"Nobody Is Winning In Afghanistan"--General McChrystal
-
FootwedgeOh...and the actual outlayment of the wars in Iraq/Afghanistam/Pakistan are about to exceed 1 trillion to date.
http://www.costofwar.com/ -
jmogYou can't count "future" costs, at least not yet.
BCS said the Afghan war has WASTED, as in past tense, he was indeed false, and he wasn't even close.
I'm not 100% for or against the war in Afghanistan to be honest. I'm in the "we needed to retaliate" crowd but also the "we should have found a way to pay for it" crowd if that makes sense. -
jmog
About to, but haven't yet.Footwedge wrote: Oh...and the actual outlayment of the wars in Iraq/Afghanistam/Pakistan are about to exceed 1 trillion to date.
http://www.costofwar.com/
Also, he said Afghan, not combined. He also said trillionS, not trillion.
So he was way off. -
Glory Days
neither was spain and i dont think great britain was either was either to begin with.I Wear Pants wrote: Al Qaeda isn't some super organized system. We've wrecked most of their shit.
Canada, Australia, etc weren't in their homelands to begin with. Why would they get attacked?
because South Korea and Canada are both some of the largest of the non US forces in the middle east right now.cbus4life wrote:
Why the eff would they even consider attacking South Korea and Canada?Glory Days wrote:
look who is conducting those attacks. its like the minor league of al qaeda or isnt even related to al qaeda. so yes, we are preventing attacks. aslong as we are keeping the organizations that can really cause damage to us from attacking us, we are doing our job over there.dwccrew wrote: My question to those that still support the wars in the mid east is this, what is the plan? What is the timeline? When will it be time to end military involvement in the mid east? Do you really believe that the troops being in the mid east is preventing attacks here in the US? Clearly it is not, attacks are still being attempted, we are just better prepared than before 9/11. HAving troops in the mid east is doing nothing to prevent attacks here. What is preventing attacks here is a more alert defense system within the US.
I can guarantee this, as long as we have troops on a large scale in the mid east, we will continue to have terrorists attempt to attack the US.
Another question is this: why after terrorists attacked in Spain and in England have those 2 countries not engaged in war with any other country? Note, those countries have not had any more subsequent terrorist attacks, than the US has, since each countries initial attack.
what about all the other countries in the world that arent supporting us in Iraq or Afghanistan yet still get bombed? Indonesia, India, Russia, Morocco, Tunisia.
what about Canada, Australia, Poland, and South Korea? why havent they been attacked? they are supporting us in the middle east. -
ptown_trojans_1
Spain was, Al-Andalus, until 1492.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Andalus -
Thread Bomber
Osama has won.... He won by wrecking our economy, and he will continue to win.
As a matter of perspective, The US is the terrorist. Every time we kill one of the Afganies, We create a marter and 10 will follow the cause.
The only plausible end game is to turn this wasteland into a burnt piece of glass. The survivors will be there 10,000 years from now waiting to defend Allah and their homeland. -
Glory Days
haha so i take it England was attacked because of the Crusades? man, those terrorist sure do go back a ways to get their revenge.ptown_trojans_1 wrote: Spain was, Al-Andalus, until 1492.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Andalus -
Footwedge
No wonder Columbus got the fuck out of there.ptown_trojans_1 wrote: Spain was, Al-Andalus, until 1492.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Andalus -
CenterBHSFan
I've got a book about Queen Isabella/King Ferdinand and it talks "somewhat" of this. Very interesting read, concerning that and when it was basically put a stop to.ptown_trojans_1 wrote: Spain was, Al-Andalus, until 1492.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al-Andalus -
dwccrew
Glory Days wrote:
look who is conducting those attacks. its like the minor league of al qaeda or isnt even related to al qaeda. so yes, we are preventing attacks. aslong as we are keeping the organizations that can really cause damage to us from attacking us, we are doing our job over there.dwccrew wrote: My question to those that still support the wars in the mid east is this, what is the plan? What is the timeline? When will it be time to end military involvement in the mid east? Do you really believe that the troops being in the mid east is preventing attacks here in the US? Clearly it is not, attacks are still being attempted, we are just better prepared than before 9/11. HAving troops in the mid east is doing nothing to prevent attacks here. What is preventing attacks here is a more alert defense system within the US.
I can guarantee this, as long as we have troops on a large scale in the mid east, we will continue to have terrorists attempt to attack the US.
Another question is this: why after terrorists attacked in Spain and in England have those 2 countries not engaged in war with any other country? Note, those countries have not had any more subsequent terrorist attacks, than the US has, since each countries initial attack.
what about all the other countries in the world that arent supporting us in Iraq or Afghanistan yet still get bombed? Indonesia, India, Russia, Morocco, Tunisia.
what about Canada, Australia, Poland, and South Korea? why havent they been attacked? they are supporting us in the middle east.I Wear Pants wrote: Al Qaeda isn't some super organized system. We've wrecked most of their shit.
Canada, Australia, etc weren't in their homelands to begin with. Why would they get attacked?
I Wear Pants and Cbus bring up great points.cbus4life wrote:
Why the eff would they even consider attacking South Korea and Canada?Glory Days wrote:
look who is conducting those attacks. its like the minor league of al qaeda or isnt even related to al qaeda. so yes, we are preventing attacks. aslong as we are keeping the organizations that can really cause damage to us from attacking us, we are doing our job over there.dwccrew wrote: My question to those that still support the wars in the mid east is this, what is the plan? What is the timeline? When will it be time to end military involvement in the mid east? Do you really believe that the troops being in the mid east is preventing attacks here in the US? Clearly it is not, attacks are still being attempted, we are just better prepared than before 9/11. HAving troops in the mid east is doing nothing to prevent attacks here. What is preventing attacks here is a more alert defense system within the US.
I can guarantee this, as long as we have troops on a large scale in the mid east, we will continue to have terrorists attempt to attack the US.
Another question is this: why after terrorists attacked in Spain and in England have those 2 countries not engaged in war with any other country? Note, those countries have not had any more subsequent terrorist attacks, than the US has, since each countries initial attack.
what about all the other countries in the world that arent supporting us in Iraq or Afghanistan yet still get bombed? Indonesia, India, Russia, Morocco, Tunisia.
what about Canada, Australia, Poland, and South Korea? why havent they been attacked? they are supporting us in the middle east.
GD- you bringing up how S. Korea and Canada haven't been attacked only solidifies the idea that countries that don't meddle in mid east don't get attacked. S. Korea and Canada may have the largest non-U.S. forces, but they are a couple of hundred troops. The US and Britain are like 98% of the coalition.
Also, these attacks that have been stopped are not because of our military prescence in the mid east, it's because of agencies here being more on guard than pre-9/11. Yes, some of the recent attacks are "minor league", but they have also caught and prevented bigger planned attacks. It has nothing to do with our military in the mid east. We have crushed AQ, time to bring the troops home.
I ask again, why does AQ and the like of them hate us? If we pulled out of the mid east, do you think we would still be attacked. -
I Wear PantsYes, they think that the terrorists will forever hate us for being American.
Which is a fucked up world view to have (another reason we're looked down on is our holier than thou attitude towards everyone) and is in all likelihood wrong.
They hate use because we're meddling in affairs that aren't ours to meddle in. We are the closest thing left to imperialists. -
Glory Days
Yes. We are still allies with Israel. and Al-Qaeda will never be able to have any power as long as we are a super power and able to support the middle east against terrorism.dwccrew wrote: I ask again, why does AQ and the like of them hate us? If we pulled out of the mid east, do you think we would still be attacked.
and AQ has been crushed, but not destroyed. even though you may not be able to technically destroy something like AQ, leaving will only allow them to rebuild and attack again. -
majorspark
First off I don't give two shits what Usama believes. We have the right as a sovereign nation to have alliances with any nation we choose. We have alliances with many nations with diverse religious beliefs. We have a presence on many of these allies soil. You don't see British, German, Japanese, Taiwanese, or South Korean malcontents wanting to kill Americans. Nor do you see the enemies of the aforementioned nations we have aligned with having nutcakes out their in mass wanting to kill Americans.Footwedge wrote: Usama himself has been very claer as to why he wants to kill Americans. He wants to kill Americans for their one sided allegiance to Israel and the presence of our military all over the Middle East.
Clearly the issue in most cases is our alliance with Israel. We stand as a roadblock in their quest to drive the Jews into the sea. If the former airbase in Riyadh had been used to drop bombs on Tel Aviv, Usama and his ilk would be singing our praises.
Turkey, a muslim nation, has a military alliance with the US. Any nation laying a glove on them is laying a glove on us (article 5). The nation of Israel does not even enjoy this close alliance.
That being said, I am quite weary of entangling foreign alliances. They are necessary at times. They are however a two edged sword and should not be indefinite. They can drag us into a brutal slaughter or prevent us from one.
No nation or group has any just cause to kill Americans because we as a sovereign nation in this violent world decide that by our sovereign will we will form an alliance or allegiance with another nation.
I would react like you or any other civilized human being. I would resist honorably to the death if necessary. I would not however engage in video taped beheadings of my adversaries. I would not target my fellow countrymen who after a military defeat of my nation cooperated with the occupying force in order to move on with life and provide for their families.Footwedge wrote: I just wonder how many people on this blog site would actually be passive if a foreign country with armed forces patrolled our streets and told us how to run our government.
If like the Germans and Japanese in WWII or the southern states in the civil war, I found continued resistance and killing to be futile, I would eventually submit to the greater power. Only if as in the aforementioned cases, my fellow compatriots were treated justly and humanly and self governance would be returned to my countrymen within a reasonable amount of time I would lay down my arms. -
I Wear Pants
But...they're attacking because we're over there.Glory Days wrote:
Yes. We are still allies with Israel. and Al-Qaeda will never be able to have any power as long as we are a super power and able to support the middle east against terrorism.dwccrew wrote: I ask again, why does AQ and the like of them hate us? If we pulled out of the mid east, do you think we would still be attacked.
and AQ has been crushed, but not destroyed. even though you may not be able to technically destroy something like AQ, leaving will only allow them to rebuild and attack again.
If AQ is something that will always be around doesn't it make sense to not waste money and lives for a pointless war? -
I Wear Pants
So we have the right to just run roughshod over anyone and they are automatically the bad guys for using gorilla/brutal tactics that are their only real way to fight. We are too large an enemy for almost any single country to fight. Is everyone just supposed to bow to our will then?majorspark wrote:
First off I don't give two shits what Usama believes. We have the right as a sovereign nation to have alliances with any nation we choose. We have alliances with many nations with diverse religious beliefs. We have a presence on many of these allies soil. You don't see British, German, Japanese, Taiwanese, or South Korean malcontents wanting to kill Americans. Nor do you see the enemies of the aforementioned nations we have aligned with having nutcakes out their in mass wanting to kill Americans.Footwedge wrote: Usama himself has been very claer as to why he wants to kill Americans. He wants to kill Americans for their one sided allegiance to Israel and the presence of our military all over the Middle East.
Clearly the issue in most cases is our alliance with Israel. We stand as a roadblock in their quest to drive the Jews into the sea. If the former airbase in Riyadh had been used to drop bombs on Tel Aviv, Usama and his ilk would be singing our praises.
Turkey, a muslim nation, has a military alliance with the US. Any nation laying a glove on them is laying a glove on us (article 5). The nation of Israel does not even enjoy this close alliance.
That being said, I am quite weary of entangling foreign alliances. They are necessary at times. They are however a two edged sword and should not be indefinite. They can drag us into a brutal slaughter or prevent us from one.
No nation or group has any just cause to kill Americans because we as a sovereign nation in this violent world decide that by our sovereign will we will form an alliance or allegiance with another nation.
I would react like you or any other civilized human being. I would resist honorably to the death if necessary. I would not however engage in video taped beheadings of my adversaries. I would not target my fellow countrymen who after a military defeat of my nation cooperated with the occupying force in order to move on with life and provide for their families.Footwedge wrote: I just wonder how many people on this blog site would actually be passive if a foreign country with armed forces patrolled our streets and told us how to run our government.
If like the Germans and Japanese in WWII or the southern states in the civil war, I found continued resistance and killing to be futile, I would eventually submit to the greater power. Only if as in the aforementioned cases, my fellow compatriots were treated justly and humanly and self governance would be returned to my countrymen within a reasonable amount of time I would lay down my arms. -
Glory Days
no, just use diplomacy. oh wait, we are the only country that is supposed to use that, not everyone else in the world.I Wear Pants wrote:
So we have the right to just run roughshod over anyone and they are automatically the bad guys for using gorilla/brutal tactics that are their only real way to fight. We are too large an enemy for almost any single country to fight. Is everyone just supposed to bow to our will then?majorspark wrote:
First off I don't give two shits what Usama believes. We have the right as a sovereign nation to have alliances with any nation we choose. We have alliances with many nations with diverse religious beliefs. We have a presence on many of these allies soil. You don't see British, German, Japanese, Taiwanese, or South Korean malcontents wanting to kill Americans. Nor do you see the enemies of the aforementioned nations we have aligned with having nutcakes out their in mass wanting to kill Americans.Footwedge wrote: Usama himself has been very claer as to why he wants to kill Americans. He wants to kill Americans for their one sided allegiance to Israel and the presence of our military all over the Middle East.
Clearly the issue in most cases is our alliance with Israel. We stand as a roadblock in their quest to drive the Jews into the sea. If the former airbase in Riyadh had been used to drop bombs on Tel Aviv, Usama and his ilk would be singing our praises.
Turkey, a muslim nation, has a military alliance with the US. Any nation laying a glove on them is laying a glove on us (article 5). The nation of Israel does not even enjoy this close alliance.
That being said, I am quite weary of entangling foreign alliances. They are necessary at times. They are however a two edged sword and should not be indefinite. They can drag us into a brutal slaughter or prevent us from one.
No nation or group has any just cause to kill Americans because we as a sovereign nation in this violent world decide that by our sovereign will we will form an alliance or allegiance with another nation.
I would react like you or any other civilized human being. I would resist honorably to the death if necessary. I would not however engage in video taped beheadings of my adversaries. I would not target my fellow countrymen who after a military defeat of my nation cooperated with the occupying force in order to move on with life and provide for their families.Footwedge wrote: I just wonder how many people on this blog site would actually be passive if a foreign country with armed forces patrolled our streets and told us how to run our government.
If like the Germans and Japanese in WWII or the southern states in the civil war, I found continued resistance and killing to be futile, I would eventually submit to the greater power. Only if as in the aforementioned cases, my fellow compatriots were treated justly and humanly and self governance would be returned to my countrymen within a reasonable amount of time I would lay down my arms. -
Glory Days
yeah we are over there, but for various reasons. not because we are trying to rule any of those countries. how come its only terrorist who dont want us there? oh thats right, because the countries we are there for are either getting rich from us or using us for security.I Wear Pants wrote:
But...they're attacking because we're over there.Glory Days wrote:
Yes. We are still allies with Israel. and Al-Qaeda will never be able to have any power as long as we are a super power and able to support the middle east against terrorism.dwccrew wrote: I ask again, why does AQ and the like of them hate us? If we pulled out of the mid east, do you think we would still be attacked.
and AQ has been crushed, but not destroyed. even though you may not be able to technically destroy something like AQ, leaving will only allow them to rebuild and attack again.
If AQ is something that will always be around doesn't it make sense to not waste money and lives for a pointless war? -
Footwedge
The topic of Turkey deserves it's own thread. Google Sibel Edmonds and you will find that the alliance with Turkey is fraught with clandestine drug operations between the poppy runners in Afghanistan, the middlemen druggies in Turkey, and our own CIiA. Nothing but more intervention to garnish lucrative contraband money.majorspark wrote:
Do we tell Britain, Germany, Japanese or South Koreans how to run their daily operations? Have we ever propped up puppets to siphon oil profits away from their poverty stricken people? Your analogy is flawed.Footwedge wrote: Usama himself has been very clear as to why he wants to kill Americans. He wants to kill Americans for their one sided allegiance to Israel and the presence of our military all over the Middle East.
First off I don't give two shits what Usama believes. We have the right as a sovereign nation to have alliances with any nation we choose.
Never said that we didn't. I have simply explained to you the reasons why bin Ladin attacks the West. You act as if I'm sympathizing with him. I find that highly offensive.
What is annoying......thje pro war party members that will never acknowledge any motive at all for these extremists. Well they have motives. And the motives are erroneously castigated by neocons that they hate us for our wealth or our way of life. This thinking is absolute bullshit.
We have alliances with many nations with diverse religious beliefs. We have a presence on many of these allies soil. You don't see British, German, Japanese, Taiwanese, or South Korean malcontents wanting to kill Americans. Nor do you see the enemies of the aforementioned nations we have aligned with having nutcakes out their in mass wanting to kill Americans.
Yeah...they will shove Isreal into the Red Sea and push their 200 nukes into the water right with them. And I suppose Isreal, who has more UN violations than any other country on the planet is blameless too.Clearly the issue in most cases is our alliance with Israel. We stand as a roadblock in their quest to drive the Jews into the sea. If the former airbase in Riyadh had been used to drop bombs on Tel Aviv, Usama and his ilk would be singing our praises.
Turkey, a muslim nation, has a military alliance with the US. Any nation laying a glove on them is laying a glove on us (article 5). The nation of Israel does not even enjoy this close alliance.
And one day, these tangling alliances could very well lead to the lightning rod for WW III. Why is it that Japan, Germany, France and Italy remained deathly passive in the war business since the mid late 50's?That being said, I am quite weary of entangling foreign alliances. They are necessary at times. They are however a two edged sword and should not be indefinite. They can drag us into a brutal slaughter or prevent us from one.
Could it be that they became sick and tired of having their cities incinerated?
[/quote]No nation or group has any just cause to kill Americans because we as a sovereign nation in this violent world decide that by our sovereign will we will form an alliance or allegiance with another nation.
No sovereign nation will admit any responsibilty for harming Americans because we have 1500 active nuclear weapons....and...we are the only counbtry on earth that has used them...and used them on civilian populations without a shred of remorse. -
majorspark
No. Not sure how you get that out of my post. We should only do so if the cause is just. Unless in the case if immediate necessary defense, only congress can declare war and allow the federal government the power to run roughshod over anyone.I Wear Pants wrote: So we have the right to just run roughshod over anyone
Guerrilla tactics against military targets are justifiable. Brutal beheadings of military or civilian adversaries is unacceptable. Suicide bombings of civilian markets or places of religious gatherings unacceptable. If this is my only real way to fight I will honorably and respectfully surrender.I Wear Pants wrote: they are automatically the bad guys for using gorilla/brutal tactics that are their only real way to fight.
No. Again where do you get this from my post? There is no greater world power in the history of mankind than that of the USA. There is also no world power in history that has exercised its power more benevolently than that of the USA. No world power in the history of mankind has done more for those in need outside of their borders. Feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, freeing the oppressed.I Wear Pants wrote: We are too large an enemy for almost any single country to fight. Is everyone just supposed to bow to our will then?
The USA is not perfect and has many flaws. Yes at times we have wielded our sword when we should not have. No nation in the world will ever be able to claim perfection. They all stink to a degree. Some a lot more than others. But in the history of this violent depraved world our nation has withheld its sword far more than any in history that possessed such great power. This world is a dirty place and sometimes we get a little dirt on us as well. -
dwccrew
I think it is a bit different to compare the countries you have mentioned to mid east countries. First off, we are welcome in the nations you have listed. We are not welcome in many of the mid east nations. They do not want us there, simple as that. We set up puppet governments in those countries to allow us access to military bases, but many citizens do not want us there.majorspark wrote:
First off I don't give two shits what Usama believes. We have the right as a sovereign nation to have alliances with any nation we choose. We have alliances with many nations with diverse religious beliefs. We have a presence on many of these allies soil. You don't see British, German, Japanese, Taiwanese, or South Korean malcontents wanting to kill Americans. Nor do you see the enemies of the aforementioned nations we have aligned with having nutcakes out their in mass wanting to kill Americans.
I agree, our allegiance with Israel is a huge issue with many of the extremists. Which is why we should heed Thomas Jefferson's advice (possibly the most brilliant of the founding fathers) and have trade, commerce and relations with all nations; allegiance with none. Israel could take the entire middle east on if they wanted to, they don't need us as their backup.majorspark wrote: Clearly the issue in most cases is our alliance with Israel. We stand as a roadblock in their quest to drive the Jews into the sea. If the former airbase in Riyadh had been used to drop bombs on Tel Aviv, Usama and his ilk would be singing our praises.
You mention the former base in Riyadh. I stress former. They do not want our military presence there.
We are not allowed to use Turkish airbases anymore. They have kicked us out. When I was still enlisted Turkey was one of our rotations until they gave us the boot. They are another country that does not want our military presence in their territory.majorspark wrote: Turkey, a muslim nation, has a military alliance with the US. Any nation laying a glove on them is laying a glove on us (article 5). The nation of Israel does not even enjoy this close alliance.
I agree that no nation has just cause to kill innocent Americans, but they don't feel they are unjustly doing anything. One thing I remember learning while I was in the military is "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter." They feel they are oppressed by the U.S. and that they are justified fighting. I don't agree at all with the death of any innocent civilians of any nation.majorspark wrote: No nation or group has any just cause to kill Americans because we as a sovereign nation in this violent world decide that by our sovereign will we will form an alliance or allegiance with another nation.
I agree with you that many of these groups have taken things to the absolute extreme. I often wonder (and believe) that we are partly to blame for creating such groups. We have made it much easier for these groups to recruit and grow in numbers by our involvement in the mid east.majorspark wrote: I would react like you or any other civilized human being. I would resist honorably to the death if necessary. I would not however engage in video taped beheadings of my adversaries. I would not target my fellow countrymen who after a military defeat of my nation cooperated with the occupying force in order to move on with life and provide for their families.
I think this is where the problem lies. What is a reasonable amount of time? Look at the trouble that is going on with the recent Iraqi elections. Now an Iranian friendly government is very possibly getting put into place. No matter what our intentions were, it is my opinion that they will be in vain. The people over there will always allow religion to be apart of government which will always lead to turmoil.majorspark wrote: If like the Germans and Japanese in WWII or the southern states in the civil war, I found continued resistance and killing to be futile, I would eventually submit to the greater power. Only if as in the aforementioned cases, my fellow compatriots were treated justly and humanly and self governance would be returned to my countrymen within a reasonable amount of time I would lay down my arms.
Afghanistan is a whole other issue. That country has a corrupt government and is no where near a condition of the US allowing them to self goern completely, even after 9 years of us being there. -
Footwedge
You think only terrorists want us the gell out of their countries?Glory Days wrote:
yeah we are over there, but for various reasons. not because we are trying to rule any of those countries. how come its only terrorist who dont want us there? oh thats right, because the countries we are there for are either getting rich from us or using us for security.I Wear Pants wrote:
But...they're attacking because we're over there.Glory Days wrote:
Yes. We are still allies with Israel. and Al-Qaeda will never be able to have any power as long as we are a super power and able to support the middle east against terrorism.dwccrew wrote: I ask again, why does AQ and the like of them hate us? If we pulled out of the mid east, do you think we would still be attacked.
and AQ has been crushed, but not destroyed. even though you may not be able to technically destroy something like AQ, leaving will only allow them to rebuild and attack again.
If AQ is something that will always be around doesn't it make sense to not waste money and lives for a pointless war? -
dwccrew
This is simply not accurate. It is not just terrorists that want us out of their countries. There are citizens I have met (being of Lebanese descent, I have met many many many people from the Middle East and have family from there) from those nations that, while don't share the blood lust for the US, do not want the US meddling in their affairs.Glory Days wrote:
yeah we are over there, but for various reasons. not because we are trying to rule any of those countries. how come its only terrorist who dont want us there? oh thats right, because the countries we are there for are either getting rich from us or using us for security.I Wear Pants wrote:
But...they're attacking because we're over there.Glory Days wrote:
Yes. We are still allies with Israel. and Al-Qaeda will never be able to have any power as long as we are a super power and able to support the middle east against terrorism.dwccrew wrote: I ask again, why does AQ and the like of them hate us? If we pulled out of the mid east, do you think we would still be attacked.
and AQ has been crushed, but not destroyed. even though you may not be able to technically destroy something like AQ, leaving will only allow them to rebuild and attack again.
If AQ is something that will always be around doesn't it make sense to not waste money and lives for a pointless war?
Do not confuse the blood lust of terrorists with the peaceful people of the mid east wanting us out. They want us out, but are not trying to kill us.
Here is some articles about the people's will:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/26/AR2006092601721.html
http://www.alternet.org/world/51624/In Baghdad, for example, nearly three-quarters of residents polled said they would feel safer if U.S. and other foreign forces left Iraq, with 65 percent of those asked favoring an immediate pullout, according to State Department polling results obtained by The Washington Post.
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-03-03/the-iraqis-want-us-out-now/
Interesting transcripts from NPR about how Afghans feel about Karzai's trip to the US and how they would like US military operations to cease in their country.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126661662
More turmoil between Karzai and the US
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N01160403.htm -
I Wear PantsGlory Days wrote: yeah we are over there, but for various reasons. not because we are trying to rule any of those countries. how come its only terrorist who dont want us there? oh thats right, because the countries we are there for are either getting rich from us or using us for security.
It isn't only terrorists that don't want us there. At best it's a 50/50 split on opinion.Q8. From today’s perspective and all things considered, was it absolutely right, somewhat right, somewhat wrong, or absolutely wrong that US-led coalition forces invaded Iraq in spring 2003?
Absolutely Right:
Mar 08: 21%
Aug 07: 12%
Feb 07: 22%
2005: 19%
2004: 20%
Somewhat Right:
Mar 08: 28%
Aug 07: 25%
Feb 07: 25%
2005: 28%
2004: 29%
Somewhat Wrong:
Mar 08: 23%
Aug 07: 28%
Feb 07: 19%
2005: 17%
2004: 13%
Absolutely Wrong:
Mar 08: 27%
Aug 07: 35%
Feb 07: 34%
2005: 33%
2004: 26%
Refused/Don't Know:
Mar 08: -
Aug 07: -
Feb 07: -
2005: 4%
2004: 13%
http://www.globalpolicy.org/images/pdfs/0308opinion.pdf -
majorspark
I did not say you were sympathizing with bin ladin. If I thought you were I would have said so. I give you the benefit of the doubt that you are being a realist as to the actions of the players in the world. Whether you agree or disagree with their actions. I do understand your point in regards to bin ladin. I as you are trying to be a realist when it comes to how the world is run. On some points you and I disagree.Footwedge wrote: Never said that we didn't. I have simply explained to you the reasons why bin Ladin attacks the West. You act as if I'm sympathizing with him. I find that highly offensive.
I still do not give two shits what him or his ilk thinks. I don't believe our foreign policy should be affected by what nutbags like him believe.
I don't disagree with you 100%. I think the main issue is our support for Israel. If we stood against Israel they would look past any of our perceived shortcomings in their eyes.Footwedge wrote: What is annoying......thje pro war party members that will never acknowledge any motive at all for these extremists. Well they have motives. And the motives are erroneously castigated by neocons that they hate us for our wealth or our way of life. This thinking is absolute bullshit.
As for the issue of wealth there is a natural human flaw to covet the wealth of others and their way of life. This flaw and the jealousy of others course in life is universal. It has been the cause of many wars throughout history. It is used to mold political power in our country. It is also used to mold power in other nations as well. The human flaws of jealousy and covetousness can be quite powerful tools.
In the case of Japan and Germany yes we did at on point. That faded away over the years and power was returned to them. One could say that the initial rulers of Germany and Japan were puppets of the US government. In fact I remember during the Iraq war people calling Tony Blair a US puppet. The analogy stands and is not flawed.Footwedge wrote: Do we tell Britain, Germany, Japanese or South Koreans how to run their daily operations? Have we ever propped up puppets to siphon oil profits away from their poverty stricken people? Your analogy is flawed.
On a side note do you not think that our subsidizing of a foreign governments defense provides us a little say in their affairs? Also after 65yrs I think it may be high time we stop the practice of defense subsidies in these nations.
Please the UN is a joke and has little credibility. Israel is not blameless as is no nation on this earth. Including our own. We would make Israel look like a kindergarten playground.Footwedge wrote: Yeah...they will shove Isreal into the Red Sea and push their 200 nukes into the water right with them. And I suppose Isreal, who has more UN violations than any other country on the planet is blameless too.
When our out of control spending forces us to abandon our influence around the world, including Israel, you will see those nations that our power held back move on them with aggressive force regardless of how many perceived nukes they posses.
Start a thread and prove it. Until then my point stands, an attack on Turkey(a muslim country) by a foreign power is an attack on the US (article 5).Footwedge wrote: The topic of Turkey deserves it's own thread. Google Sibel Edmonds and you will find that the alliance with Turkey is fraught with clandestine drug operations between the poppy runners in Afghanistan, the middlemen druggies in Turkey, and our own CIiA. Nothing but more intervention to garnish lucrative contraband money.
Could be. Like I said entangling foreign alliances are a two edged sword. I agree 100% as to the passive motives of Japan, Germany, France, and Italy. The US has yet to feel their pain. Remember though in the case of Japan, Germany, and Italy their pain was brought about by their nations aggressive actsFootwedge wrote: And one day, these tangling alliances could very well lead to the lightning rod for WW III. Why is it that Japan, Germany, France and Italy remained deathly passive in the war business since the mid late 50's?
I would not say we have not a shred of remorse for our use of nuclear weapons. That is incorrect. I think it is disingenuous to say our leaders were somehow blood thirsty warmongers lusting to unleash nuclear hell.Footwedge wrote: No sovereign nation will admit any responsibilty for harming Americans because we have 1500 active nuclear weapons....and...we are the only counbtry on earth that has used them...and used them on civilian populations without a shred of remorse.
That decision weighed heavily on the hearts of our leaders of the time. Perhaps you would have been one to opt for the institution of operation downfall. Which would have resulted in 100's of thousands of US casualties with dead over 100 thousand. Add to that millions of Japanese civilian and military casualties with dead in the hundreds of thousands. Let me put it this way I would hate to have lived in Harry Truman's shoes.
I'll source wikipdia but there are far more grim casualties of operation downfall out there. I find the numbers I cited within reason leaning on the conservative side considering the casualty rates of the pacific campaign and the mindset of the Japanese people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Downfall
I may not be posting here today as my grandfather fought in the pacific islands and would have had to fight his way through mainland Japan. Hundreds of thousand of Japanese people were spared by the quick and abrupt end by our use of nuclear power.
That being said I despise nuclear weapons. They are a fearsome and horrible power. I wish they did not exist. But unfortunately they exist and the world is a violent place. Even if they did not exist nations would still devise, and continue to do so, efficient ways of killing their fellow man. -
Glory Days
well, besides Turkey, no other country has made us leave. and although most of what we had in Saudi Arabia is gone, we still work with them and have a few personnel there. funny, they didnt even had to resort to terrorism to get us to leave.Footwedge wrote: You think only terrorists want us the gell out of their countries?