Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Isn't that the same logic we heard 45 years ago, involving Vietnam? Does the United States as a nation have some kind of desire to keep jumping head-first into the same quicksand?
We're still scared by commies. Having said that, this should never have been about Taliban, but only Al Qaeda, just like it never was about Saudi Arabia even though most 9/11 terrorists were from there.
It would be interesting to see how many who oppose the war in Afghanistan today, supported it in 2001. The problem I had wasn't the war itself, but the politics and focus and not too long after that, the focus was completely gone and into Iraq (something I expected at least 2 years before it did).
Obviously, being respectful to foreigners in their land is still an alien term, if not forgotten. The change I want in this regard is that instead of counting enemies, we start counting friends. A grass root effort is needed to instill confidence in Afghanistan. The trickle down approach, by installing a puppet government doesn't work in the longer term. A proper understanding of the region, their culture and religion is required, and actions taken appropriately, not what you or I feel is right. This is exactly the kind of mess Bush created by promoting democracy in Palestine, opposing PLO and paving the way for Hamas to be where it is at.
This is seminar stuff, not foreign policy. A proper understanding of murder does not deter it.
Quote:
This is why Iran is a threat. This is why Pakistan never stabilized as a democracy. This is why Iraq should have been put in place in the 1980s after the well known atrocities, but we turned a blind eye and indirectly supported every step until... this is why we should have handled Al Qaeda in the 1980s before it turned against us. We're paying for the massive mistakes made by profound stupidity in previous administration.
Shoulda, coulda, woulda. You're crying over a whole dairy of spilt milk.
Quote:
like I said, this can't be treated as a traditional war. The parallel to Soviet invasion or our own stupidity that was Vietnam war is unwarranted for that region. This is no war. This is an effort to help the people, work with them, to restore sanity. Running away from this, waving white flag is only going to bite us back, big time. We can't leave a place that we ruined, in shambles.
Help WHICH people? THe opium poppy growers? The arms merchants? The relgious fanatics? The corrupt bureaucrats? that pretty much constitutes the population of Afghanistan.
Quote:
And I know this went above your head, but I must repeat, helping create a peaceful situation between Israel and Arab nations will indeed calm down a lot, but not all, of terrorism in the Muslim world. It would be a first big step towards reducing effectiveness of AQ and other terrorist networks. To think Pakistan has no terrorists is representative of how out of touch with reality some are.
Speaking of going over someone's head: how do you propose to solve the Israeli-Arab conundrum? The whole world would like your answer to that one, which for some reason has eluded the rest of us.
Quote:
But, it won't be easy... and that is why ideologues need not apply.
You mean like the ideologues in Afghanistan, Iran, Palestine, and Israel? Sorry. They don't need to apply. They're already in charge.
This is seminar stuff, not foreign policy. A proper understanding of murder does not deter it.
Help WHICH people? THe opium poppy growers? The arms merchants? The relgious fanatics? The corrupt bureaucrats? that pretty much constitutes the population of Afghanistan.
Speaking of going over someone's head: how do you propose to solve the Israeli-Arab conundrum? The whole world would like your answer to that one, which for some reason has eluded the rest of us.
You mean like the ideologues in Afghanistan, Iran, Palestine, and Israel? Sorry. They don't need to apply. They're already in charge.
Country of origin for ideologues matters only as far as their beliefs. They all seem to believe in one size fits all and every situation. That is part of the whole problem.
I'm not sure if you've got something against seminar stuff, or if you maintain different standards as opposed to offering pragmatic solutions regardless of the place and time, but yes, being respectful would be staying out of others' personal business and operation of their country. You don't intrude and force your ways. It is fundamental to being respectful. But, you do make it clear that you're there, not to take over their beliefs. It wasn't a group of corrupt bureaucrats that killed thousands on American soil.
Israel-Arab issue may or may not be resolved, at least for the long term. But even some effort that shows fairness to both sides can go a long way towards building a proper relationship. "You're either with us or them" rhetoric has to stop. People are not stupid, more so, when they happen to be at the receiving end. It is one thing to cry out loud from top of a mountain, another to be wearing their shoes. This won't be easy, but unless you've got something against complex solutions that affect us in every way, I don't see why you would be opposed to the idea and contribute to it. I certainly would and am in the process of sending a whole set of ideas to White House.
Country of origin for ideologues matters only as far as their beliefs. They all seem to believe in one size fits all and every situation. That is part of the whole problem.
Well, of course. And they're in charge in all the countries you've mentioned.
Quote:
I'm not sure if you've got something against seminar stuff, or if you maintain different standards as opposed to offering pragmatic solutions regardless of the place and time, but yes, being respectful would be staying out of others' personal business and operation of their country. You don't intrude and force your ways. It is fundamental to being respectful. But, you do make it clear that you're there, not to take over their beliefs. It wasn't a group of corrupt bureaucrats that killed thousands on American soil.
Okay, then we agree. Let's be respectful and stay the hell out of Afghanistan.
Quote:
Israel-Arab issue may or may not be resolved, at least for the long term. But even some effort that shows fairness to both sides can go a long way towards building a proper relationship. "You're either with us or them" rhetoric has to stop. People are not stupid, more so, when they happen to be at the receiving end. It is one thing to cry out loud from top of a mountain, another to be wearing their shoes. This won't be easy, but unless you've got something against complex solutions that affect us in every way, I don't see why you would be opposed to the idea and contribute to it. I certainly would and am in the process of sending a whole set of ideas to White House.
Nice of you to take the time. Let us know how that works out. Maybe you can explain things to Mr. Obama in terms that he can grasp.
//
So, regarding [GOP] support for Obama (and his plan):
* If they support him and he succeeds, they fail.
* If they oppose him and he succeeds, they fail.
* If they support him and he fails, they fail.
* But if they oppose him and he fails, they succeed.
//
//
So, regarding [GOP] support for Obama (and his plan):
* If they support him and he succeeds, they fail.
* If they oppose him and he succeeds, they fail.
* If they support him and he fails, they fail.
* But if they oppose him and he fails, they succeed.
//
That all depends to a large degree on one's definition of success and failure.
Unlike the Democrats on this Forum, who conveniently ignore the success of Bush's surge in Iraq while trumpeting their willingness to commit our forces to Afghanistan with niether a goal nor a strategy.
What success? Where are the weapons? Where is Osama?
Unlike the Democrats on this Forum, who conveniently ignore the success of Bush's surge in Iraq while trumpeting their willingness to commit our forces to Afghanistan with niether a goal nor a strategy.
What are you talking about? Each was/is a case of merely increasing the numbers of troops deployed? Fie on the "surge" talk. B.S. Deploying to Afghanistan in the first place wasn't a Dem idea. Plus, that's where al Qaeda was in the beginning, until Dubya attracted to so many into Iraq.
If it works then he gets credit for following in the footsteps of his predecessor once again.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
