Joe B explains Afghanistan...

Discussion in 'Afghanistan' started by JoeB131, Apr 28, 2012.

  1. JoeB131
    Online

    JoeB131 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    80,612
    Thanks Received:
    6,875
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +15,090
    Or maybe tries to open a sensible discussion as to why we are there.

    Here's the thing. We invaded after 9/11. Absolutely right to do so, but it was also what Bin Laden wanted - to draw us into war that would exhaust us militarily so we'd stop interferring in the middle east. Why not. Worked with the Soviets.

    But we became more pre-occuppied with Iraq, or at least Bush did.

    The Obama tried to split the anti-war baby by calling Iraq the War of Choice while Afghanistan was the "war of necessity". (In fact, there are no wars of necessity. Only choices of what you are willing to put up with.) So while carrying out Bush's plan to get out of Iraq on schedule, he upped the ante on Afghanistan.

    But I ask, to what purpose?

    To get Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda relocated to Iraq, Yemen, Somalia and points west in 2002.

    To establish democracy? I don't think the Afghans ever had any interest in democracy or modernization, for that matter. It became a moot point when Karzai stole the 2009 election.

    The thing is we are propping up Karzai, and five minutes after we leave, he's gone as being tainted by a foreign occupying power. So how much more money and blood are we going to throw down this rathole?

    discuss!
     
  2. Swagger
    Offline

    Swagger Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    12,161
    Thanks Received:
    2,003
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    European Far Right
    Ratings:
    +5,512
    Agreed. Besides, history's repeated itself too much for comfort. Alexander, the British, followed by the Soviets. All were eventually repelled along with any 'values' they sought to impart upon the natives. Afghanistan returned to its societal inclination: tribalism. A case of deja-vu is sure to follow the complete withdrawl of all coalition forces. I reckon they've stayed this way due to the inhospitable terrain.
     
  3. Dot Com
    Offline

    Dot Com Nullius in verba Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    49,466
    Thanks Received:
    7,549
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Fairfax, NoVA
    Ratings:
    +16,308
    one Afghan said the U.S. has the time but the Afghani's have the watch ;)
     
  4. JStone
    Offline

    JStone BANNED

    Joined:
    Jun 29, 2011
    Messages:
    13,374
    Thanks Received:
    247
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +258
    Only real solution: Depopulate Afghanistan of the muslime excrement and repopulate the country with those nice Buddhists who used to own it before the muslimes invaded and fucked it up like every other islimic shithole
     
  5. Swagger
    Offline

    Swagger Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 26, 2011
    Messages:
    12,161
    Thanks Received:
    2,003
    Trophy Points:
    280
    Location:
    European Far Right
    Ratings:
    +5,512
    Wouldn't such a policy of 'depopulation' draw some rather stark parallels with what the Nazis did to the Jews in Europe?
     
  6. freedombecki
    Offline

    freedombecki Let's go swimmin'! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    23,690
    Thanks Received:
    5,924
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    My house
    Ratings:
    +5,933
    JoeB131, I'm pretty certain you never laid your eyes on Secretary of State Madeline Allbright's online State Department page on Iraq.

    There is not one single thing, no, not one single thing Bush did in Iraq that did not 100% corroborate the Allbright/Clinton opinions therein. Not one.

    All the Bad Bush this and the Bad Bush that credo was based one one book entitled "Fortunate Son," which became the DNC platform not only in E2000, but much to my shock and dismay during #2004. By that time, the public had figured out that JHHatfield, its author, only wrote the book to damage President Bush. Now why is that, you ask? I'll tell you. JHHatfield was a prisoner in the Texas State Prison system, and he was placed there for trying to murder his boss with a car bomb. When the bomb fizzled and the boss called in the police, JHHatfield's fingerprints were all over it. So they put him away for a number of years, but he wanted out really bad. He petitioned the office of Governor George W. Bush, who reviewed the petition, discovered that indeed, JHHatfield had perpetrated the murder scheme, and they recommended he complete his sentence as delivered by the judge. So JHHatfield, who had to serve his final year without parole, decided to get even, and he got even with the man at the top. He wrote a book that claimed many bad things about the Governor that suited his imagination and fancy, claimed 4 interviews with Bush insiders (who persistently said they were never interviewed by anyone named JHHatfield, and would have no way of knowing the "information" JHHatfield gleaned from these "sessions."

    However, so eager were Democrats to beat Bush, after the Clinton humiliation, that the false charges sounded "right" to them, and they dogged the entire election based on the book of "revelations" about Texas Governor, George W. Bush. On October 27, 1999, Robert Wallace left St Martin's Press because of his failure to examine the book for authenticity.

    The Democrats repeated the false charges of the book so often, I still see conservatives here who still think at least part of it was true, when exactly zero items were true that were not available by picking up any newspaper prior to 1999, which truly would have made dismal reading, since George W. Bush was fully engaged in cleaning up brownfields in the state of Texas, fully engaged in promoting literacy along with Laura, in school aged children as well as the continuing education and literacy of adults who were illiterate or needed educational training to perform work and/or intellectual tasks.

    Not a day passes here where I see someone practically quoting the nauseous little tome written by this convict, which has caused the firing/resignations of two prominent Americans already--one was the President of Little Brown and Co. St. Martin's Press--who authorized distribution of this book, and the other was Dan Rather, fired from his job for failing to check another lie from the book and airing it as if it were the gospel.

    As a matter of fact, the DNC is so invested in the book it hopes is true, and it repeated was true so many times people think it is, but it was eventually shown that J.H. Hatfield was nothing but a potential boss-murderer according to his actual record, and a con-artist when his 4 interviewees all agreed they'd never been contacted by anybody named J. H. Hatfield.

    Here's a portion of the sick, sad story people still think is true, but it's not. It's just wishful fiction adopted by the DNC, Republicans who supported other candidates that George W. Bush, and so on.

    Sorry folks, all the evidence points to the truth, George W. Bush wasn't fairly or truly represented in any way in this little brainstorm of a sick, criminal mind of JH Hatfield, wannabe boss murderer by planting a bomb in his automobile in 1988. And if anyone should have known better, it should have been Dan Rather, who agreed his journalism was improperly documented, which turned out to be another fable offshoot of the unfortunate book, "Fortunate Son."

    You could find Madeline Allbright's notes online from almost the beginning of her tour of heading America's State Department, right up until about 6 months before the 2004 reelection of President Bush. Now, it is out-and-out banned, because Madeline Albright's notes:

    100% supports and calls for the invasion of Iraq and ouster of Saddam Hussein

    And that, my fellow USMB posters, is a story the leftist press ignored until their repetitions of the lies became the history of the lies, not the true history of President Bush's past. Today, I had to go 12 pages into my Bing information to get past the wall of lies instituted to discredit President George w. Bush, all just to make the Democrat base "feel good" about President Clinton's impeachment and disbarment.
     
    Last edited: Apr 30, 2012
  7. JoeB131
    Online

    JoeB131 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    80,612
    Thanks Received:
    6,875
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +15,090
    Becki, I have discussed many times how the Democrats were just as hot to get Saddam in other threads when debating folks like Sallow and others.

    I'm not sure why you go into a diatribe about Bush when I only mentioned him in passing. I think there were a LOT of mistakes made in Iraq- by Democrats, Republicans and the Miltiary and Diplomatic corps...

    All that said, Bush was the the President, and it was ultimately his responsibility. I think he was mostly right to go after Saddam, but huge mistakes were made.
     
  8. Dot Com
    Offline

    Dot Com Nullius in verba Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 15, 2011
    Messages:
    49,466
    Thanks Received:
    7,549
    Trophy Points:
    1,830
    Location:
    Fairfax, NoVA
    Ratings:
    +16,308
    Do you believe that the (now defunct) PNAC goaded W into invading and that his staff was replete w/ neocons?
     
  9. freedombecki
    Offline

    freedombecki Let's go swimmin'! Supporting Member

    Joined:
    May 3, 2011
    Messages:
    23,690
    Thanks Received:
    5,924
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    My house
    Ratings:
    +5,933
    The biggest mistake that was made, Joe, was people buying into the lie. That set a stage, and the newspapers knew all along the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and you should have seen the lies I had to sift through for a full hour to get 2 actual references that told the truth as it unfolded. By the time 9/11 was playing out, and Bush went to the site to encourage firefighters still working to clear the site and memorialize the heroes of 9/11 who didn't make it out of the WTC or the Pentagon alive. Immediately, he was totally trashed by the same people proclaiming JHHatfield was just "misunderstood" when he was setting off a pipe bomb to booby trap his boss with in 1988. They made all kinds of egregious claims, such as he knew, he was an idiot for reading some children a library book when he was an informed of the travesty, then he was a coward when the secret service skirted him off in a jet plane to an undisclosed location, and he didn't get back to Washington until late that night. On and on and on. It was Bush idiot this and Bush idiot that. A few Democrats knew their platform was a lie, because they caught JH Hatfield in a few other cons, like lying his ass off about claiming he wasn't THAT JH Hatfield when he was, that he'd never served (he did and his fingerprints proved it), on and on.

    I'm here to tell you George W. Bush got his wild oats out of his system long before he became the Governor of Texas. When he ran for President, his life was on the total up and up. He did not cheat his way into college degrees in 2 Ivy League schools, he worked his butt off. He served honorably in the Texas National Guard and he was not AWOL at any time. But because of the Hatfield book, the Democrats who took the book as their party platform in 2000 had to perpetuate the lie some more and some more and some more until nothing George W. Bush did was good enough for them, and they wink-winked each other for the first 6 years after lying about their opponent, until they finally just realized, "Hey, even the other side believes us now." and it went from there.

    That's a hell of a thing for anybody to do to this nation, to lie, lie, lie, lie, lie about a good man who spent every day of his 8 years working on their betterment.

    Excuse me if I don't tolerate the little lies, the big lies, and the whoppers. I was and still am horrified to see Democrats jump all over Bush as though he were a criminal for doing the right, correct, legal, and proper thing 24/7/365 x 8 years.

    I'm mad as hell, because I've known the truth all along, and have taken a boatload of feces thrown at me from leftists who believe their own leader's facetious lies and harsh critiques based on President Bush's alleged less-than-human intellect. And if you defend him, they come up with more lies "he got through because of daddy..." His father happened to be the President of the United States, and a plot on his life was made by Saddam Hussein. Clinton did absolutely, positively nothing about it, too. That's when we should have gone after Saddam, but nope, Clinton didn't want to do it, it wasn't important, put on the back burner, and handed down to the next sucker who'd come along.

    There were no "huge" mistakes that the press wouldn't have said boo about if Democrats did them, and neither would most Republicans.

    Lying has consequences, and the consequence is this nation is screwed because of lies. The war was screwed because of lies.

    And the worst thing, the biggest liar of all told a Grand Jury "I forget" rather than admit to an error and apologize. For it, she was cheered by the press, pushed by a crook Senator from New York to join him as a fellow Senator, and there's nothing but fairy tales up there in Washington where a quarter of our nation's money goes in taxes. They're all up there just collecting money hand over fist, giving it out to whoever they like, and having a money orgy on the poor sucker who pays them taxes, plus they lie like criminals.

    The biggest consequences, we the people are confused if we forget the facts as they unfold, and that's exactly what happened here. demagogues of the left insured not one single solitary person in this nation would respect President Bush when they got finished dogging every word he said, every paper he signed, every bill he agreed to, every bill he didn't agree to, everything, everything, and more everything was always wrong, bad, wrongful, a lie, illegal, blah, blah, blah, all of which is the fairy tale that originated with the "Favorite Son" piece of criminal crap. 'Scuse my French.

    Fooey on the idea Bush made "huge" mistakes. I think he did the right thing at each twist and turn of the road, he researched, analyzed, consulted, listened to his generals on the ground, the whole enchilada.

    Go ahead, Joe, say whatever it is you want to say. I just don't think President Bush did one single solitary thing to put this nation in trouble with the Hague. The liars did that, and public exposure to their line of bull will not have one single effect, because people believe the ninnyhammers.
     
  10. JoeB131
    Online

    JoeB131 Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2011
    Messages:
    80,612
    Thanks Received:
    6,875
    Trophy Points:
    1,815
    Location:
    Chicago, Chicago, that Toddling Town
    Ratings:
    +15,090
    I think there were a lot of factions that were goading Bush into war, but I also think Bush really thought Saddam was a bad guy who needed to be taken out.

    Then again, Saddam tried to kill his father, I don't think he needed that much "goading". About as much goading as I'd need to spend the night with a hot supermodel.
     

Share This Page