• 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!

Afghanistan gains will be lost quickly after drawdown, U.S. intelligence (WAPO)

Montecresto said:
I don't believe they ever asked for any US help to begin with, thank you very much. Can the US now just stay home and stop ****ing with the ME already.
Click to expand...
No...they didnt ask for help. They didnt have to. The Afghanistan people were being ruled by a pretty ruthless bunch of ****heads that made the final fatal error of allowing a terrorist organization to openly operate within their borders. Oh...sure...Im certain you think they would be better off with the Taliban in charge still. Who needs art, culture. Women shouldnt be allowed to read anyway...just fills their heads with nasty thoughts about rights, progress, equality.

Hey...whats your favorite method of death for a woman that teaches a girl over the age of 7 to read? Do you prefer stoning or just the good old fashioned basic rifle to the back of the head thing?
 
VanceMack said:
No...they didnt ask for help. They didnt have to. The Afghanistan people were being ruled by a pretty ruthless bunch of ****heads that made the final fatal error of allowing a terrorist organization to openly operate within their borders. Oh...sure...Im certain you think they would be better off with the Taliban in charge still. Who needs art, culture. Women shouldnt be allowed to read anyway...just fills their heads with nasty thoughts about rights, progress, equality.

Hey...whats your favorite method of death for a woman that teaches a girl over the age of 7 to read? Do you prefer stoning or just the good old fashioned basic rifle to the back of the head thing?
Click to expand...

Again! Your making the argument that we were in A-Stan to improve the quality of life for women. That is a joke. 13 years, 2,000 lost US servicemen/women and a trillion dollars and nada.
 
Wait a minute, you mean Obama's strategy of Surging troops in but then having a politicized pull-out divorced from on the ground conditions is guaranteed to fail?

Say it Aint' So!


Oh. Wait. We've been saying this for years.
 
Montecresto said:
Again! Your making the argument that we were in A-Stan to improve the quality of life for women. That is a joke. 13 years, 2,000 lost US servicemen/women and a trillion dollars and nada.
Click to expand...
No I'm not. I made the argument very clearly. We were in Afghanistan because they allowed terrorists to use their country as a BO against us. That their citizens and especially women have better opportunities as a result of our intervention is just a happy bi-product.
 
Montecresto said:
Please dispense with the notion that the US went into A-Stan and spent blood and treasure to take out al Qaida and improve life for the Afghanistan people.

Before the U.S. invasion, before the Russian war, before the Marxist revolution, Afghanistan used to be a pretty nice place.
An astonishing collection of photos from the 1960s was recently featured by the Denver Post.

Remembering 1960s Afghanistan, the photographs of Bill Podlich

Read more: Astonishing Pictures Of Afghanistan From Before The Wars - Business Insider
Click to expand...

And? That does not prove your point. You did not explain, why you think that the two aims are incompatible.
 
joG said:
As I said elsewhere, the US has not been clear enough on how it will react to threats and disturbances. One of the main points in reacting is to make people understand that you will do, what you say you will do. You lose that stabilizer, if you haven't told the people, what you will do.
Click to expand...
that's a non sequitur.
We are pretty clear what we are "doing".
 
VanceMack said:
No...they didnt ask for help. They didnt have to. The Afghanistan people were being ruled by a pretty ruthless bunch of ****heads that made the final fatal error of allowing a terrorist organization to openly operate within their borders. Oh...sure...Im certain you think they would be better off with the Taliban in charge still. Who needs art, culture. Women shouldnt be allowed to read anyway...just fills their heads with nasty thoughts about rights, progress, equality.

Hey...whats your favorite method of death for a woman that teaches a girl over the age of 7 to read? Do you prefer stoning or just the good old fashioned basic rifle to the back of the head thing?
Click to expand...
So now we're supposed to not only nationbuild a "graveyard of the empires", but also change their way of life?

Wow. Pretty heavy agenda. In truth there has been some progress on women's rights, but it's upto the Afganis.
It is not our business to drag them out oftheir feudal society. All we are interested in, is degrading AQ
-eveerything else is just "missioncreep"
 
annata said:
So now we're supposed to not only nationbuild a "graveyard of the empires", but also change their way of life?

Wow. Pretty heavy agenda. In truth there has been some progress on women's rights, but it's upto the Afganis.
It is not our business to drag them out oftheir feudal society. All we are interested in, is degrading AQ
-eveerything else is just "missioncreep"
Click to expand...
And that is different from what I posted how exactly?
 
VanceMack said:
And that is different from what I posted how exactly?
Click to expand...

if it doesn't, thaen I misread your intent, my intent was to say exactly what I did, that we have no interest in buiding a stable Afganitan,.
Not to the point other then degrading AQ.

Our drone attacks in Paki/N.Wazir are countless (literally unquantifyable),
yet the Taliban now are a more cohesive force in Paki, and show no sign of wanting to co-operate with the current Afg, gov't

This is a messageboard, and if i misead your intent, my apologies.
 
VanceMack said:
No I'm not. I made the argument very clearly. We were in Afghanistan because they allowed terrorists to use their country as a BO against us. That their citizens and especially women have better opportunities as a result of our intervention is just a happy bi-product.
Click to expand...

Except that that isn't true. Women have no better opportunities.
 
VanceMack said:
No I'm not. I made the argument very clearly. We were in Afghanistan because they allowed terrorists to use their country as a BO against us. That their citizens and especially women have better opportunities as a result of our intervention is just a happy bi-product.
Click to expand...

Is that like the happy bi-product of Iraqi oil distribution to the coalition partners from attacking Saddam Hussein to prevent a mushroom cloud over an American city that of course he could NEVER have produced?
 
Montecresto said:
Is that like the happy bi-product of Iraqi oil distribution to the coalition partners from attacking Saddam Hussein to prevent a mushroom cloud over an American city that of course he could NEVER have produced?
Click to expand...

I think you should do your research on where that oil went to from Iraq. You'll fine the first oil contracts was to China, not the US
 
Hamster Buddha said:
So you think it's more difficult to be a woman in Australia... and you have less opportunity than in Afghanistan? Really?
Click to expand...

Yes, that's my argument; do you always presume idiocy to win debates?
 
annata said:
that's a non sequitur.
We are pretty clear what we are "doing".
Click to expand...

You really think so? The US is much clearer than most countries. But just think of Obama's drone attacks, NSA surveillance, "all options on the table" or "red line" statements.
I got the prediction pretty well (though I had not expected the escalation of drone strikes to the extent they came) and I am sure the specialists around the world were not surprised. But the public was surprised and that is costing us.
 
joG said:
And? That does not prove your point. You did not explain, why you think that the two aims are incompatible.
Click to expand...

My point is that improving the quality of life for Afghanistan's people was not only never a stated goal of the Bush administration, it was never a possibility. But that even if it had been an "aim" it failed as evidenced by pictures of Afghanistan today when contrasted by those published in the Denver post.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
I think you should do your research on where that oil went to from Iraq. You'll fine the first oil contracts was to China, not the US
Click to expand...

But was that as intended? Washington cluster****ed everything about Iraq. Fortunately the US military is much better at what it does than Washington.
 
ecofarm said:
Yes, that's my argument; do you always presume idiocy to win debates?
Click to expand...

So if you were a woman, you'd rather live in Afghanistan, than in Australia... because you have more opportunities in that society, since.. Australia is more sexist?

 
Risky Thicket said:
But was that as intended? Washington cluster****ed everything about Iraq. Fortunately the US military is much better at what it does than Washington.
Click to expand...

Just saying, if we wanted to lock down first dibs with oil contracts we certainly could... we are talking about Washington though, I could see them screwing that up. You know, I'll believe my way but, you make a compelling counter-argument sir.
 
Montecresto said:
Is that like the happy bi-product of Iraqi oil distribution to the coalition partners from attacking Saddam Hussein to prevent a mushroom cloud over an American city that of course he could NEVER have produced?
Click to expand...
Nope...completely different animal, but thanks for playing.

Every elected democrat prior to 2004 KNEW that Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons, was a threat to the US , USED chemical weapons, and stood for both Clinton AND Bush engaging militarily. We know for a fact that Saddam Hussein openly ignored 17 UN resolutions MANDATING that he provide a complete accounting of his inventoried and cataloged chemical weapons stockpiles post GW1. Not 1 resolution, not the 2nd, or 3rd, or 5th, but 17 different resolutions. Those democrats also 'knew' he used chemical weapons in the past and was a threat to use them again. They also 'knew' he cooperated with, housed, and allowed terrorist operations to be conducted from Iraq as well as sponsoring Palestinian terrorists.

You will get no argument from me that the post war ops in Iraq was as screwed up as the post war ops in Afghanistan. But as to the 'cause'? There was a unified cause in the war against Iraq...right up until the election of 2004. I can cite you quote after quote and defy you to try to distinguish between democrat and republican justification for the war. Again...right up until the election.
 
Imprisoned for escaping abusive households, attacked with acid for going to school, stoned to death for alleged adultery…

These are just three of a staggering number of shocking things women face on a daily basis in Afghanistan today

From Amnesty International.

http://www.varsity.co.uk/comment/5674
 
VanceMack said:
Nope...completely different animal, but thanks for playing.

Every elected democrat prior to 2004 KNEW that Saddam Hussein had chemical weapons, was a threat to the US , USED chemical weapons, and stood for both Clinton AND Bush engaging militarily. We know for a fact that Saddam Hussein openly ignored 17 UN resolutions MANDATING that he provide a complete accounting of his inventoried and cataloged chemical weapons stockpiles post GW1. Not 1 resolution, not the 2nd, or 3rd, or 5th, but 17 different resolutions. Those democrats also 'knew' he used chemical weapons in the past and was a threat to use them again. They also 'knew' he cooperated with, housed, and allowed terrorist operations to be conducted from Iraq as well as sponsoring Palestinian terrorists.

You will get no argument from me that the post war ops in Iraq was as screwed up as the post war ops in Afghanistan. But as to the 'cause'? There was a unified cause in the war against Iraq...right up until the election of 2004. I can cite you quote after quote and defy you to try to distinguish between democrat and republican justification for the war. Again...right up until the election.
Click to expand...

Don't know how we ended up here but I won't be arguing that when it comes to foreign policy there's any difference between the two parties. So called "regime change" for many ME countries has been a US foreign policy goal for decades and won't stop until accomplished. The propaganda wars precede the bombing wars and as evidenced here, we have plenty of Americans that lap up the propaganda. If evidence is fixed around the policy, hey whatever it takes.
 
Hamster Buddha said:
I think you should do your research on where that oil went to from Iraq. You'll fine the first oil contracts was to China, not the US
Click to expand...

I said coalition partners not the US didn't I??
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom