Not only do you not know that Osama was responsible, but you are too ignorant of what actually happened to make an intelligent response. Afghanistan offered to turn Osama over to a neutral country for a trial. Bush said we don’t need a trial ,we know he is guilty. Silly me, I think a trial would have been a good idea. If he was guilty, you could easily prove it in court. Are you really that ignorant or is the propaganda infecting your nerve endings.I was going to say brain but you are not thinking, you are having Pavlovian responses.
Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over | Afghanistan | The Guardian Have someone read that to you.
Osama wasn’t responsible? He was in charge of Al-Queda. If not him, who then? The CIA? Most likely Unocal given the state of this thread.:rolleyes:
Yes, they could have turned him over to the US directly and stopped the bombing in its tracks, but they were worried more about their terrorist buddy rather than their own citizens. Lovely people that you support.
And what do you think Bush was proposing to have done with him? Put him up against a tree and have him shot? If you remember, this was before Iraq, AbuGhraib, and prisoners being sent to Guantanamo. So, it was very likely there would have been a trial as handing over Osama would have been a highly publicized event with people wanting to know exactly what was happening with him. Take your head out of your ass.
What would Bush have done? It would have been ugly and illegal. He had little respect for the law ,international or otherwise. He thought he was elected god.
Civilian deaths are up 20 percent. Isn’t that special. i suppose those whose families are getting killed have to understand we have a right to kill people who live thousands of miles away from us, when we feel like . They just have to,learn to get out of the way when we let loose of bombs. Damn these people don’t understand some immature people have a right to do whatever immoral act they want, when they are pissed off.
http://www.truth-out.org/civilian-casualties-afghanistan-reach-all-time-high62222 Another article about civilian deaths in Afghanistan. I suppose in Uziland they are entitled to their revenge against us. If your people are being killed you have a right to extract revenge.Therefore UZI would agree that they have a right to attack us.
It is interesting that you think we are the ones responsible for killing civilians when any killing would stop immediately if the Taliban would stop fighting. So, they should be blaming them as they are the reason we continue to be in Afghanistan. Sucks to be in a country that supports terrorists, but there you go.
You still talk about revenge as if that is the reason we are there. What proof do you have that it is so? Assuming that revenge is a bad thing, that is. I’m not entirely sold on that idea if no one else is willing to do what is necessary to bring murders to justice.
Congrats, you get dumber every day. We send our troops thousands of miles away from home to fight. In Uziland they have a right to do so. But the people defending their homeland, should not resist foreign invasion. If they just quit fighting we would probably quit killing them after a while. Or maybe not.
I don’t think we are responsible for killing civilians, I know we are.
If we quit invading foreign lands, civilians would quit dying. That ,even you must be able to follow.
Unlike you who’d wave at the guy who killed your wife across the border. Maybe even invite him in for tea, too?
‘I got nuthin’ ’ is much quicker to type.
Are you actually dumb enough to think that is a part of the debate on war in Afghanistan? I am not a child and will not react to your silly made up scenario. It simply distills down to your love of revenge against people who actually have nothing to do with 911. You are frustrated that the towers were brought down a decade ago, by someone who is not in Afghanistan. The Afghani citizens that are dying have nothing to do with 911. The Taliban did not do it. It was probably Al Qeada ,who is not in Afghanistan. You do understand that much don’t you? We have killed a lot more men, women and children in Afghanistan than died in the towers. When will you close the books on revenge? How many deaths will you need?
I think we should have engaged the Taliban on this, as they are known for their fairness and honesty in foreign affairs.
And I suppose you think we are?
I do not think any war should be waged without totally exhausting diplomacy. Can you imagine that? If we wanted Osama on trial, it was there for Bush. He did not want that at all. He wanted war.
No, but you are child who thinks that conspiracy theoris are more plausible than the simple truth that Afghanistan is about 911 and the Taliban support of Osama. You are also a child to think that it is easy for those in power to admit that their strategy for Afghanistan is a failure. We neither found Osama or ensured that Afghanistan would no longer support terrorists. And we went in there with the agenda of putting a democracy in place for a bunch of iron age semi-savages, rather than ensuring that the people of Afghanistan had the security, education, and culture that supported a democracy.
You on the other hand, would just leave them to their fate. What do you think will happen if the Taliban gains power again? Probably more shootings of ‘alleged’ adulterers and no school for girls. But, I guess you’re fine with that because it is ‘their’ country and culture and who are ‘we’ to tell them any different?
[quote=“Uzi, post:253, topic:546812”]
You have been taking this noodle seriously all along.
Actually, your theory that 20 idiots with box cutters directed from a cave in Afganistan brought about 9/11 is about the most implausible conspiracy theory I’ve heard.
What if Osama raped my wife and mother, blew up my house and shot my dogs. Would I go after him? Why not create a really, really stupid scenario and pretend it makes sense? It still would not.
Do you think we have the right to change other governments because we don’t like them? If so, you have to understand if they don’t like our corpratocracy ,they also have the right to change ours. Sovereign countries have no rights in your right wing universe. The most powerful country has a right to decide if your country’s government suits them. There are 65 dictatorships in the world. You better get busy. Then of course you have to attack China, they are commies after all. We can’t have that in our world.
He blew up your wife and mother (or at least your fellow citizen’s) and the buildings they were in. The scenario is valid. You won’t do anything about it, yet you’re quite willing to weep over those who commit and support such acts.
If you could change those dictatorships to something more benign with the blink of your eyes with no one getting hurt, would you do it? If so, then we just disagree on the method of fixing the world so that people in those countries have the same benefits and opportunities you do. Because those dictatorships aren’t going to disappear by you blinking your eyes. If not, then you are truly an evil person rather than just the naive and gullible fool your posts have indicated you are.
[quote=“adhay, post:254, topic:546812”]
So what do you think actually happened? An inside job, perhaps, by the Bush administration to bring about the acceleration of Armageddon? As far as we can tell, in fact it was dudes with box cutters that took over airplanes and suicidally flew them into the WTC and the Pentagon. And that they were financed in their training, planning and execution of the plan by Al-Qaeda, which at the time was based in Afghanistan due to its lawlessness.
Considering that we have also killed innocent people’s wives and mothers and destroyed buildings all over the world, if that’s justification enough to kill innocent people then all your argument does is justify 9-11, since we did it before they did. All over the world.
Hardly. We aren’t changing those dictatorships into anything more benign.
Of course we aren’t. But you get guys like gonzo who think that just because a line is drawn on a piece of paper that people on the other side of that line are untouchable if they do something wrong. Yeah, it would be nice if you could sit down at a table and hash things out for the better, but not everyone wants things to improve. Like the Taliban for example. They want to live in the iron age and bring everyone down to their level. That someone even thinks we should negotiate which such creatures is ludicrous.
Improve? Who says? They don’t share your values and don’t think like you do. Iran has not attacked anybody in centuries. Yet we see them as an enemy’ We have been running around warring across the globe, yet you see that as honorable. We have interfered inside states and overthrown elected governments. Yet somehow you think we are acting from a higher moral plane? Who did the Taliban attack.? It was we who attacked them. When did Viet Nam attack us?
Do you remember Diem? He was our dictator and despot. Was that a good thing ? Was it moral to you? Good grief read something.
Ngo Dinh Diem - Wikipedia Here for you.