Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
And who was supplying arms to the Taliban to help them beat the Russians?
Should NATO continue to be involved in Afghanistan?
- Thread starter Ron Earp
- Start date
And who was supplying arms to the Taliban to help them beat the Russians?
Jeff Young
GT40s Supporter
Charlie Wilson!
Pretty amazing when you read about the regime the Russians invaded to support -- anti-Islamic fundamentalist. Pro-women's rights. But "socialist," so when the Russkies when in to save IT from the Mujahadeen, we supported the Islamic militants.
Word up!
Pretty amazing when you read about the regime the Russians invaded to support -- anti-Islamic fundamentalist. Pro-women's rights. But "socialist," so when the Russkies when in to save IT from the Mujahadeen, we supported the Islamic militants.
Word up!
Yes Jeff, the world was different when the Russians were in Afthanistan. The cold war was going on and we won that one.
I like you consider myself centerist but conservative socially. I have had some of my greatest heated arguments with friends who are left of center, and actually hardened me with a more right wing view. I mentioned in a post elsewhere in GT40s that I come from Illinois, and have seen what the Democrats have done to the state.
Regarding Afthanistan, I heard on BBC Radio 4's morning news program some time back a listener's proposal about the NHS buying up the poppy fields in Afthanistan, and using the opium for medicinal purposes. As nothing happened, it makes one wonder just why the politicans are not interested. It makes one wonder if the will to stop the poppy crop is legimate.
Regarding the stability of Pakistan (a nuclear power) on Afthanistan's boarder, if we pull out, the Taliban will take control of Afghanistan, and then push into Pakistan (I head today on BBC Radio that Pakistan is now getting the word to look for Bin Laden).
I like you consider myself centerist but conservative socially. I have had some of my greatest heated arguments with friends who are left of center, and actually hardened me with a more right wing view. I mentioned in a post elsewhere in GT40s that I come from Illinois, and have seen what the Democrats have done to the state.
Regarding Afthanistan, I heard on BBC Radio 4's morning news program some time back a listener's proposal about the NHS buying up the poppy fields in Afthanistan, and using the opium for medicinal purposes. As nothing happened, it makes one wonder just why the politicans are not interested. It makes one wonder if the will to stop the poppy crop is legimate.
Regarding the stability of Pakistan (a nuclear power) on Afthanistan's boarder, if we pull out, the Taliban will take control of Afghanistan, and then push into Pakistan (I head today on BBC Radio that Pakistan is now getting the word to look for Bin Laden).
Pat Buckley
GT40s Supporter
LOL - and the USA is probably STILL supplying weapons to them for use against us.....Israeli middle man no doubt.
Color me cynical.
Pete,
no I haven´t. What I meant to say is that the poppy fields, though they must be destroyed to prevent Taliban funding, are only a minor threat compared to any nuclear potential in their hands.
I'd like to throw a curve ball in here. There are at least 1.3 billion barrels of oil proven to be in the ground in Northern Afghanistan in a substantial field. Experts have said that the geology of Afghanistan supports the view that there must be many more billions of barrels in the country as yet undiscovered.
Do we have another agenda going on here?
Do we have another agenda going on here?
Keith, it would be nice to bring some tech before you throw a turd in the punchbowl like that. Can you provide any links regarding real or potential oil reservoirs in Afghanistan?
I'm also surprised at the tone of the comments and the poll results. I think Marcus hit the nail on the head. If we bail out of Afghanistan in its current condition, then it's not hard to envision a chain of events that could result in a nuclear detonation in a US or Eurpoean city, courtesy of radical Islam and Pakistan's nuclear arsenal.
I assure you I did not throw that turd in the punchbowl - I couldn't find a clean end to pick it up with... 
Came across the item the other day when I was browsing for something else.
Oil in the country - pipleine across the country from Caspian sea (200 billion barrels) - George Bush in the oil business, there's loads if you Google. This page talks about a pipeline access but there are loads of pages concerning Afghanistan, oil and the economic and political implications..
After the complete bollocks our glorious leaders told us about Iraq - I'm not sure I will ever believe anything again, even if I see it with my own eyes.
Oil.. it's always about oil. If it wasn't, we'd be in the Congo stopping those murderous bastards from killing children or even finishing the job in Somalia, (No oil in either).
For example (many many others)
PS some people even pin the blame of 9/11 on a revenge attack because the Bin Laden/Bush oil consortium fell out over a deal. Who knows?
Oil.
The Debate: Did oil influence America's decision to invade Afghanistan? Were the true motives for war declared? Read our detailed report and sign the online petition for a public statement from the American government. TheDebate.org - Debating curren
Came across the item the other day when I was browsing for something else.
Oil in the country - pipleine across the country from Caspian sea (200 billion barrels) - George Bush in the oil business, there's loads if you Google. This page talks about a pipeline access but there are loads of pages concerning Afghanistan, oil and the economic and political implications..
After the complete bollocks our glorious leaders told us about Iraq - I'm not sure I will ever believe anything again, even if I see it with my own eyes.
Oil.. it's always about oil. If it wasn't, we'd be in the Congo stopping those murderous bastards from killing children or even finishing the job in Somalia, (No oil in either).
For example (many many others)
PS some people even pin the blame of 9/11 on a revenge attack because the Bin Laden/Bush oil consortium fell out over a deal. Who knows?
Oil.
The Debate: Did oil influence America's decision to invade Afghanistan? Were the true motives for war declared? Read our detailed report and sign the online petition for a public statement from the American government. TheDebate.org - Debating curren
Ahhh.... Now I get it. A version of the old "domino theory". Last used to justify Vietnam.
Crikey - Reds under the Beds all over again...!
BTW I haven't voted in this because the pull out option does require clarification. No we shouldn't be there but objectives are cloudy to say the least and the politicians stated objectives are wishy washy and conflicting. Just plain don't trust them.
I know one thing. If the serving Troops feel they are not being fully supported by popular opinion - it will greatly affect their morale and therefore their fighting efficiency. We have all seen what happens when a faction get sufficiently emboldened by a tangible reluctance in their opponents to engage and more men will be lost if the 'enemy' detects any weaknesses. The reason that it is drawn out and confused is that the 'rules of engagement' suck big time.
If we pull out too quickly then all those guys (and civilians) have died for nowt. If the public are to support their Troops then a clear set of achievable objectives must be published otherwise I do not feel I have enough information to make any decision save for those concerns I have stated.
Been there done that! The troops we have all lost would not be wasted if we save the lives of those yet to go and presently serving. As a longtime combat vet, this would become the accepted attitude of most military currently serving, and hopefully the family's of those lost. Get over it and get on with what needs to be done! There is no real government plan to expand, rebuild or withdraw. Perhaps oil is a hidden agenda, however, the USA has the natural resource and more untapped oil than all of the middle east. Why aren't we drilling here? Once again, follow the money! All of this is my personal opinion of course..
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
Fair enough Marcus, I agree, my apologies if I sounded a bit harsh.
Al, I am also a vet and I agree with your summation, public opinion does effect moral, but nowhere near as much as no clear objective and fighting with one hand tied behind your back by P.C.
Last edited:
IMHO, perhaps NATO could be a postive force in Afghanistan, but that doesn't seem to be the way the world sees it and it appears to be mostly the U.S.A. that is taking on this battle (and it gets even worse, as Obamma will address the nation tomorrow night on prime time to explain his reasoning for sending 30,000 more troops into battle in Afghanistan).
Common sense says to just withdraw and let these Islamic societies wage battle with each other. They've been doing it for milleniums, we can't stop them with just a few years' intervention. Soon as we leave, they'll be at it again. I'm also of the ( apparently minority) opinion that if George Bush, Sr. had not authorized a unilateral invasion of Iraq in the first place that the atrocities suffered by our civilian population on 9/11/01 would not have happened. It was, after all, Bin Laden's revenge on the U.S. for interfering in Iraq's civil war.
If this is not to be a shared quest, and it doesn't look like it is to me, I say "No", let's ALL leave them alone to beat the crap out of each other in bliss! I suspect that one rogue chieftan with an atomic bomb would galvanize the civilized world into action and that IMHO is what it will take to bring about a long term and lasting intervention/solution.
I reiterate my belief that the U.S. Congress should declare war on any country before we send combat troops into that country. I find it offensive that one person (namely, the president of the United States, any of them) can make the decision to commit 100,000 troops to a deadly conflict that far across the world when we won't even try to protect our own borders from the invasion from the south!!
Doug
Common sense says to just withdraw and let these Islamic societies wage battle with each other. They've been doing it for milleniums, we can't stop them with just a few years' intervention. Soon as we leave, they'll be at it again. I'm also of the ( apparently minority) opinion that if George Bush, Sr. had not authorized a unilateral invasion of Iraq in the first place that the atrocities suffered by our civilian population on 9/11/01 would not have happened. It was, after all, Bin Laden's revenge on the U.S. for interfering in Iraq's civil war.
If this is not to be a shared quest, and it doesn't look like it is to me, I say "No", let's ALL leave them alone to beat the crap out of each other in bliss! I suspect that one rogue chieftan with an atomic bomb would galvanize the civilized world into action and that IMHO is what it will take to bring about a long term and lasting intervention/solution.
I reiterate my belief that the U.S. Congress should declare war on any country before we send combat troops into that country. I find it offensive that one person (namely, the president of the United States, any of them) can make the decision to commit 100,000 troops to a deadly conflict that far across the world when we won't even try to protect our own borders from the invasion from the south!!
Doug
Pat Buckley
GT40s Supporter
Speaking to the idea that if we don't win in Afghanistan that the Taliban will take over and then Pakistan is next...etc.....
Perhaps a nuke detonated somewhere by the terrorists (or any of those shitty little countries) would be the wake up call the world apparently needs to deal with these people.
Surely they must know that if they do detonate one the world would come down on them very harshly?
Perhaps a nuke detonated somewhere by the terrorists (or any of those shitty little countries) would be the wake up call the world apparently needs to deal with these people.
Surely they must know that if they do detonate one the world would come down on them very harshly?
Ron Earp
Admin
I believe that this will cost the Democrats many seats in the Senate. Something like 35 seats are up for grabs in 2010 and "withdrawing from the Middle East" was definitely a campaign topic for the current administration. Since it is now clear they will not be able to deliver on that front I think their party will suffer some backlash. How much backlash is certainly debatable, but I imagine it will be significant.
You know, Ron, I agree and don't think that would be a bad idea. I'm tired of partisan politics, we watched the Republican party run amok for 8 years with a majority in both the House and the Senate and a Republican president, kind of like letting the kids loose in the candy store with nobody there to watch them. The Democrats have demonstrated that despite Obamma's rhetoric otherwise, they will have their way in the same candy store.
Let's give the Republicans back control of either the Senate or the House, then there will have to be some cooperation between the two dominant parties in order for ANYTHING to get done. The American public won't stand for gridlock for long, the politicians will be forced to work together for the good of America instead of for the good of their party's agenda, and maybe we will all have learned a valuable lesson.
Doug
So you think we can just destroy the poppy fields and leave and everything will be OK?
The local native population depends upon jobs in the poppy fields and in the production of opium/heroine for their livelihood. That's how they feed their familied, like it or not. Destroy the poppy fields and the production facilities and now you've got an extra angry population, angry at the US specifically! Once the US and NATO troops have left the Taliban get back to work stirring up anti-US sentiment - easily done when the jobs have all gone and the US was responsible for taking them away. It won't be a situation of warring in the middle east amongst middle east countries/regimes. The fight will be coming to our shores just like it did on September 11th. Vengence is a way of life there, and the Taliban are anxious to get back in control and arm the native population to a) terrorize the US on its own shores, and b) fund it all with opium production and worldwide distribution.
It's just a matter of time before a nuclear device is used on a foreign population by a terrorist-run rogue state such as an Afghanistan with no US/NATO presence. If the US and NATO withdrew on a short or medium time table I'd be very worried about the safety of my family.
The local native population depends upon jobs in the poppy fields and in the production of opium/heroine for their livelihood. That's how they feed their familied, like it or not. Destroy the poppy fields and the production facilities and now you've got an extra angry population, angry at the US specifically! Once the US and NATO troops have left the Taliban get back to work stirring up anti-US sentiment - easily done when the jobs have all gone and the US was responsible for taking them away. It won't be a situation of warring in the middle east amongst middle east countries/regimes. The fight will be coming to our shores just like it did on September 11th. Vengence is a way of life there, and the Taliban are anxious to get back in control and arm the native population to a) terrorize the US on its own shores, and b) fund it all with opium production and worldwide distribution.
It's just a matter of time before a nuclear device is used on a foreign population by a terrorist-run rogue state such as an Afghanistan with no US/NATO presence. If the US and NATO withdrew on a short or medium time table I'd be very worried about the safety of my family.
Pete McCluskey.
Lifetime Supporter
So if I make crack cocaine and my family depends on it for their livelihood that makes it O.K.?
The Taliban are already funding themselves from the world wide distribution of opium and heroin and by far the bulk of it comes from Afghanistan. Destroy the poppy fields and you put a stop to that caper.
And if that makes the local rag heads angry so be it. They already hate us anyway.
The Taliban are already funding themselves from the world wide distribution of opium and heroin and by far the bulk of it comes from Afghanistan. Destroy the poppy fields and you put a stop to that caper.
And if that makes the local rag heads angry so be it. They already hate us anyway.
Last edited:
Pat Buckley
GT40s Supporter
I think you could eliminate the word "mutual" from that....( my point earlier)
Similar threads
