|
Should USA bomb Afeganistan?
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Exxtreme |
Guys... i'd like to know what is the opinion of you about whether USA should declare war to afeganistan. Mostly, i'd like to hear about americans, from all over US, not only NY. Please read all this text.
I think new yorkers will mostly say US should bomb them. Well, i'm not quite sure what would be my reaction. I personally think people from outside this can evaluate things better coz they don't have their heads on fire, generally like NYers. I see palestinians killing israelis, and those also killing palestinians. And i see that for a long time. And that violence did not create peace. Plus i'm really worried since afeganistan have nuclear weapons.
And let me tell something to the americans... (btw; I DO NOT THINK WHAT WAS DONE WAS RIGHT!!!) PUT YOURSELVES IN THE PLACES OF the arabs, palestinians, afeganistan people. If i was STUPID, had NO education, if i was a FANATIC about religion, and if my mom got shot by a gun, plus if i was seeing violence everyday next to me, i would say " you americans!!!". Really, it's not that they "hate" you, it's just that IGNORANT people can't think clearly. They think; oh well, they have cars, they have houses, they have food, they have a family, they have confort, AND LOOK WHAT I HAVE! I have nothing...! And when all this happens, it's easy when someone yells "US is the reason of why all you are in such conditions!!!", the ignorant people will believe him.
It's the kind of things that makes thiefs go rob banks and people. The "spread" of richness between people brings violence. That's what i see here in my country. And the more the ignorant the people are, the more dangerous this gets.
Afeganistan people HAVE NOTHING TO LOOSE. Americans can build 100 building like WTC. I don't think that an attack from terrorists should affect all americans lives, and the whole world, even though i reckon the terrible attacks US has suffered.
btw, did you know that nostradamus predicted exactly THAT EVENT predicting the 3 world war? I don't know how to translate his words. Has this been publicized by the press?
Well... What do you think about this all? |
|
|
| raverchikadee |
| I say no. The innocent people of afgan. are the ones that are ging to be paying for it... not the person/ people that caused this horrific destruction. I think that American should just go for the people resposible for this. Just going and bombing some country just because they think that they are the cause of this doesnt sound like the logical idea to me. Its only been 5 days after the event... what might they have found in that time such as evidence that was able to lead to afgan. being the cause of this. I think they should take serious thought and consideration before acting upon any country as a whole. |
|
|
| Fraggle |
no
i think they proved in gulf war, even smart bombs kill innocent people
...& there have been enuff killings of innocent people...why should there be more, if even under the pretence of revenge or justice?
even in gulf war...they knew exactly who the enemy was...yet never managed to take out saddam & killed iraqi civilians...in ny...they still aren't 100% positive about osama yet, so there's even more chance the real threat will not be removed & they may evade the us strikes anyway :(:(:(
please don't kill more people, no matter what the reason :(:(:(
|
|
|
| Juricimo |
all right...bomb - yes, but only the terrorist stuff, leave the civilians out of it, though many civilians will lose their lives as well.:(
>JM< |
|
|
| TranceCluber |
| I say Yes.... there has to be something to be done...and Military action has to be done..... cuz if nothing if going to done from this tragady then more innocent people die in the long run......so i say go distroy this terrosists and the goverments that harbor them..... thats all i have to say..... and avoid killing innocent people which should be always done in any act of war..but the truth is that life isnt as pretty as we want them to be..... military action has to be done .... and innocent lives will be lost on both sides.... thats the fact of life..if there was a easier way to dealing with this ..then life would be easier ..but the fact is there isnt.... so i dont many innocent people dieing and i hope not many will. But like i said there has to some military action done to prevent deaths of innocent people from these terrosists ..... there might be innocent peopel dieing from these bombings but it will 100x as much innocent people dead if these terrorists do another act as they did...and they will if we dont stop them. |
|
|
| worldover2k1 |
| Without a doubt, yes. However, no one wants innocents to die. |
|
|
| Lilith |
| I think you should at least learn to spell the name of the country that you intend to dump millions of dollars of bombs on. |
|
|
| TranceCluber |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lilith
I think you should at least learn to spell the name of the country that you intend to dump millions of dollars of bombs on. |
ohh come on listen to your self ...learn to spell the name of the country before u bomb them...what the hell does the spelling have to do with any political issues a country may have over another...and what does someone else miss spelling have to do with that either ...AFGANISTON,AFGANISTAN, AFGANISTEN,AFGAN,etc.etc.etc |
|
|
| Coup |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lilith
I think you should at least learn to spell the name of the country that you intend to dump millions of dollars of bombs on. |
I just changed it to the correct spelling, sorry for the pain it must have caused to see a word mispelt, no wonder you post so little, proberly hurts to read these forums. |
|
|
| Lilith |
No, usually its the aggression, sexism, intollerance and lack of intelligence from a lot of members that makes me post very little in the way of anything.
Its not that I dont want too.
But its not like you care anyway.
But I figure people can at least afford the time to spell a country correctly and re-read what the write before posting, poor spelling is not an indication of intelligence but it wont get a point across very well.
Back to the question at hand, a war isnt going to be won by airpower alone, they will eventually have to send in troops and that going to mean lots of dead people from both sides. Optimistically it will remove the Taliban eventually as a political force.
Realisticaly if history is to be learnt by, they wont get all of them and they'll just sit up in their hills emerging to wreck things, terrorise and cause mischeif for how many generations it takes before they dont care anymore.
Killing Bin Laden wont end terrorism, at best it will be a form of bloodletting for all the americans that died, I suppose I can see a point to it all because it will help them get back their pride and a place to vent their anger.
As an effective way of combatting further attacks? I dont think so, terrorists have very little in the way to lose when it comes to bombing them, you might squish the odd one and blow up a $5 tent but its like trying to kill ants with a sledgehammer. Ultimately they'll just rack off to their hole in the ground and wait until you go away, they are too dispersed to effectively corner and I dont think the magnitude of the problem has yet to sink in to most people.
Ive traveled though places like this, places like Iraq and Iran in the mid eighties before they went to hell and other worse places like Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia that have had massive civil disturbances and I was unfortunate enough to be forcibly evicted from Zimbabwe 2 years ago. My family lost a house, 2 cars, $75000 and consider myself lucky compared to some.
I find it very narrow minded that people can sit back in the comfort of their room and make judgements on the problems going on in other people's backyard. Most of you havent seen, smelled and looked on human suffering with your own senses, you get the politically correct and desensitised version on the TV and newspaper.
You see large numbers, never faces and our governments call them 'problems', they dont call them lives. They are people just like all of you that are caught up in the middle and I think its unfortunate that the general consensus of the rest of the world is that a 'few eggs are going to be broken'.
And those lives are going to be broken as a result of bombings.
There has to be some action to remove the taliban and get rid of Bin Laden, but I dont think it should be done with big armies and bombs.
2 cents from a refugee. |
|
|
| boy_luke_y2k |
after what i have heard today:
osama bin laden has threatened nuclear warfare, i think its about time serious action was taken and not just using daisy-cutter bombs, but actually achiving what is necessary, and the allies occupying one city is a start. look back at ww2, if u have seen the band of brothers or saving private ryan or anything like that, this cost of lives has been minimal and nothing compared to say like the battle of the somme in ww1. |
|
|
| FASTDJMP3 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lilith
No, usually its the aggression, sexism, intollerance and lack of intelligence from a lot of members that makes me post very little in the way of anything.
Its not that I dont want too.
But its not like you care anyway.
But I figure people can at least afford the time to spell a country correctly and re-read what the write before posting, poor spelling is not an indication of intelligence but it wont get a point across very well.
Back to the question at hand, a war isnt going to be won by airpower alone, they will eventually have to send in troops and that going to mean lots of dead people from both sides. Optimistically it will remove the Taliban eventually as a political force.
Realisticaly if history is to be learnt by, they wont get all of them and they'll just sit up in their hills emerging to wreck things, terrorise and cause mischeif for how many generations it takes before they dont care anymore.
Killing Bin Laden wont end terrorism, at best it will be a form of bloodletting for all the americans that died, I suppose I can see a point to it all because it will help them get back their pride and a place to vent their anger.
As an effective way of combatting further attacks? I dont think so, terrorists have very little in the way to lose when it comes to bombing them, you might squish the odd one and blow up a $5 tent but its like trying to kill ants with a sledgehammer. Ultimately they'll just rack off to their hole in the ground and wait until you go away, they are too dispersed to effectively corner and I dont think the magnitude of the problem has yet to sink in to most people.
Ive traveled though places like this, places like Iraq and Iran in the mid eighties before they went to hell and other worse places like Angola, Mozambique, Ethiopia that have had massive civil disturbances and I was unfortunate enough to be forcibly evicted from Zimbabwe 2 years ago. My family lost a house, 2 cars, $75000 and consider myself lucky compared to some.
I find it very narrow minded that people can sit back in the comfort of their room and make judgements on the problems going on in other people's backyard. Most of you havent seen, smelled and looked on human suffering with your own senses, you get the politically correct and desensitised version on the TV and newspaper.
You see large numbers, never faces and our governments call them 'problems', they dont call them lives. They are people just like all of you that are caught up in the middle and I think its unfortunate that the general consensus of the rest of the world is that a 'few eggs are going to be broken'.
And those lives are going to be broken as a result of bombings.
There has to be some action to remove the taliban and get rid of Bin Laden, but I dont think it should be done with big armies and bombs.
2 cents from a refugee. |
i have to say it is the best analysis i've seen on this boards , i totally agree with you Lilith |
|
|
|
|
