deep knowledge and understanding as if their reporters had been tracking and covering it for years. A classic example of this publicity was the “Special Report” in Time, Nov 12, 2001, that was spread over more than two-thirds of the magazine, whose blazing cover title was, “INSIDE THE AL-QAEDA—Bin Laden’s Web of Terror.”

However:

"The report was mum on how Al-Qaeda had so smoothly overcome all the insurmountable odds and so utterly disabled the US national security agencies and authorities, and had hijacked four American airliners and smashed three of them into most high profile buildings in broad daylight. It gave no explanation how Time had gathered such encyclopedic knowledge of Al-Qaeda so soon after 9/11 ? The report was silent on many publicly known facts. It hid the fact that it was CIA that had picked up Osama and initiated him (through the Saudi Intelligence) into the anti-Soviet Afghan Jihad."


"Al-Qaeda had to be shown as having all the power and resources for committing the most terrible acts at the global level. Otherwise, how could it be a big and dreadful enough threat to the World or a worthy enough combatant for the world’s superpower to battle with?

The real mischief is, Al-Qaeda can actually be invested with the alleged great capabilities, because it is a Wing of Mossad! The vast capabilities attributed to Al-Qaeda are those of Mossad, which has worldwide tentacles and can deploy biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. Let the world’s masses, more so the Muslims, and among them especially the religious, comprehend this frightful reality."

"Al-Qaeda is Jewish Agency’s Child

The terror gangs that came to be known as Al-Qaeda were formed in the early 1930s by the Jewish Agency (JA) for a dreadful purpose. Established in 1929 in Jerusalem as an arm of WZO, the JA was to function as a ‘government-in- being’ for the future Zionist state. One of its tasks was to expel the Palestinians from Palestine and to compel the large numbers of Jews living in and around the Middle East to immigrate to Palestine to increase its Jewish population."


Americans are figuratively...lemmings being led as the power proxy for Israel and the world-wide banking/trading cartel..


The mind boggles as to how this drivel could ever be called a refresher course.

OBL never recruited directly from the Taliban. Afghans, as is there wont, often switch from one side to the other. OBl did indeed bail out the Taliban when it was the government in power, as did Saudi and a few other Muslim States. The Taliban had the aim of making Afghanistan a Sharia State, thats it, end of. They didnt even have eyes on Pakistan and are seperate from the Pakistani Taliban. It was the Pakistani ISI who pulls the strings with the Taliban, not AQ and not Bin Laden. His views on the west clashed totally with those of Mullah Omar, whose aim is to rid Afghanistan of foreign troops. The west missed a trick in not concentrating on AQ and, thanks to the idiots Bush and Blair, concentrating on Iraq on some made up reasoning. Ironic how we are now told that Iraq was never about oil, given statements by Bush senior saying otherwise when he was in office.

Anyone interested in the Politics of Afghanistan might like to read the following.

http://compare.ebay.co.uk/like/150992202312?var=lv<yp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar&adtype=pla&crdt=0

One consequence of long term troop placements in Afghanistan hs been the radicalisation of the next generation of youngsters.






Tuub -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 6:26:45 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

The Netherlands never supported that guy;) We only stayed neutral.

But lets go back to the US, they supported the most violent regimes in the past, wich already makes the US more evil then the Netherlands...

Today the US supports groups like Al-Qaeda... and they support these violent regimes of Saudi-Arabia and Israel;)

So... who's worse?


BTW. the US is convicted of state terror;) Netherlands is not.

That is totally untrue.
Killing people in Al-Qaeda cannot be confused with supporting them.
We played a large part in the destruction of the Nazis.
We opposed Pol Pot.
And the Rowanda genocides.
And on and on
Netherlands pretended it wasn't thier problem cause they were "nuetral"
Neutral is a nice word for afraid.


You do support Al-Qaeda.. you did it in Afghanistan.. and now in Syria... and even when you fight them you make them stronger and bigger.

US supported the Shah, Saddam Hussein, The royal famely of Saudi-Arabia ect. ect. i can put a list here with over a hundred violent regimes that where or are supported by the US.

If you knew what kind of shitty army the Netherlands had at that time, well the US wouldn't have done different.




Tuub -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 6:29:30 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

Lol haha, the US wouldn't even come close if they tried to conquer the world xD

And yes you are terrorist nation number 1.

US supports countries that violate human rights, the US supports terrorist organisations and the US itself commits terrorist acts... they even where convicted in the past for state terrorism.

Like i said, Simple as that.

And wich countrie would be terrorist nation no.1 in your opinion then?

When was the US convicted of state terroism and by whom?



By the International court somewhere in the eighties for illigally supporting the Contra's in Nicaragua.




Tuub -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 6:36:23 AM)

quote:

Neutral or not, your government did give him a safe haven and protection, so that's a sign of support.


True, but so did you with alot of warcriminals and regular criminals so...

quote:

The most violent regimes? We didn't support Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union, and they, along with Communist China, were probably the most violent regimes in history. We didn't support the most violent regimes.

The Netherlands is a member of NATO, too, so your government is in bed with evil.

My only point here is not so much to compare the Netherlands to America and which one is more evil, but I'm just pointing out how silly it is to declare America "terrorist nation #1" or "more evil than" the Netherlands or some other nation - as if there's some kind of contest as to who is the most evil. Besides, the Netherlands has made their mark on America, and tens of millions of Americans are of Dutch ancestry (including myself). So, in a very real sense, we are the "evil" that you created.


I can give you a list with god knows how many evil leaders that where or are supported by the US.
And no, we didn't create the evil.. it was your choice to become to who you are... not ours.

quote:

I actually agree with you about Saudi Arabia, but for different reasons. I think part of the reason terrorists declare open season on America is because they see us as weak and vulnerable. They recognized that when Saudi Arabia and other nations imposed an oil embargo on the U.S. in the 1970s and then kept jacking up the price. We put ourselves in that position and wanted to stay there, for some reason. So now we're stuck having to support that regime. We should try to find a way out of it, though.

As for Israel, that's a tough nut to crack. I think the U.S. has tried to act as a mediator and work out diplomatic solutions to the problems in this region, but they never really seem to work for very long. I'm not sure what the solution is, and it doesn't seem that we're doing any good there anyway. I think a lot of U.S. support also comes from the religious right, and those who are religious have always had strong feelings about that particular territory.


True with Saudi-Arabia but yet, you still support that regime that is probably the most anti woman rights regime since the fall of the Taliban in Afghanistan...

For Israel i agree to... its one hell of a complex situation wich probably won't get solved anytime soon:(

quote:

Cite?


Just google;) somewhere in the eighties, for illligally supporting the Contra's in Nicaragua.




BamaD -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 6:49:38 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

Lol haha, the US wouldn't even come close if they tried to conquer the world xD

And yes you are terrorist nation number 1.

US supports countries that violate human rights, the US supports terrorist organisations and the US itself commits terrorist acts... they even where convicted in the past for state terrorism.

Like i said, Simple as that.

And wich countrie would be terrorist nation no.1 in your opinion then?

When was the US convicted of state terroism and by whom?



By the International court somewhere in the eighties for illigally supporting the Contra's in Nicaragua.

Sombody someplace at sometime but trust me it happened. come back when you have something better.




BamaD -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 6:57:13 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

The Netherlands never supported that guy;) We only stayed neutral.

But lets go back to the US, they supported the most violent regimes in the past, wich already makes the US more evil then the Netherlands...

Today the US supports groups like Al-Qaeda... and they support these violent regimes of Saudi-Arabia and Israel;)

So... who's worse?


BTW. the US is convicted of state terror;) Netherlands is not.

That is totally untrue.
Killing people in Al-Qaeda cannot be confused with supporting them.
We played a large part in the destruction of the Nazis.
We opposed Pol Pot.
And the Rowanda genocides.
And on and on
Netherlands pretended it wasn't thier problem cause they were "nuetral"
Neutral is a nice word for afraid.


You do support Al-Qaeda.. you did it in Afghanistan.. and now in Syria... and even when you fight them you make them stronger and bigger.

US supported the Shah, Saddam Hussein, The royal famely of Saudi-Arabia ect. ect. i can put a list here with over a hundred violent regimes that where or are supported by the US.

If you knew what kind of shitty army the Netherlands had at that time, well the US wouldn't have done different.

We did not support Al Qaeda in Afganistan, when we support those resisting the Soviets AQ didn't exist
The US gave Hussein just enough help to keep the was with Iraq going leting two of our enemies kill each outher off
So you admit that your magnificent nuetrality was a facade to cover cowardness.
Those without courage always critisise those with it




Tuub -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 8:36:49 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

Lol haha, the US wouldn't even come close if they tried to conquer the world xD

And yes you are terrorist nation number 1.

US supports countries that violate human rights, the US supports terrorist organisations and the US itself commits terrorist acts... they even where convicted in the past for state terrorism.

Like i said, Simple as that.

And wich countrie would be terrorist nation no.1 in your opinion then?

When was the US convicted of state terroism and by whom?



By the International court somewhere in the eighties for illigally supporting the Contra's in Nicaragua.

Sombody someplace at sometime but trust me it happened. come back when you have something better.


You can easely google it;)




Tuub -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 8:39:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub


quote:

ORIGINAL: BamaD


quote:

ORIGINAL: Tuub

The Netherlands never supported that guy;) We only stayed neutral.

But lets go back to the US, they supported the most violent regimes in the past, wich already makes the US more evil then the Netherlands...

Today the US supports groups like Al-Qaeda... and they support these violent regimes of Saudi-Arabia and Israel;)

So... who's worse?


BTW. the US is convicted of state terror;) Netherlands is not.

That is totally untrue.
Killing people in Al-Qaeda cannot be confused with supporting them.
We played a large part in the destruction of the Nazis.
We opposed Pol Pot.
And the Rowanda genocides.
And on and on
Netherlands pretended it wasn't thier problem cause they were "nuetral"
Neutral is a nice word for afraid.


You do support Al-Qaeda.. you did it in Afghanistan.. and now in Syria... and even when you fight them you make them stronger and bigger.

US supported the Shah, Saddam Hussein, The royal famely of Saudi-Arabia ect. ect. i can put a list here with over a hundred violent regimes that where or are supported by the US.

If you knew what kind of shitty army the Netherlands had at that time, well the US wouldn't have done different.

We did not support Al Qaeda in Afganistan, when we support those resisting the Soviets AQ didn't exist
The US gave Hussein just enough help to keep the was with Iraq going leting two of our enemies kill each outher off
So you admit that your magnificent nuetrality was a facade to cover cowardness.
Those without courage always critisise those with it


Al-Qaeda was formed from the resistance against the Soviets, so the US actually helped the start of Al-Qaeda...
So you already admit that the US supported Hussein...
No i did not, its simple survival, Germany wasn't a threat to the Netherlands aslong as we staid neutral, so why would we go to war with them?




mnottertail -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 8:41:10 AM)

Bush withdrew from the World Court:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/10/politics/10death.html?_r=0

St. Wrinklemeat takes one in the ass from the World Court:
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-158261795.html




MrRodgers -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 9:17:24 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: WingedMercury

It's probably a pretty trite comment, but when you say things like "the preeminent western power on earth" it rather sticks in my craw. I guess you mean "the most powerful militarily' and I am not denying that. But I can assure you that on this side of the Pacific, many people see yours as one of the sick societies .... economically you're in trouble, social welfare is (compared to many) pathetic (many Americans see that as a strength), a large percentage of Americans believe in Creationism and want it taught in schools as a science, and their right to bear arms is just so staggeringly outdated.
Don't get me wrong. I don't dislike America or Americans. On my visits there, I have been very impressed with and thankful for their hospitality. I admire the nation's technical skills and I love to read Longfellow. I just feel sorry for so many of them.

Unfortunately, or fortunately, no country rests it long term economic, political and military security on the various social values or various histories of other countries except as a means to try to exploit them. There isn't a single sovereign US foe in the world that hasn't tried to enrich themselves at US expense following or agreeing, assisting in their foreign policy goals and agenda and then when it suits them...doing exactly what they want, i.e., serving their own, military, security and foreign policy goals.

As I wrote earlier, Pakistan now is both arson and fireman in the wild, just to get what $1-$2 Billion a year from the US, without which their country might financially/economically fall into the gutter.

The real trouble is that we have this discussion specifically because now, the US has changed. The US is seen now as having no superior social values. They've seen surplus go to deficit, a very specious attack by [others] on their soil, a reduction of their own constitutional rights because [it] then declares a world-wide 'war on terror.'

This rationalizes preemptive wars and a politically expedient alliances or dealings with nations previously too repugnant to recognize on any international level. Look at what the world has to deal with in the middle east n now with several new govts. Another problem with their new govts. or a new era of peace ? I don't think the latter.

So the world is still about power and wealth, guns and oil. The hunter gatherer is still in us, now all of us.




MrRodgers -> RE: Collateral murder (2/16/2013 9:58:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Politesub53

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

A little refesher course. Al-Q... was never 'based' in Afghan. And you must know this.....

The Taliban however, was. Look kinkroids, OBL wanted to 'hit' the US. The Taliban did NOT !! The Taliban wanted bring down Islamic govts. in bed with the west.

OBL asked them if he could recruit from its members. The Taliban needing his money...agreed. OBL got 2. That's right cybersluts, TWO men is all OBL was able to recruit. That was the re-birth of what ?

Al-Quada...believe it or not, the term Al-Quada was brought out of mothballs by the CIA to give the world or 'put a face' on our attackers.

The real story: Here

An 'agency' created before history and brought back straight out of the CIA disinformation playbook. Got it ?

"Before Sept 11, 2001, you could hardly find a mention of Al-Qaeda in the US Media. But, immediately after the dramatic attacks both the electronic and print Media began to speak of this hitherto almost unknown entity with such deep knowledge and understanding as if their reporters had been tracking and covering it for years. A classic example of this publicity was the “Special Report” in Time, Nov 12, 2001, that was spread over more than two-thirds of the magazine, whose blazing cover title was, “INSIDE THE AL-QAEDA—Bin Laden’s Web of Terror.”

However:

"The report was mum on how Al-Qaeda had so smoothly overcome all the insurmountable odds and so utterly disabled the US national security agencies and authorities, and had hijacked four American airliners and smashed three of them into most high profile buildings in broad daylight. It gave no explanation how Time had gathered such encyclopedic knowledge of Al-Qaeda so soon after 9/11 ? The report was silent on many publicly known facts. It hid the fact that it was CIA that had picked up Osama and initiated him (through the Saudi Intelligence) into the anti-Soviet Afghan Jihad."


"Al-Qaeda had to be shown as having all the power and resources for committing the most terrible acts at the global level. Otherwise, how could it be a big and dreadful enough threat to the World or a worthy enough combatant for the world’s superpower to battle with?

The real mischief is, Al-Qaeda can actually be invested with the alleged great capabilities, because it is a Wing of Mossad! The vast capabilities attributed to Al-Qaeda are those of Mossad, which has worldwide tentacles and can deploy biological, chemical and nuclear weapons. Let the world’s masses, more so the Muslims, and among them especially the religious, comprehend this frightful reality."

"Al-Qaeda is Jewish Agency’s Child

The terror gangs that came to be known as Al-Qaeda were formed in the early 1930s by the Jewish Agency (JA) for a dreadful purpose. Established in 1929 in Jerusalem as an arm of WZO, the JA was to function as a ‘government-in- being’ for the future Zionist state. One of its tasks was to expel the Palestinians from Palestine and to compel the large numbers of Jews living in and around the Middle East to immigrate to Palestine to increase its Jewish population."


Americans are figuratively...lemmings being led as the power proxy for Israel and the world-wide banking/trading cartel..


The mind boggles as to how this drivel could ever be called a refresher course.

OBL never recruited directly from the Taliban. Afghans, as is there wont, often switch from one side to the other. OBl did indeed bail out the Taliban when it was the government in power, as did Saudi and a few other Muslim States. The Taliban had the aim of making Afghanistan a Sharia State, thats it, end of. They didnt even have eyes on Pakistan and are seperate from the Pakistani Taliban. It was the Pakistani ISI who pulls the strings with the Taliban, not AQ and not Bin Laden. His views on the west clashed totally with those of Mullah Omar, whose aim is to rid Afghanistan of foreign troops. The west missed a trick in not concentrating on AQ and, thanks to the idiots Bush and Blair, concentrating on Iraq on some made up reasoning. Ironic how we are now told that Iraq was never about oil, given statements by Bush senior saying otherwise when he was in office.

Anyone interested in the Politics of Afghanistan might like to read the following.

http://compare.ebay.co.uk/like/150992202312?var=lv<yp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar&adtype=pla&crdt=0

One consequence of long term troop placements in Afghanistan hs been the radicalisation of the next generation of youngsters.


Well there is a very good documentary by the BBC that followed OBL around and was not only witness to what I wrote but also interviewed many of those involved. Those interviews included men who did and didn't join OBL.

Not really big deals but the Taliban is not really a govt. as such but simply a religious movement that seeks arms and power through any means, take over society and install Sharia orthodoxy. They also want to bring down all Muslim govts, they deem too close to the west or otherwise not sufficiently Sharia.

Afghanistan has never had a central govt. in the western sense. It has always been tribes and tribal leaders. Al-Quada was however the name of a Jewish 'agency' created about the 1930's well before WWII to expel Palestinians from Palestine and specifically for the purpose of forming an Israeli country starting with Jerusalem.












Page: <<   < prev  7 8 [9] 10 11   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
6.054688E-02