Give me a reason

[Contumacious]

Contumacious has left the building.

Deltex1 has abandoned his brain and reality.

.

 

[alan1]

How about I just give you the bullet.

How about if you back off? Moderator mode.
[MENTION=25283]Sallow[/MENTION]

[MENTION=16165]alan1[/MENTION]

WTF are you talking about.

I am AGREEING with the OP.

Karzai deserves to take a dirtnap.

Unless you love THAT guy.

Sorry [MENTION=25283]Sallow[/MENTION]
I misunderstood. I thought you were making a veiled threat at the member. My mistake.

 

[Unkotare]

The US declared bankruptcy in 1935 . Separated Gold from the dollar. Began issuing irredemeble paper money.


If Osama was really the culprit then the mission accomplished. But the Country did not have to be invaded . Congress could have issued a letter of marque and reprisal.




So by killing innocent women and children. By incarcerating thousands in GITMO without a trial we are fighting terrorism? How so?

.

1) No we did not. Keep your hyperbolic nonsense under control.

2) Yes, the country had to be invaded in order to pursue our goals. Bill Clinton proved that lobbing a few missiles into sand or blowing up a baby food factory doesn't cut it.

3) Killing innocent women and children was never our goal. You know that but are deliberately being an anti-American POS.

 

[Contumacious]

The US declared bankruptcy in 1935 . Separated Gold from the dollar. Began issuing irredemeble paper money.


If Osama was really the culprit then the mission accomplished. But the Country did not have to be invaded . Congress could have issued a letter of marque and reprisal.




So by killing innocent women and children. By incarcerating thousands in GITMO without a trial we are fighting terrorism? How so?

.

1) No we did not. Keep your hyperbolic nonsense under control.

Yo Ding Dong , why the **** did the US go off the GOLD STANDARD?!?!?!?!?

2) Yes, the country had to be invaded in order to pursue our goals. Bill Clinton proved that lobbing a few missiles into sand or blowing up a baby food factory doesn't cut it.

Wasn't the "goal" to kill Osama twice?

3) Killing innocent women and children was never our goal. You know that but are deliberately being an anti-American POS.

Bullshit.

"Let me explain to you the most fundamental principle of American foreign policy: Any country where the people have unpronounceable names can be bombed by the US with impunity. For you Rockwell readers who are a little slow on the uptake, "impunity" means they aren't allowed to bomb us back. "We called no tag-backs." It hardly qualifies as impunity when they blow up our biggest buildings, now does it? They aren't playing by the rules."

 

[Unkotare]

Yo Ding Dong , why the **** did the US go off the GOLD STANDARD?!?!?!?!?

Going off the gold standard does not mean going bankrupt. I told you words have meanings, dope.

 

[Unkotare]

Bullshit.

**** you. US forces in Afghanistan have often been hampered to the point of placing our own servicemen and women in harm's way to an extent all but unheard of in the history of warfare.

Spike in battlefield deaths linked to restrictive rules of engagement - Washington Times

 

[FA_Q2]

We can talk until we're blue in the face about whether we should be there or not.

Irrelevant and juvenile. The FACT is -- We ARE there.

This is very true and glossed over. We are there and once you start something, you finish it. Period.

This is one of the problems with the American populous (and our leaders by extension): we go to war WAY to easily. Then we realize how shitty war really is and pull out without finishing the job. That is utterly unacceptable. If you are going to get into a war, you had better be damned well ready to finish that war.

 

[deltex1]

Kill the ************...


Graham Calls for an Afghan Aid Cutoff If Karzai Frees Prisoners

 

[Two Thumbs]

To not put a bullet in Karzai's head....anyone?



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/04/w...cts-with-the-taliban.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=0

He's the least corrupt person we know over there

and he's trying to make peace in his own country

 

[deltex1]

To not put a bullet in Karzai's head....anyone?



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/04/w...cts-with-the-taliban.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=0

He's the least corrupt person we know over there

and he's trying to make peace in his own country

Which is a progressive way of saying he is a criminal and a traitor...to us and his people...put him in the dirt...with a bullet in him...and promise the same to his replacement if they do not perform to our standard.

 

[FA_Q2]

To not put a bullet in Karzai's head....anyone?



http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/04/w...cts-with-the-taliban.html?hpw&rref=world&_r=0

He's the least corrupt person we know over there

and he's trying to make peace in his own country

Which is a progressive way of saying he is a criminal and a traitor...to us and his people...put him in the dirt...with a bullet in him...and promise the same to his replacement if they do not perform to our standard.

And then continue killing ‘leaders’ until the nation becomes varying tribes that vie for power…

You do realize that the core problem here is that if we did get rid of him another would replace him and they would be no better.

THAT is the core problem, we simply are not going to get any better. It is not as though the problems are centered on him. They are FAR deeper than that, he is simply the figurehead.

 

[deltex1]

He's the least corrupt person we know over there

and he's trying to make peace in his own country

Which is a progressive way of saying he is a criminal and a traitor...to us and his people...put him in the dirt...with a bullet in him...and promise the same to his replacement if they do not perform to our standard.

And then continue killing ‘leaders’ until the nation becomes varying tribes that vie for power…

You do realize that the core problem here is that if we did get rid of him another would replace him and they would be no better.

THAT is the core problem, we simply are not going to get any better. It is not as though the problems are centered on him. They are FAR deeper than that, he is simply the figurehead.

Can't argue with what you said. So where does that leave us? Leave and go back to 911 days? Apply sanctions? (That works so well for us everywhere it's tried). Make Afghanistan an example of what our new policy will be...cooperate or die?

 

[FA_Q2]

Which is a progressive way of saying he is a criminal and a traitor...to us and his people...put him in the dirt...with a bullet in him...and promise the same to his replacement if they do not perform to our standard.

And then continue killing ‘leaders’ until the nation becomes varying tribes that vie for power…

You do realize that the core problem here is that if we did get rid of him another would replace him and they would be no better.

THAT is the core problem, we simply are not going to get any better. It is not as though the problems are centered on him. They are FAR deeper than that, he is simply the figurehead.

Can't argue with what you said. So where does that leave us? Leave and go back to 911 days? Apply sanctions? (That works so well for us everywhere it's tried). Make Afghanistan an example of what our new policy will be...cooperate or die?

From here? I am not completely sure because I think that we royally fucked up before and am not sure that we can truly fix it.

The fact is war sucks. Period. There is no way around that. I understand the realities that we learned from the world wars – realities that show just obliterating a nation and then making it pay for the reparations of the nations it bombed is a bad idea. We learned that rebuilding had its merits. HOWEVER, we went into both Afghanistan and Iraq with the intention of destroying the current government and replacing it with our own. That is utter folly.

It would be like England deciding that the American government was corrupt, coming over here and then replacing it with a parliamentary system. Would you accept the new government? Of course not. No matter how it was put there or how many times you get to vote for its leaders it would always be foreign and not our own. That is exactly what we did over there though. Then we wonder why there are so many problems with those governments.

We should have went over there with one thing in mind – kicking their teeth in. After, we can provide help in restoring the nation but the government should be ALL up to them without any interference from the US. IF the new regime wants to try siding with the terrorists again, back to kicking their teeth in. If they want a dictatorship then so be it – that is what they want.

This idea that we can simply kill the leader of the already defunct American government that they people are never going to see as their own and then replace him is simply not going to be effective. If anything it will simply show the people that they are living under a puppet American government. Who, then, are they going to blame their problems on? Are they ever going to accept their government?

No, they will not and instead of stabilizing the area we will simply ensure that another generation of people there are ripe and ready for the American Jihad that they must undertake to dispel the yoke of their American ‘oppressors.’

 

[KNB]

You are aware that the US trained and armed the jihad, right? They were specifically set up for long periods of guerrilla warfare. You want to keep kicking their teeth in because they're doing what we taught them to do?

 

[Sallow]

Disagree.

Who the **** is going to protect him when the US finally leaves?

If the most powerful army on earth hasn't been able to crush the Taliban what can he do?

.

The most powerful army on earth needs to send a message. The time of diplomacy is over...oppose us.....threaten us.....die.

The message has been sent.

1) We are a BANKRUPT welfare/warfare state;

2) We had NO REASON whatsoever to invade Afghanistan

3) We had NO ******* idea what the goals were in Afghanistan

.

1, No. We are absolutely not.

2. Yes we did.

3. I agree with this.

 

[TemplarKormac]

The most powerful army on earth needs to send a message. The time of diplomacy is over...oppose us.....threaten us.....die.

The message has been sent.

1) We are a BANKRUPT welfare/warfare state;

2) We had NO REASON whatsoever to invade Afghanistan

3) We had NO ******* idea what the goals were in Afghanistan

.

1, No. We are absolutely not.

2. Yes we did.

3. I agree with this.

1. Then explain why 47 million people and counting are on food stamps.

2. Oil? If your answer was oil, you'd be wrong.

3. Wow, this is a momentous occasion, you actually agreed with someone to the right of you.

 

[FA_Q2]

You are aware that the US trained and armed the jihad, right? They were specifically set up for long periods of guerrilla warfare. You want to keep kicking their teeth in because they're doing what we taught them to do?

Irrelevant.

Besides, we did no such thing. We did not really teach them to do what they are doing – they have been at war FAR longer than America has been even a thought let alone a nation. What we did was finance them, arm them and then abandon them. That was a piss poor idea to begin with but what shall we do now? Allow them to train and send attacks to our nation without recourse? That is what they Taliban were doing – harboring and supporting a military outfit that was openly attacking America. There is not much else we can do but face that very real and very present threat. We did that but we continue to be in an area that we should not be in. We go to war because we have to and stop persecuting that war when the need ceases to exist. It no longer exists.

 

[deltex1]

How about now?? Will obama kill Karzai's...he showed our boy major disrespect...

 

[BlackSand]

How about now?? Will obama kill Karzai's...he showed our boy major disrespect...

If I was Karzai ... I would have told President Obama to screw off as well.
We are leaving Afghanistan ... And neither Karzai nor the Taliban are going anywhere.
Karzai is going to have to figure out a way to deal with the Taliban ... And he cannot go all out war on them by himself.

If he attempts to gain support with tribal leaders to help gain assistance in handling the Taliban ... Then that is what he has decided to do.
Karzai has no hopes of dealing with the Taliban without that support from tribal leaders ... And the Taliban don't react to empty threats from foreign powers.
His troops and police are under pressure from the Taliban as is ... Some are crossing over under threat against them and their families.
Nothing President Obama is going to do will fix that ... And Karzai doesn't have to listen to advice from someone who is bailing.

Telling America it is none of their business ... Is a lot nicer than what I would have said.
Karzai has been grateful for the support he received in weakening the Taliban ... But we are done with that ... And now he has to figure out what to do for his country, not ours.

.

 

[deltex1]

Afghanistan will revert to pre 911 posture....how did that turn out for us. You are correct about one thing. NOBODY reacts to empty threats.....all presidents since HST are full of empty threats. That has to end...even if it means a slaughter.