[ShepherdsDog]

$1:

We didn't remove a foreign force, and I don't think the current group is nearly as bad as the Taliban. The Taliban did help attack NATO.

Osama and others of his ilk helped to bankroll the taliban who gave him and al qaeda shelter. Yet the West is condemned for supporting the current Afghan regime. Yes, it's a bad thing that the regime we are supporting is initiating egalitarian policies, allowing women to actually have a role in Afghan society again.

[Tricks]

Scape Scape:

[popcorn]
For the record WTG Tricks!

WTG? Is that insulting?

[ShepherdsDog]

Way to Go.....shit you're developing novaitis

[Tricks]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Way to Go.....shit you're developing novaitis

Yeah I really have to stop talking to her. Blond is rubbing off.

[DerbyX]

$1:

We are training them. They might be under some foreign commanders. But as a whole, we are not controlling them. They are not forced to do anything.

??? The nazis trained the vichy guys while their countryman trained in England.

The fact is that we have autonomous authority in Afghanistan and put on every facade possible to distract from this.

In addition, its my opinion that the very people we give authority to are just as bad as those we oppose.

$1:

I'm not putting political spin. I haven't even mentioned politics. This has nothing to do with party lines. Are we forcing the Afghani army to do things? The fact that some sketchy shit happens kinda proves we aren't lording over them.

By "politics" I don't mean our own politics but the general meaning of the word.

We are "coercing" some dozen or so warring tribes into our belief of a political system in order to fight against people they were already fighting against and the results show.

If they were ever going to sort it out with out help they would have done so long ago.

In the time since we invaded our country raised an entire army, navy, and airforce that helped defeat the massive nazi war machine.

Its their country and their responsibility.

$1:

That made no sense to me. I'm going to chalk it up to me being tired. Yes the Taliban for the most part were domestic. So what? Wasn't the Vichy government French?

So what? So its their own poeple deciding to live like that.

Its no different then a superior force invading us and putting ...... that natives in charge or the fucking bloc and then legitimaizing it that they have the support of 'the people".

The situation in Afghanistan is directly related to the BS cold war between the east and west and continued interference by us.

We sorted our own affairs out though it tooks us many mahy decades. We demand others do so in months and then invade when they don't adopt our beliefs in a short span.

$1:

I would have agreed with you 6 years ago had their fight not spilled over the edge. When they got NATO involved, then it became our problem too. Because if we let them fight it out, there is no telling if it might boil over again.

Thats crap. NATO has less reason to get involved the my ferrets. They are simply looking for ways to drum up buisness so to speak.

Funny how you think we shouldn't let them "fight it out"when our side demands everybody stay out of their affairs.

Imagine QC seperating and we move to assert control over teerritory we call ours and then foreign forces move in, occupy our country, and decide where the borders will be.

$1:

True. We went in to get Osama. But we have stayed there for another reason. That's why young Canadians are still volunteering to go.

I disagree. In fact a recent report showing recruitment of people with a less then stellar viewpoint of muslims was becoming a problem.

This is no different then bono demanding tha CDNS send billions to africa.

We need to look after ourselfs, secure our own borders and respect others above all else.

.

[RUEZ]

Wow.

[weaponeer]

DerbyX DerbyX:

$1:

And we aren't controlling.

C'mon man. Look beyond the spin. Do you honestly think we removed a foreign force and that we aren't propping up a group just as bad?

Do you have any idea what your talking about. Just as bad, don't be an idiot. Are you Afghanistan, have you seen, smelled or cleaned the talibs handy work??

I have been here since April!!! The current gov't does not hang people for playing music, it does not cut off the hands of little girls in school learning to write their name, and does not take their teachers, tie them to poles and skin then alive for teaching girls.

C'mon man, sounds like another leftard who is all for human rights, freedom of speech and equality until he actually has to pick up a gun and defend it.....

[Tricks]

DerbyX DerbyX:

??? The nazis trained the vichy guys while their countryman trained in England.

The fact is that we have autonomous authority in Afghanistan and put on every facade possible to distract from this.

There is a difference between having authority and using it. Sure we could boss them around. And that would make us an occupying force, but we choose not to. Instead we work with them, not over them.

$1:

In addition, its my opinion that the very people we give authority to are just as bad as those we oppose.

Agree to disagree? Really no way to prove either way.

$1:

By "politics" I don't mean our own politics but the general meaning of the word.

We are "coercing" some dozen or so warring tribes into our belief of a political system in order to fight against people they were already fighting against and the results show.

Isn't bringing warring tribes together a good thing? And as for them fighting the Taliban, it's about time they stood up for themselves.

$1:

If they were ever going to sort it out with out help they would have done so long ago.

The same could have been said for the Soviet Union or Germany. They were oppressed and didn't have the will to do anything. We are giving them that will.

$1:

In the time since we invaded our country raised an entire army, navy, and airforce that helped defeat the massive nazi war machine.

Its their country and their responsibility.

What? You say we helped take down the nazis, but then say it's their responsibility? You lost me.

$1:

So what? So its their own poeple deciding to live like that.

Not really. Stalin was Russian, but Russians didn't welcome communism with open arms. There was turmoil. They just couldn't do anything about it. Taliban is no different.

$1:

Its no different then a superior force invading us and putting ...... that natives in charge or the fucking bloc and then legitimaizing it that they have the support of 'the people".

We didn't "put" anyone in charge. They voted. Regardless of what you think, that was a nationally recognized election.

$1:

The situation in Afghanistan is directly related to the BS cold war between the east and west and continued interference by us.

Yeah it definitely has it's part. Because we fucked up earlier means we should just not try again? Remember the old road runner cartoons? Where the coyote would keep getting owned. I always thought why he would try a few of those ideas again, but just do something different, and fix what he fucked up on last time. Bad analogy, sue me.

$1:

We sorted our own affairs out though it tooks us many mahy decades. We demand others do so in months and then invade when they don't adopt our beliefs in a short span.

Didn't you just say we invaded for Osama?

$1:

Thats crap. NATO has less reason to get involved the my ferrets. They are simply looking for ways to drum up buisness so to speak.

9/11 is looking for a reason? Sorry, I like to think that if another country was key in attacking an allied nation, we have every right to go in their and slap those fuckers around.

$1:

Funny how you think we shouldn't let them "fight it out"when our side demands everybody stay out of their affairs.

Who is their? The west or the Taliban? For the West, we don't generally kill a few thousand people when we do it.

$1:

Imagine QC seperating and we move to assert control over teerritory we call ours and then foreign forces move in, occupy our country, and decide where the borders will be.

Not really seeing the comparison. Not sure the point either. Have you had a few?

$1:

We need to look after ourselfs, secure our own borders and respect others above all else.

.

We are securing our borders. We do respect others. We just don't respect people who kill our countrymen and allied nation's countrymen.

[DerbyX]

weaponeer weaponeer:

DerbyX DerbyX:

$1:

And we aren't controlling.

C'mon man. Look beyond the spin. Do you honestly think we removed a foreign force and that we aren't propping up a group just as bad?

Do you have any idea what your talking about. Just as bad, don't be an idiot. Are you Afghanistan, have you seen, smelled or cleaned the talibs handy work??

I have been here since April!!! The current gov't does not hang people for playing music, it does not cut off the hands of little girls in school learning to write their name, and does not take their teachers, tie them to poles and skin then alive for teaching girls.

C'mon man, sounds like another leftard who is all for human rights, freedom of speech and equality until he actually has to pick up a gun and defend it.....

Leftard eh?

What gov't did the Taliban revolt against? What did they do?

What happens beyond the propaganda you post?

How does any of this change the fact that we are still invading a foreign land?

Imagine all those natives who resent us getting help from a foreign power giving them power and then pointing to how their conditions on reserves is better?

Ohhh thats different. Its only our natives. Hell we even voted against giving them rights.

Its amazing how many one-sided people there are.

Its not our place to police afghanistan and certainly not out place to enforece our beliefs ont hem.

Remember that before somebody enforces their beliefs on us.

[ShepherdsDog]

$1:

Not really. Stalin was Russian, but Russians didn't welcome communism with open arms. There was turmoil. They just couldn't do anything about it. Taliban is no different.

Ask the millions of russians and other ethnicities who died at his hands. why do you think many ukranians(jews and gypsies not included for obvious reasons) welcomed the germans as liberators rather than invaders?

Therin too is the difference in Afghanistan. The role of NATO soldiers has changed since their initial deployment in Afghanistan. Where they originally came to police, under UN sanction, they now liberate.

$1:

1. to set free, as from imprisonment or bondage.
2. to free (a nation or area) from control by a foreign or oppressive government.
3. to free (a group or individual) from social or economic constraints or discrimination, esp. arising from traditional role expectations or bias.

From dictionary.com


I thought 'we are our brother's keeper' was one of the rallying calls of the left?

[weaponeer]

Yes,

LEFTARD!!!

What did they do, the harbored AQ, allowed them a base of operations for 9/11. They are a mid evil insane religious organization hell bent on controlling Afghanistan and promoting hatred and jihad. If you saw their handy work up close, you would not be spouting this crap......

As for our Indians, what the hell does that have to do with Afghanistan?? Our Indians are doing fine, they have roads, hospitals, shopping malls, power boats, the internet, good hunting rifles, nice clothes, cars, snowmobiles, casinos, air conditioning, cell phones etc.... Yes, the white man really did them wrong, we should all feel sorry for them, perhaps we could arrange a pity parade!!

Your not in Afghanistan, and have no idea what is going on here, just spouting of nonsense you probably heard from some college prof whose never had a real job.... you want to know what;s going on, get over here, see for yourself. It is real easy to criticizes from the safety of Canada!!!

[Scape]

DerbyX DerbyX:

Its not our place to police afghanistan and certainly not out place to enforece our beliefs ont hem.

Remember that before somebody enforces their beliefs on us.

The UN didn't think so. NATO didn't think so. Our biggest allies and long time trading partners didn't think so.

The Afghans can effectively police themselves as well as the Pakistanis. That is to say not at all. I would rather some regional power like India assert local autonomy over the area AKA Syria did over Lebanon at least that would be some measure of control. How can you have order without stability? You have to start somewhere and even thugs like Capone had some hierarchy of control. Would I rather the reigns be held by domestics? Of courses but as soon as the reigns are passed they will be taken by force by thugs. Until that can be corrected this is the only option or we invite a den of terrorists to develope unchecked.

[DerbyX]

$1:

There is a difference between having authority and using it. Sure we could boss them around. And that would make us an occupying force, but we choose not to. Instead we work with them, not over them.

1) Thats not quite true. As long as they don't bother us doing what we want we let them piss on the side of the road.

2) Thats arguably the problem as so many have posted that the actual problem is islam, something we do everything to avoid there.

$1:

Isn't bringing warring tribes together a good thing? And as for them fighting the Taliban, it's about time they stood up for themselves.

No it isn't. Its a bad idea toforce people who havne't sorted out there problems togeather.

Yugoslavia? Hailed as a triumph. Didn't work out so good.

People need time to sort their problems out and let go of hate.

$1:

The same could have been said for the Soviet Union or Germany. They were oppressed and didn't have the will to do anything. We are giving them that will.

Trouble is you are comparing political vs religious ideology. People will far easier abandon political ideology over religious.

That being said we didn't invade the USSR and it fell on its own accord.

[

$1:

quote] What? You say we helped take down the nazis, but then say it's their responsibility? You lost me.

I'm saying that the afghanis should have raised a viable security force/army long ago because we were able to raise an army in less time.

Its about willpower and commitment. We could still be there 10 years from now saying the same thing over and over.

If they were going to do it they would have done it by now. Full stop.

$1:

Not really. Stalin was Russian, but Russians didn't welcome communism with open arms. There was turmoil. They just couldn't do anything about it. Taliban is no different.

The bolshek revolution happened. We migbht also debate the criminal actions by our own founding fathers.

Regardless, the history is black and white. We fucked up by opposing a real working gov't by helping thugs overthrown the legit gov't. We called them freedom fighters then.

Its all BS politics. We know nothing but BS in that region and I doubt any Canadian would like it if some afghani got to decide our english-frencg dispute.

Canadians are demanding more authority then we concede to to others.

We are werong in this case.

$1:

We didn't "put" anyone in charge. They voted. Regardless of what you think, that was a nationally recognized election.

No they didn't. Karzai was put in power.

Now its time for me to go but its been enjoyable. I'll leave with "we aren't defending our country there". thats the spin they use to win support.

We are enforcing US policy there, the same US policy that created the situation in the first place.

Enjoy Uni. Talk to ya later.

[Tricks]

Pfft. If I'm not going to get a response, I'm so not wasting my time typing a reply

See ya round.

[2Cdo]

OPP OPP:

Durandal Durandal:

OPP OPP:

Everyone fighting is tagged TALIBAN, whatever that means. Must have something to do with terrorsit. You must understand how ridiculous this branding is?!

They are combattants. Ennemy combattants. Taliban.

What does that mean? Do you know why they coined "enemy combatant"? It's to circumvent the U.N charter. Otherwise they'd have to grant these soldiers the rights that any other nation would grant U.S or Canadian soldiers for that matter.

Just for your information, the term has been around for years, even before 9/11. Soldiers wear readily identifiable uniforms, enemy combatants don't. Soldiers who wear other nations uniforms or civilian clothes were often shot immediately during WWII, both both sides. Nice try though.

Also, according to you we are fighting locals, who we then call Taliban or al Queda. If that is the case why is it that the majority of prisoners taken by NATO troops are not Afghans but Tajiks, Uzbecks, Pakistanis, etc?

I thought we were fighting just poor oppressed farmers.