• 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!

Taliban leader in secret talks was impostor

Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Really? What kind of approach do you recommend? You seem to know more than the military so far.

More tallies in body bags would be a good approach.

Take the number of tallies we've killed, to date and triple it by July.

That'll make them sing a different tune.

yeah, I know, "they're not afraid to die, la, la, la, la-la". Well, if you kill off all the dudes that aren't afraid to die; what are you left with?
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

More tallies in body bags would be a good approach.

Take the number of tallies we've killed, to date and triple it by July.

That'll make them sing a different tune.

yeah, I know, "they're not afraid to die, la, la, la, la-la". Well, if you kill off all the dudes that aren't afraid to die; what are you left with?
Should we be more vicious than the Soviets were?
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

More tallies in body bags would be a good approach.

Take the number of tallies we've killed, to date and triple it by July.

That'll make them sing a different tune.

yeah, I know, "they're not afraid to die, la, la, la, la-la". Well, if you kill off all the dudes that aren't afraid to die; what are you left with?

I don't think anyone's argument against this is "they don't care," but rather "you're going to murder thousands of innocent people."

You're the military guy, so you tell me:
How do you identify a hostile? Shoot anyone who is armed? How do you reconcile that with belief in the 2nd amendment? After all, doesn't everyone have the right to defend themselves and their homes?
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Should we be more vicious than the Soviets were?

Yes, we should. However, we shouldn't annihilate total villages, as the Soviets did. This would be counter productive, obviously.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

I don't think anyone's argument against this is "they don't care," but rather "you're going to murder thousands of innocent people."

You're the military guy, so you tell me:
How do you identify a hostile? Shoot anyone who is armed? How do you reconcile that with belief in the 2nd amendment? After all, doesn't everyone have the right to defend themselves and their homes?

Eventually, the common folks will stop giving sanctuary to the tallies. When they figure out that the reason that they getting lit up, is because tallies are holeing up in their village, they won't let the tallies come around.

You know, common sense stuff.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Yes, we should. However, we shouldn't annihilate total villages, as the Soviets did. This would be counter productive, obviously.
Just do more of the same and hope for different results. Gotcha.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Just do more of the same and hope for different results. Gotcha.

Point out where I said that we should do more of the same? War is war and the only way to win a war, is to destroy the enemy's ability to wage war; and yes, civilian casaulties are a byproduct of that.

There were 15,000 French civilians killed during the Normandy invasion. Does that mean we shouldn't have invaded? No, it doesn't.

But, hey, we've been there for 9 years. Wanna be there for another 9 years? Keep doin' what we're doin'. Obviously, the half assed approach to warfare doesn't work.

Or, we can leave, now and in 10 years, go back to fix the **** we didn't fix the first time around; which would be repeating the same mistake the first time we got involved in Afghanistan.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Point out where I said that we should do more of the same?
You said that we should be more vicious than the Soviets. So you're saying we what has already been tried, but only more so.
War is war and the only way to win a war, is to destroy the enemy's ability to wage war
Where do these folks get there ability? Where do they get their resources?
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

You said that we should be more vicious than the Soviets. So you're saying we what has already been tried, but only more so.

I said that we should be more vicious, towards the enemy.

BTW, the Soviet strategy was working, until the U.S. got involved.

Where do these folks get there ability? Where do they get their resources?

If your point, is that these folks get their ability--resources--from the populace, then you must realize that the people that aid the enemy, are they enemy, themsleves. If they're already aiding the bad guys, that means that they already hate us. Do you think that because we don't kill them, that they will change their minds?
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

I said that we should be more vicious, towards the enemy.

If your point, is that these folks get their ability--resources--from the populace, then you must realize that the people that aid the enemy, are they enemy, themsleves. If they're already aiding the bad guys, that means that they already hate us.
And the enemy is the populace? I see.

Do you think that because we don't kill them, that they will change their minds?
Do you?
When we treat the populace as the enemy, will that change their mind?

BTW, the Soviet strategy was working, until the U.S. got involved.
Not from what I have read. They were having to clamp down on their own populace in the USSR to keep the bad news from getting around. They had to provide major security for their puppet government. They had to ship massive amounts of grain to Afghanistan to support the people in loyalist sectors.

There's actually quite a long list of problems that the USSR had from before they even sent the 1st of their invading army in.

If that's "working" I wouldn't wish it on the US.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Eventually, the common folks will stop giving sanctuary to the tallies. When they figure out that the reason that they getting lit up, is because tallies are holeing up in their village, they won't let the tallies come around.

You know, common sense stuff.

Pretty sure the opposite would happen. People tend to get pretty pissed off when you shoot up their homes. You'd be creating more "tallies."

You know, common sense stuff.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

I think this impostor story is funny. I wonde if him ordering a ham sandwich with Swiss on rye for lunch gave him away?

FTR, I am not sure that our rules of engagement etc have changed that much as a result of Obama's presidency. Perhaps I am wrong.

I believe the rules of engagement are being dictated to us by Karzai and yes president bush did go along with them costing some of our young people their lives.

If we are going to put our young people at risk Karzai needs to be told to sit down and shut the Hell up or we give not one ,more penny and remove his ass from office for stealing the last election.

Then give the military what they need to win this BS war in a week and then come home. If we can defeat Japan and Germany we can sure as hell beat a Cult all we need to do is fight this war like it is a war and not some sissified girlie fight.

I am tired of watching our young people die because some weak kneed limp wristed Liberals don't wasn't to upset the people who are aiding the enemy screw that.

Sorry but there is collateral damage in a war it's a fact deal with it.

Why do I think this impostor flap is funny? Because only Obama and other fools negotiate with terrorists.
 
Last edited:
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

I don't think anyone's argument against this is "they don't care," but rather "you're going to murder thousands of innocent people."

You're the military guy, so you tell me:
How do you identify a hostile? Shoot anyone who is armed? How do you reconcile that with belief in the 2nd amendment? After all, doesn't everyone have the right to defend themselves and their homes?

In Iraq the cilivans were told not to carry weapons. If they were armed, they knew better and was dealt with. See there is no Constitution at the time so there was NO RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS. Why do the people from the left cannot seem to understand this? Its quite simple.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Then give the military what they need to win this BS war in a week and then come home. If we can defeat Japan and Germany we can sure as hell beat a Cult al we need to do is fight this war like it is a war and not some sissified girlie fight.

I am tired of watching our young people die because some weak kneed limp wristed Liberals don't wasn't to upset the people who are aiding the enemy screw that.

Sorry but there is collateral damage in a war it's a fact deal with it.
You've knocked the stuffing out of that strawman. I don't think he'll be able to stand up after the drubbing you gave him.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

And the enemy is the populace? I see.

If the populace is aiding and abetting the bad guys, then, yes. They are.

Do you?
When we treat the populace as the enemy, will that change their mind?

It worked during WW2. An historical example for ya, there.

Not from what I have read. They were having to clamp down on their own populace in the USSR to keep the bad news from getting around. They had to provide major security for their puppet government. They had to ship massive amounts of grain to Afghanistan to support the people in loyalist sectors.

There's actually quite a long list of problems that the USSR had from before they even sent the 1st of their invading army in.

If that's "working" I wouldn't wish it on the US.


I was referring to the military strategy.

It's agreed that Communism doesn't work.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

Pretty sure the opposite would happen. People tend to get pretty pissed off when you shoot up their homes. You'd be creating more "tallies."

You know, common sense stuff.

By that logic, we created more Wehrmacht by attacking Germany, during WW2. Should we have stopped at Germany's borders and negotiated a peace??
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

I am telling you that this method was tried by the USSR. You're welcome to think it'll be different this time.

The two wars are different. The first they had assistance from the US, and the entire nation was opposed to the Communists.

.
 
Re: Taliban Leader in Secret Talks Was an Impostor

The first they had assistance from the US, and the entire nation was opposed to the Communists.
Both of these happened eventually, but weren't the case to start. Originally, there were some Afghanis who were in favor if communism of some sort. The heavy handed intrigues of the USSR pretty much put an end to that.
Since the Afghanis like the US so much better, they're prob'ly turning in the people who fight our troops in droves. I am sure that they will have turned in the last one by the time I finish this post.

Or perhaps the area has an age old tradition of despising foreign occupiers that dates back at least hundreds of years if not longer.

If they're not turning in the people who're fighting the US troops, perhaps their sympathies are not with the US as much you propose. Perhaps it may even be that Afghanis think they'd rather have us gone.
If you have evidence as to how many Afghanis want the US troops in their country, please provide it.
 
Back
Top Bottom