because killing radical islamists is a good thing to be doing. indeed, it would be good if it became an official western past time.

___________________

Must we stop at Islam?

___________________
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.

This war is gonna last a looooooooooooooooooong time since we are there to fight ideologists. It will be like going round and round circles.

___________________
Mystic Mind - DJ Mixes
http://soundcloud.com/mystic-mind

Facebook page
https://www.facebook.com/DJMysticMind

I can definately see this being a slippery slope if nato packs up and leaves, and these fragile former soviet stans in the area may begin to desintegrate one by one, not to mention the potential chaos that lies in pakistan's future.

Al Qaeda is heavily intertwined with the warlords, and the symbiotic relationship helped both parties. The Taliban needed any financing they could get when they decided to give Aymen and Ossama their haven. Some could argue that Al-Qaeda has ownership of the Taliban governance system to a certain degree.

If you are able to watch Taliban messages, there are clear goals of wiping out the western culture, to replace it with their backwards puritannical form of faith-through whatever means possible. To me, this is a declaration of war.

I am for the Nato occupation, the cancers on the world need to be treated effectively. However, I think that current methods of warfare are not sustainable, and will definately not win the hearts and minds of the people. Afghanistan's history is not friendly to occupiers, and this should really be taken into account. With Pakistan as this corrupt refuelling station for the Taliban right next door, I can't devise any practical solutions for this Quagmire, without literally sacrificing millions of innocent lives-and I don't condone this kind of action at all.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN because killing radical islamists is a good thing to be doing. indeed, it would be good if it became an official western past time.

haha

word - i would gladly trade baseball for radical muslim killings.

quote:

Originally posted by ******** Simply not true, the Taliban offered to hand Osama over to Pakistan to be tried. So STOP your LIES! In 1998 Bill Clinton sent cruise missles into Afghanistan. This was one of the first unprovoked activities that America took in its most recent war in Afghanistan. Fact is America has been fueling was in afghanistan for the last 50 years. America is by nature an invader occupier and human rights denier, who doesn't acceed to the geneva convention instead it opts to overthrown and oppress free people because they are like that. WAKE UP! Stop convoluting yourself. Its all American Imperialism and Greed. Stop lying and get a clue. America is just out to kill maim and destroy, as it has never for 1 day in its existence recognized a peaceful state of being. Formed in war and lived in war. Soon dead. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Infinite_Reach Lies Lies and more Lies. America knows no truth only convolutes. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/200...stan.terrorism5 This was premeditated in the late 80's. If you havn't seen the breifs I can't blame you for being a sap but this was planned long in advance. There has been an international protocol for extradition for over 100 years, totally side steping diplomacy was somewhat uncalled for. Also bombing a country because someone was there is a little over the top and unproportional especially if you arn't aiming at him. It was a premediated invasion and overthrow. Just like you can say a premptive assault is a lot like an invasion. These are not practicle wars they are the regular brand of forced intervention in internal affairs. The same address and reasoning to all: Whose orders do we follow? CHILDE OR FOE. Don't think this comes from one thing it goes back much further http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gulf_War and that is only the very zenith of the iceberg, and traces back to the dawn of history itself, and even before him. This isn't a national thing, it is a values thing.

Did you bother reading my subsequent post, which has a link to an interview between a CNN reporter and a taliban spokesperson? If you bothered to read the contents on the linked page you would see that the taliban spokesperson admits they weren't giving osama because of tribal loyalty.

quote:

Originally posted by jerZ07002 if you believe they would have handed him over you are extremely naive. The taliban wasn't going to hand over osama because he had tribal support.

Okay, in any case, Donald Rumsfeld decided not support his CIA comrades and waited more than 1 month to go into Afghanistan, so in essence, the Pentagon sabotaged the search for Osama. They didn't have to occupy the entire damn country.

quote:

it's not a slippery slope argument at all (for your future benefit, a slippery slope argument starts with a minor action causing a string of future events leading to the claim A leads to Z). The argument is simple. (1) We leave Afghanistan, (2) Al Qaeda claims victory (which they obviously will do). (3) This makes them look stronger to other islamic extremists (who were on the margins before), who will more willingly join the causes because it doesn't look nearly as futile as it may have (to that person) prior to the US withdrawal. The only way this could possible be a slippery slope argument is if: (1) Leaving Afghanistan is considered a minor event (which isn't the case), (2) 3 events is sufficiently long to be considered a slippery slope (unlikely), (3) Al Qaeda wouldn't actually claims victory if we leave (not a chance), and (4) marginal extremists aren't emboldened by perceived successes of other extremists (please). while 3 and 4 may be unproven, i would love to hear you provide you reasoning on why they wouldn't be true.

Who cares if AQ declares a victory? Really, WHO CARES? Is that why we'r in the country? To save face or have some semblance of honor? What a stupid reason to occupy a country. Just because AQ declares victory doesn't mean it is an actual victory.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo you gotta start somewhere. but no one has ever said thats the end of it. Musharaff kept at least a semblence of control militarily. say what you will about the guy, he was a dictator, yeah, but he wasn't a madman.

If we started everything militarily, we'd soon be on our way to World War III.

quote:

3 million girls are going to school for the first time in a generation. im sorry, if just one Afghani girl graduates to the 6th grade while risking acid being thrown on her face at her bus stop or otherwise risk being hauled out of her classroom and summarily shot in the street then honestly dude i don't give two shits wtf you think about your country.

Riiiiiiight. We should go to war, occupy countries, and spend billions of dollars we don't have, so we can make sure their children are educated. What a ridiculous argument.

quote:

do you have any evidence of that being successful?

Yea I do. The vast majority of terrorist groups have been taken down by police action, not military action. Even with AQ, most real AQ suspects were captured by police forces. Look around the world. Spain, Germany, USA, etc. Terrorist groups in these countries were captured by police. You don't need to invade and occupy entire countries to fight terrorism. Unless, you want to foment more terrorism and have an excuse to continue such flagrant disregard of other country's sovereignty.

quote:

9/11 was one battle. it wasn't the first battle. it wasn't the last battle.

9/11 wasn't a battle. It was a surprise attack which unfortunately, was used as a pretext to invade 2 countries whose government's neither planned, knew about, or carried out any attack on the United States.