Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415
Results 141 to 146 of 146

Thread: WikiLeaks Data Seem to Show Pakistan Helped Attack American Troops

  1. #141
    long standing member
    justabubba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Last Seen
    Today @ 10:37 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,157

    Re: WikiLeaks Data Seem to Show Pakistan Helped Attack American Troops

    Quote Originally Posted by MSgt View Post
    Ummmm...no. I suggest we leave "sometime."
    it should be noted that "sometime" has not yet occurred in germany, japan, okinawa, etc. there are few on this board who have lived when our military presence was not situated in those locales
    and these countries have rebounded from the devastation of war
    why should we expect anything else in iraq and now afghanistan ... and probably soon, pakistan, other than generations of spending American taxes to underwrite the military's presence in those nations to assure those nations' political processes are in sync with our own
    Your idea of when that is (NOW) has no study, no experience, and no real understanding behind it does it? Just a conclusion made from a reporter's notes and maybe a commentary or two as a base. Ever cracked a book about this region or culture? I doubt it.
    what pray tell, provides you with a better lens into that region than an other forum member? and if you have an actual advantage, from your posts on this matter, it would appear you have squandered it
    We haven't even tried to police the "entire frigging world." Do you know how big that is? How many troops do you think we have? This "world policemen" cliche is worn out.
    that term is worn out from use - because it so aptly describes our foreign policy for multiple generations. what we cannot achieve thru negotiation we compel by military might
    Another thing that is worn out is the ignorant -and yes it is entirely ignorant- idea that we have to create utopia in America before we can deal with the world's messes.
    you are invited to prove your point, otherwise we can dimiss this attempt at a rebuttal as a lame strawman. but prove me wrong and identify the posts where our members have insisted that we must attain utopia in the USA before we intervene in foreign affairs
    How much of a utopia existed in the U.S. at the advent of two World Wars and a nuclear Cold War? Maybe we should have gotten our women's rights messes out of the way before we dealt with Japanese imperialists and German Nazis huh? Maybe we should have gotten our homeless and civil rights movements out of the way before we stopped the Soviet expansion all over the world huh? Get over it and think for yourself.
    that is a poor example of what you would pretend to be intelligent thought
    no one is asserting that our other national interests should not be subordinate to the defense of our nation. but i suspect there are a significant number of us who would object to our nations expenditure of national treasure, reputation and the blood of our youth to initiate misguided offensive actions without purpose. that absence of stated clear purpose to engage in war prohibits the ability to recognize what constitutes victory in those costly military engagements
    But without thinking too hard on the matter, reflect hard on the condition of the environments that have threatened our way of life before we sent troops to fight.

    Was Europe healthy?

    Was the Pacific healthy?

    Was the Soviet's ideas healthy?

    Is the Middle East healthy?

    By all means let's wait until millions of Americans have to die before we deal with the unhealthy regions of the world so Kali can feel superior to the people who focus so intently on such matters.
    why is it America's responsibility to cure whatever might ail europe, the pacific, the soviet union, and/or the middle east? why should we not instead tend to our own affairs ... mind our own business ... effect a libertarian philosophy that they are able to do whatever they choose so long as their actions do not intrude on our nation's ability to do the same?
    we are negotiating about dividing a pizza and in the meantime israel is eating it
    once you're over the hill you begin to pick up speed

  2. #142
    Sage

    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Last Seen
    05-16-15 @ 02:32 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    12,537

    Re: WikiLeaks Data Seem to Show Pakistan Helped Attack American Troops

    this war, tragically, is a disaster

    we're sposed to be going after al qaeda but only 50 or so are actually IN afghanistan

    Leon Panetta: There May Be Fewer Than 50 Al Qaeda Fighters In Afghanistan

    the international terrorists are in pakistan

    and the isi is selling us out (surprised?)

    june was the deadliest month of this longest of all american wars, until july

    karzai's a crook AND a kook, there's billions of us dollars flying out of kabul

    Aid cash feared lost as billions is flown out of Kabul

    remember when the corrupt crackpot threatened to join the taliban?

    CBC News - World - Karzai threatens to join Taliban

    gibbs was "frustrated"

    so were our troops

    the outing by and of mcchrystal was a disaster

    the white house is all over the place on withdrawal, transition, thin out---it changes almost weekly

    holbrooke equivocates on dealing with the haqqani

    and john kerry on last sunday's fareed zakaria openly pondered the possibility of looking to iran to "help change the equation" in the region

    Video - Breaking News Videos from CNN.com

    no wonder our "allies" must all look out for #'s 1
    Last edited by The Prof; 08-06-10 at 09:41 PM.

  3. #143
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,051

    Re: WikiLeaks Data Seem to Show Pakistan Helped Attack American Troops

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    it should be noted that "sometime" has not yet occurred in germany, japan, okinawa, etc. there are few on this board who have lived when our military presence was not situated in those locales
    and these countries have rebounded from the devastation of war
    why should we expect anything else in iraq and now afghanistan ...
    Because you are capable of thought? I know I'm placing myself on a limb assuming as much, but places like Germany, Japan, and Okinawa aren't really wanting us to leave. Iraq and Afghanistan are like other locations. They are volatile and temporary. Vietnam was volatile, we left. The Phillipines wanted us gone, we left. South Korea wanted us to stay, we stayed. Somalia wanted us gone, we left. Cuba was left in Cuban hands a long time ago. Do I really need to invoke the history?

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    what pray tell, provides you with a better lens into that region than an other forum member? and if you have an actual advantage, from your posts on this matter, it would appear you have squandered it
    You may stand alone on this. It's not so much about an advantage as it is about getting informed beyond the television guru. Perhaps this is why you think your opinion counts so much. What have you actually studied about this region? My guess is nothing. You, like others, hang on the words of reporters swaying your opinons back and forth with no real understanding into perspectives, history, direction, tactics, or big picture diplomacy. Much of the opinions I see now about Afghanistan are the same I saw in regards to Iraq until they were proven wrong. Instead of learning, they merely spewed their garbage to the east towards the other war. In the end, they are clueless and guessing from one event to the next.


    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    that term is worn out from use - because it so aptly describes our foreign policy for multiple generations. what we cannot achieve thru negotiation we compel by military might
    So....every corner of the world has a soldier? Every border is manned by American troops? "World Policemen" is an ignorant term. It always has been since the original "Police Action" in Korea. There have been ethnic cleansings and genocides and conflicts artound the world that have had no American troop presence whatsoever. By the way, negotiations are failures for civilians. It's when they can't fathom their failure and inject those failures into military affairs that cause the big problems.

    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    You are invited to prove your point, otherwise we can dimiss this attempt at a rebuttal as a lame strawman. but prove me wrong and identify the posts where our members have insisted that we must attain utopia in the USA before we intervene in foreign affairs
    Thanks for the invite. As it so happend, the person this was directed to expressly stated "Esp. til we get things right on the homefront." And what determines when we are "right?" At what point are we permitted to protect foreign interests for sake of security? Perhaps you are not aware, but much of Congress was against intervention in Europe in regards to Germany on the grounds that it wasn't our business and that we have enough problems of our own to deal with. Notice how the same tired ass argument gets passed on?

    One easily gets the idea that until utopia occurs, Americans have local problems to deal with first no matter what the world is shaping up to be. Anything to legimtize cowardice to do what is right.


    Quote Originally Posted by justabubba View Post
    why is it America's responsibility to cure whatever might ail europe, the pacific, the soviet union, and/or the middle east? why should we not instead tend to our own affairs ... mind our own business ... effect a libertarian philosophy that they are able to do whatever they choose so long as their actions do not intrude on our nation's ability to do the same?
    I know your frustration. Been there, moved on. You are closed minded, but I'll give it a shot.....

    Because we have made it our responsibility for our own sake. In the beginning, it was Americans that fought a war with the Barbary Pirates (early 19th century) to secure our shipments through the Mediterranean Sea (the rest of the world benefitted). We enjoyed our isolation until the world dragged us out for a World War because Europe's celebration ofmisbehavior was effecting our economy and prosperity. We went back into isolation and refused to play in Europe's Second World War until it had to cost more Americans and treasure than it had to. At this point in history it wasn't hard for policy makers and tacticians to recognize that the health of foreign regions determined our security and our lives. Next was a Cold War where the Soviet Union had influence over most of the world before the mid 1950s. Minding our own business in the Middle East meant a Soviet controlled Middle East. After the Cold War, we continued tohave nothing to do with how their leaders treated them and widely minded our own business. 9/11 was yet another reminder that unhealthy regions will touch us. Today, an entire screwed up region of eastern Africa threatens shipping lanes. In a world that has been shaped around international trades, agreements, and pacts we can't afford to roll the dice and hope all is well. We don't have a big brother like others do.

    You want to mind your own business? So did many Americans until they were forced to die in even greater numbers because they waited too long to deal with an inevitable problem. Find someone else to referee the world. Problem is that Europe is too busy criticizing America for living and damn well not willing to step in to protect even themselves. We've tried minding our own business. They insist we don't.

    The libertarian philosophy is BS in a world full of villians. We deal with governments. Arab governments are free to do as they like. They are free to invite us to build a base. They are free to request our assistance to deal with regional bad guys. They are also free to govern their people as they see fit. But this is where we get to be the "evil" in some of their citizen's world. You call us global cops. The truth is that we are victims of our own hands off approach. We don't prescribe oppression and brutality. They do this to themselves. Even "our" Shah came with positive civil and social instructions. In the end, our enemies have still contested us and today they reach out and insist on war. Even today, our general theme is one of isolationalism. This idea that we don't mind our own business is yet another worn out cliche used by people who haven't a clue.
    Last edited by MSgt; 08-06-10 at 11:03 PM.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  4. #144
    Ayatollah of Rock n Rolla
    SgtRock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Deep in the Heart of Texas
    Last Seen
    11-27-17 @ 08:27 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    7,006

    Re: WikiLeaks Data Seem to Show Pakistan Helped Attack American Troops

    Damn I wish I could articulate the way you do. Thakyou for the depth and perspective you bring to this forum.
    When America is strong the world is calm, When America is weak tyrants and terrorist slaughter the meek. ~ SgtRock

  5. #145
    Meh...
    MSgt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Colorado
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 07:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    18,051

    Re: WikiLeaks Data Seem to Show Pakistan Helped Attack American Troops

    Quote Originally Posted by SgtRock View Post
    Damn I wish I could articulate the way you do. Thakyou for the depth and perspective you bring to this forum.
    Thanks. I try, though 'justabubba' thinks differently.

    MSgt
    Semper Fidelis
    USMC

  6. #146
    Angry Former GOP Voter
    Fiddytree's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:51 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    25,703

    Re: WikiLeaks Data Seem to Show Pakistan Helped Attack American Troops

    Quote Originally Posted by Kali View Post
    We have to leave sometime. Or do you suggest we just stay there forever and ever? We cannot police the whole frigging world and need to stop trying.

    Esp. til we get things right on the homefront.
    We will not leave Afghanistan for the foreseeable future, just in the same way that we have troops present throughout the world. Our mass forces will depart, but we will have a presence.

    The argument for "homefront" concentration is legitimate, but the United States' position in the world and at home is likewise influenced by foreign affairs. The homefront will never be fully understood and finalized, which though tempting to use as justification for not involving our resources, could likewise be a detriment for American interests. Our use of "policing the world" is multifaceted, and it is hard to make the argument that we are really trying to apply our Afghanistan and Iraq experiences to the rest of the world.

    Likewise, the appeal to American history with regard to isolationism has its own complications. The simplified truth was that we interfered when we felt we must, or when some felt we must. If one were to say we were isolationist until sometime in the 20th century, then that would be to overlook many policy decisions of the previous century before that. It is perfectly acceptable to suggest that there has mostly been an element....an inkling, that prolonged combat, and intentional attempts to hold the United States down with foreign policy choices should be avoided whenever possible, and yet there is also the acceptability of suggesting that it went the other way as well.
    Last edited by Fiddytree; 08-07-10 at 02:34 AM.
    Michael J Petrilli-"Is School Choice Enough?"-A response to the recent timidity of American conservatives toward education reform. https://nationalaffairs.com/publicat...-choice-enough

Page 15 of 15 FirstFirst ... 5131415

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •