• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Head of the Pakistani Taliban Killed by US Drone Strike

why is the US droning PAKISTANI Taliban in PAKISTAN????? anyone wanna hazard a guess? 'cuz it beats the heck out of me,,,,

In other words, are we now in the bizness, of securing Pakistani's government?

how about this:

which is contradited by this:


what are we doing ? Is Afganistan's (AfPak apparently) sucessful transition determined by The Pakstani Taliban?

Apparently so, and if it is so, we got a hopeless task ahead of us..unless we want perpetual war in that region.




I am not going to post a link but if you do a little research into the history of Afghanistan you will find that war has been going on there long before the USA even existed.

Those people like to fight.
 
Define significant. A nuke? Yea, not going to happen. Ever.
Also define "encouragement". A single nuclear event, or total infinite conventional war?

I'm not familiar with which bombs are available n the US arsenal but there should be one that can spread devastation over an area that would dwarf anything the terrorists come up with. Significant would depend on the target. We are long past conventional wars. Those days of Declarations and Geneva Conventions have gone the way of the Redcoats.
 
I'm not familiar with which bombs are available n the US arsenal but there should be one that can spread devastation over an area that would dwarf anything the terrorists come up with. Significant would depend on the target. We are long past conventional wars. Those days of Declarations and Geneva Conventions have gone the way of the Redcoats.
Supposedly tried that. The MOAB, Mother of all Bombs. Dont really know what affect it had.GBU-43/B Massive Ordnance Air Blast - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
This is what you entered the conversation with. Who said it?

So you can't quote me saying that you said it? Playing coy with words is fun!

Do you not like it when people do it back to you? Awww, poor guy.
 
.. The premise of our tiff was that violence could in fact establish a more just order, and that it does not breed violence. ....

The results of a war can be for the best, but only when the better side wins. Preventing a recurrence and/or other types of continuing villence usually requires almost completely destroying the enemy (near genocide]. Sometimes war is a worthwhile endeavor, but not nearly as often as many people think.

"War does not determine who is right - only who is left." - Bertrand Russell
 
It seems you know nothing of Nicaragua either. Were you cheering for the Communists?

I don't support the use of terrorism no matter who does it.
 
So, here you have an enemy combatant who has bragged about being the mastermind of a suicide attack that killed several people, and because you support his mission, you consider him some sort of innocent civilian and bemoan his killing as "murder".

Got it.

You sure can't show much more support than that.

Your response has nothing to do with what I said. I never singled out a particular attack for criticism and I have not supported the mission of any terrorist, that is an outright lie. As I mentioned, I supported the raid to capture Bin Laden, which disproves your contention since he "bragged about being the mastermind of a suicide attack."

If you want to argue that your approve of:
  • secretly authorized remote control killing of terrorism suspects anywhere in the world
  • with no pretense of due process (fair trial]
  • with no intent to capture the suspect and put him on trial
  • even when many of them are not a threat to the USA because they are only involved in their own nation's civil war
  • away from a battlefield
  • when they are not an imminent threat which could justify a self defense claim
  • and with a probability that innocent civilians will be killed and wounded
  • and there is a strong chance that the resulting death of innocent civilians will create blowback

go ahead.

But your false claims about my sympathies do not support your argument, they are only a distraction from the truth about your opinion.

Will you still claim that such actions are acceptable if China uses a drone or other means to kill someone residing in the USA because they claim that they are a Tibetan terrorist?
 
Last edited:
I am not going to post a link but if you do a little research into the history of Afghanistan you will find that war has been going on there long before the USA even existed.

Those people like to fight.

yes. and let them fight among themselves, it isn't in our interest to try to stop their tribal ways.
Best thing about Afganistan is it's about as far away from the USA as possible
 
It seems you know nothing of Nicaragua either. Were you cheering for the Communists?

I believe that other nations have a right to self determination unless they engage in genocidal levels of violence. I believe that outside intervention in other nations internal affairs almost always causes more harm that benefit. I support remaining engaged with, and diplomatically and culturally influencing the behavior of troubled nations. The Sandinistas weren't great but they were better than the Somoza regime and the Contras.

"......The tactics used by the Sandinista government to fight the resistance have been criticized by some historians for their suppression of civil rights. On 15 March 1982, the Junta declared a state of siege, which allowed it to close independent radio stations, suspend the right of association and limit the freedom of trade unions. However, it has also been pointed out that the Human Rights Record of the Contras during the same period was far poorer, with documented cases of murder, rape, torture, used to terrorize the rural population. There is also evidence that the Contras engaged in destruction of schools, hospitals, and other infrastructure, in order to disrupt the social reform programs of the Sandinistas.[20] [21]

At the 1984 general election Ortega won the presidency with 67% of the vote and took office on 10 January 1985. A report by an Irish governmentary delegation stated: "The electoral process was carried out with total integrity. The seven parties participating in the elections represented a broad spectrum of political ideologies." The general counsel of New York's Human Rights Commission described the election as "free, fair and hotly contested." A study by the US Latin American Studies Association (LASA) concluded that the FSLN (Sandinista Front) "did little more to take advantage of its incumbency than incumbent parties everywhere (including the U.S.) routinely do......"
Wikipedai
 
With a variety of techniques by European Americans. Are there historic revisionists of this now also?

Are there historic revisionists that don't believe tribes of Native Americans wiped out other tribes of Native Americans in higher numbers and longer durations than anyone else?

Are there historic revisionists that don't believe Europeans wiped out tribes of Native Americans?

Are there historic revisionists that don't believe disease, starvation or exposure wiped out tribes of Native Americans?

Politically correct types make great historic revisionists. That's one of the reasons why I never believe anything they say or write.
 
Sure, but that is still no justification for endless war in the ME that we find ourselves in.

The bad guys have just as much say in it as we do. More, really.
 
I believe that other nations have a right to self determination unless they engage in genocidal levels of violence. I believe that outside intervention in other nations internal affairs almost always causes more harm that benefit. I support remaining engaged with, and diplomatically and culturally influencing the behavior of troubled nations. The Sandinistas weren't great but they were better than the Somoza regime and the Contras.

Really? What do you know about the Contras? Do you understand what 'Contra' means in Spanish and who they were fighting against? Do you believe 'self determination' is possible in a communist regime?

What you know about Nicaragua is nonsense. I've been in that area for 20 years, have Nicaraguan people in my employ, have heard all their stories and have checked them out with "The Black Book of Communism", written by former Communists. Understand that there was a Cold War going on for 45 years and what the first casualty always is..
 
The side which used Shock and Awe. Which side did you think it might be?

Given the number of new recruits Alqeada in Iraq got after that invasion, I'de say Alqeada got the most advantage. We got stuck there for 8 years fighting them.
 
So you can't quote me saying that you said it? Playing coy with words is fun!

Do you not like it when people do it back to you? Awww, poor guy.

Poor guy, thats all you got? You enter a conversation with a BS remark and cant back it up. Real adult like.
 
Given the number of new recruits Alqeada in Iraq got after that invasion, I'de say Alqeada got the most advantage. We got stuck there for 8 years fighting them.

That's because the war was not fought to win. It was fought to change the natural character of the country, something that should have been done after victory was complete.
 
Poor guy, thats all you got? You enter a conversation with a BS remark and cant back it up. Real adult like.
I'm purposely mocking your technique. So do you like your technique? Or do you think your technique is stupid?

Let us all know, please.
 
I like your technique of acting the ass. Seems to work well for you.

Awww, I guess you only like people hiding behind vague statements when you're the one making them. Let's all gather around and feel sympathetic for CRUE CAB!

I hope you learned an invaluable lesson here, you're welcome.
 
Awww, I guess you only like people hiding behind vague statements when you're the one making them. Let's all gather around and feel sympathetic for CRUE CAB!

I hope you learned an invaluable lesson here, you're welcome.
Sympathy from you? Hahaha, never need it.
 
Back
Top Bottom