War Against Taleban(Afganistan).

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 3:51 am

"Also i will repeat my question which i stated in the other thread."

I answered this, go find it.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:01 am

I guess if an arab said that you got what you deserved with the bombings would be worse right?

Yes. 2 different things. My statement refers to feeding these people. Yours refers to killing 10,000.

If you guys stopped bombing Red cross warehouses and UN stations and actually let the NGOs do they work, you wouldn't need to send it pop tarts or gummi bears and other ridiculous stuff.

We're not bombing them. We're bombing the terrorists. Accidents happen. If they hadn't killed 10,000 people we wouldn't be dropping bombs.

The american image of gun ho and doing all of it on their own isn't realistic

In my opinion, it is.

You could have earned the respect of the muslim people if you made the proof public and we would have got the guy for you.
Of course now, with the uni-lateral bombing of innocents in afghanistan you are in much worse of a situation.

What respect? 10,000 are dead and no one gives a damn. That is not acceptable. So we'll administer justice regardless. Oh, and we appear to be getting all the "assistance" we need from Pakistan and other surrounding states. We are dropping bombs on Afghanistan if you didn't notice. Infidels are setting foot on their soil and there's nothing the terrorists can do about it. I have all the evidence I need. I don't give a damn what you want Fas.

Osama has stated publically before that he is going to punish the US for killing inncocents in the Muslim world.

Nuts. He is a sick psychotic f*ck who's parents disowned him. He obtains pleasure in killing 10,000 civilians and lies by saying it is because infidels set foot in Saudi.

There is no justification for the events of 11 September.

Now YOU answer MY question.

Justify killing 10,000 civilians to me. Do it. Now.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:04 am

Yes they are Grunt.
And if you do take offense to them, there is no need to control it.
I say what i think and i am truthful about it.
Opinions are not meant to be uniformal.
However i will never cross the line at some poing by insulting the people the nation.
I have a problem with the policies and their implementation that is all.

Yes there is a need to control. When people lose control, people die.

You say what you think to be truthful.

That is all? A problem with policies does not justify 10,000 deaths.

I have a problem with people ignoring the fact that 10,000 innocents are dead. That really annoys me.

CM · Post by CM » Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:22 am

Justify the killing of 10,000 people?
I can't do that, as there is no justification.
Be they innocents in afghanistan or america or iraq or israel.
Killing innocents is not right no matter who commits the action.

You statement about feeding the people, again is something i don't agree with.
You say they should be happy with whatever the US feels like giving them right?
Then americans wonder why muslims don't like the US.
The US should not be in the business of givig out pop tarts.
The NGOs have a long standing system and relationship with these people.
Let them do their job.
The US should not be using planes to drop food.
if you are an illiteral afghani who is scared out of his wits due to the bombing.
What do you do when you see a plane?
Run for your life in terror?
or
Think that it drop some food, of course it could drop a bomb and the person dies.
The person would run for his life.

Again the issue of proof.
I will not condemn the Taliban or OBL unless i see it.
What happened to the principle "Innocent until proven guilty"?
If they did commit the act, go ahead and bomb them.
However show the world the proof so that muslims don't resenting the US even more.
Have the moral high ground once for all.

Ok atleast you are being truthful here.
Nothing is created in a vaccum.
The infidels as fundementalists call you, is because of their sick twisted minds.
But they also see the sanctions in iraq killing innocents, the palestinians dying becuase the US does nothing, sanction on pakistan for the past 10 years etc etc.
There is a very long list.
We pakistanis care for the afghani people, if we didn't we wouldn't have more then 2 million of them in our nation for the past 20 years.

As for this assistance you don't like.
The muslim leaders have put themselves and their nations into great jeopordy by agreeing to the US.
The general can't stop the fundo's as due to american uni-lateral actions they are gaining power in the streets.
But he will do what he thinks is best for the nation.

As for Osama, i agree with your sentiments.

Also grunt, according to news on CNN the death total appears to be around 6000 people not 10,000.
I don't have a link or source for this other than what i have seen on tv.

Delacroix · Post by **Delacroix** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:24 am

Originally posted by Gruntboy:
Ivan:

Your words insult me. Nine children dead? Thousands of American men, women and children are dead, thouasands more without fathers, mothers, loved ones. Not even a body left to mourn. I don't have to imagine the pain, Ivan, I was there. Have you ever had 10,000 people die less than a mile away from you? Have you ever wondered if your brother isn't coming home from work today? A pain like that doesn't ever go away.

I don't find the killing of children normal. That's why we're attacking and destroying the terrorists. They are people who rejoice in the deaths of children. They have brought the killing of innocents into our lives. I hate them for making us do now what we must. The terrorist are killing those children, not us. I hate them for that.

Oh, and I'm not American.

Oh! my words insult you.
Let me say that your translator didn't work.

Terrorists for me those who kills inocent people. The nine childrens deads by the USA attack. Taliban fault too. USA made the attack, USA and those who agree with this insanity have gulty too. As I say before 10000 lives and 1 live have no diference, you can not compare lives!! Kill inocent childrens, who care how many?
kill!
A ridiculous war, easily avoided.
But the USA revenge feeling and prepotence is far beyond USA humanity.
The history will certanly trow you in the hall of fame.
Hyroshima
Nagasaki
Vietnam
Afeganistão

go on...
It is all right.
Their fault.
We are clean.

(How can you say that you hate taliban because of the killing, if you support the killing, even knowing that more deaths are to come?)

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:27 am

The figure is 7,000. By the time they cleared the wreckage it will be 10,000.

6 or 10 its still sick and inexcusable.

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:32 am

On the food issue.

If I were an illiterate Afghani who had let Pakistani and Saudi Islamic Fundamentalist insurgents take over my country, enslave my women, kill my friends, incite the wrath of the US by committing acts of mass murder, I'd take the food and be ashamed.

But then again I'd probably be living in the Panjshir valley. I wouldn't let them do that to me. I wouldn't let them commit acts of mass murder in my God's name.

Wouldn't any decent human?

CM · Post by CM » Tue Oct 30, 2001 4:52 am

Originally posted by Gruntboy:
On the food issue.

If I were an illiterate Afghani who had let Pakistani and Saudi Islamic Fundamentalist insurgents take over my country, enslave my women, kill my friends, incite the wrath of the US by committing acts of mass murder, I'd take the food and be ashamed.

But then again I'd probably be living in the Panjshir valley. I wouldn't let them do that to me. I wouldn't let them commit acts of mass murder in my God's name.

Wouldn't any decent human?

I am talking about the food drops via planes.
The issues you have started do not answer my question.

Second The taliban are afghanis as are part of Osama's group.
If you have seen the video tapes.
He Osama is Saudi.
One of the is Egyptain - the spokesman as CNN as has dubbed him.
The one on the right is Jordanian.
Osama's body guards are Pakistan.
And Mullah Omar is Afghani.
It is not just one nation or people.
The group is made up of Muslims from all around the world.

If you lived in the Panjshir valley you would be living with men who turned Afghanistan into a system of warlords and have a rap sheet with Amnesty International and Human rights watch longer than The US list of Osama's crimes - for which we have been shown no proof.

The NA is no better than the Taliban.

Mr Sleep · Post by **Mr Sleep** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:41 am

I have no problem with these debates when they are kept in check, everything so far seems to be orderly and considerate enough, please let it continue without any flaming, be it through mis-communication or any other reason, please let each person explain themselves fully.

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 5:46 am

Originally posted by Ivan Cavallazzi:

But the USA revenge feeling and prepotence is far beyond USA humanity.
The history will certanly trow you in the hall of fame.
Hyroshima
Nagasaki
Vietnam
Afeganistão

go on...
It is all right.
Their fault.
We are clean.

I have a great idea. Why don't everyone who is not an American Citzen have their government do something about the 'bad' USA?

1. If you feel the USA should as the only 'super power' lead the rest of the world, grow up and lead your self.

2. If you don't like the policy of the USA, don't buy their products, don't sell them products.

3. If you don't like the UN led by the USA, get your own country to led it then.

@Fas, so you are saying the Red Cross in the three to four weeks leading up to the attacks decided not to move the food to where the people where headed to? Instead they thought in a bombing attack that gas supplies would never be hit?

I can see the point of having a center to transport the food out, but I cannot see the point in having it in a place the people are fleeing from, a place the people started fleeing from three to four weeks before the attacks started. Why at time did they not start moving the food.

As for the food drops, some people will not be happy unless they are given this..or that. I believe when you are starving any food should do. But far from me to force someone to eat. I offer food and they spit it out. I can sleep at night knowing this. I know aid was given, they decided not to take it.

Quark · Post by **Quark** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 6:51 am

Ivan, you conveniently ignore the fact that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved lives. American and Japanese lives.

Of course, just because the US did it, it has to be evil, right? I know many foreigners think that way.

About the innocents killed in the bombings - Gruntboy is not saying they are OK. He's saying they would have never happened if those terrorists had not killed thousands of innocent lives here. They would never have happened if the Taliban turned over bin Laden.

You say they want proof? They don't want proof. They want to export bin Laden to another Muslim country 'middleman'. That just means another chance for bin Laden to escape. We can't take that risk. Either they give him to us or they don't.

You say you don't like the image of the US going in this gung-ho and alone? Welcome to the real world. Who truly helps out the US? Do you guys know? Only Britain. Our own 'allies' of Canada, France, and others never help us. It's always the US versus the world purely because too many people don't like that we're the sole superpower. Only Britain was ever able to get over that hump. Everyone else just 'joins' our side in fear of what happens if they join the other.

We don't want, we don't expect help because we've never gotten any help. Just like that Canadian newscast says, an earthquake in India? We send tons of food and supplies. A devestating earthquake in San Fransisco? It's the US's problem, no one elses.

Don't tell us that we should be using help when you're not willing to give it.

Tom · Post by **Tom** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:10 am

Everybody knows this but it can’t be said too many times. Those of us who are against the bombing of Afghanistan DO condemn the horrible attacks on the WTC.

The attacks were wrong and they can’t be justified. That does not mean that there is not an explanation. It is imperative that we understand that explanation. The worst thing we can do is to ignore the cause - for if we are to fight terrorism we must understand its cause.

The USA is often generous with help for other nations and is, I believe the biggest single donor of food aid. The USA is a democracy, if not a perfect one, and so I support its system of government. The USA helped Europe and The Soviet Union against Hitler Germany. The USA has done many good things.
This does not mean that we should lose our freedom of speech if we want to oppose what the USA is doing.

The USA has a right to self-defence. To protect it self against hostilities. Bombing Afghanistan does not constitute self-defence in this case. Bombing Afghanistan will not result in the end of terrorism - in fact I think that it will make the problem worse.
But even if the bombing of Afghanistan would stop terrorism the measures taken must not kill so many more people than it saves. An example: we know for sure that a murderer lives in a certain village. Do we kill the whole village or do we investigate and try to find the perpetrator on the risk that he might kill again?
If we assume that 10.000 people is dead. Should we take action that could kill 500.000 or more. I don’t think so.

Now you ask a fair and difficult question. What should be done then???

Something must be done that much is clear. I think that an international criminal court must be set up – similarly to the ones set up to deal with the aftermath of Yugoslavia and Rwanda. Will they work? No guarantees. But there are no guarantees that the bombing will work either. In fact I think there are better chances with an international criminal court. It will not be quick - many years maybe before the justice comes but then the war also looks too take many years as Donald Rumsfeld have said. What we can be almost be certain of is that less innocent lives will be lost.
Further more I am very worried that the attacks could destabilise Pakistan. The consequences could be truly awful and can’t be ignored.

I will also just remark that in a sense we are all fumbling in the dark for the right solution to this problem. We don’t have the information we need to be sure we have made the right decision. Therefore I would again err on the side of caution and wait – delay bombing if it really is needed till the spring when we have more intelligence and hundreds of thousands of people wont starve.

Delacroix · Post by **Delacroix** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:28 am

Weasel:
I have a great idea. Why don't everyone who is not an American Citzen have their government do something about the 'bad' USA?

1. If you feel the USA should as the only 'super power' lead the rest of the world, grow up and lead your self.

2. If you don't like the policy of the USA, don't buy their products, don't sell them products.

3. If you don't like the UN led by the USA, get your own country to led it then.

I don't understand your sarcasm.
So I'll respond seriously your jokes.
About the great idea:
USA will not alow. Will not permit. Some try to resist. Good for them. courage they have.

1) Sapient Weasel, I'll write this in my notepad.
2) It is impossible to don't by their product, impossible to don't sell their product. Anyway, I don't like USA international policy, but their product don't have nothing to do with the policy. Your argument don't have procedence.

3) My country is USA too, your proposal is ilogic and don't have procedence.

Ps: Why do you think I'm anti-american? Ihave some restrictions, like I have to anything else. My principal restriction(the one you quoted) become to the fact that I think crudel to the USA revenge permit the same procedement of the terrorist.
Drop fragmentation bombs over civilian area is the end of the end.

-----------------------------------

Quark:
Ivan, you conveniently ignore the fact that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved lives. American and Japanese lives.
Of course, just because the US did it, it has to be evil, right? I know many foreigners think that way.

SAVED LIVES!!! I ignore this "fact" because it doesn't exist. Who tell you this?
An entire civilians population diying, for generations. That bomb explode over people that wasn't even born. Today people can born disfigurated because of that bombs. My god, nothing beetween the earth and the sky can justificate such atrocity. Nothing, nothing that kill one live is justificated.

Quark:
About the innocents killed in the bombings - Gruntboy is not saying they are OK. He's saying they would have never happened if those terrorists had not killed thousands of innocent lives here. They would never have happened if the Taliban turned over bin Laden.

In portuguese we call this quote a "sofisma".

You say the inocentes childrens in Afeganistan will never die if Taliban don't have attacked. The Taliban will never have attacked if USA don't put them in control, and give them weapons. USA will never put taliban in control and give them weapons if the URSS don't become an problematic country. URSS will never become a problematic country if USA don't ...
...
...
...
...
CAIN ! All his fault! Damned Evil Cain!
It is a Sofisma.
It is good for the conscience, but bad for the truth.
Those children will never die if USA don't attack civilians if Afeganistão. easy.

Quark:
You say they want proof? They don't want proof. They want to export bin Laden to another Muslim country 'middleman'. That just means another chance for bin Laden to escape. We can't take that risk. Either they give him to us or they don't.

You say you don't like the image of the US going in this gung-ho and alone? Welcome to the real world. Who truly helps out the US? Do you guys know? Only Britain. Our own 'allies' of Canada, France, and others never help us. It's always the US versus the world purely because too many people don't like that we're the sole superpower. Only Britain was ever able to get over that hump. Everyone else just 'joins' our side in fear of what happens if they join the other.

We don't want, we don't expect help because we've never gotten any help. Just like that Canadian newscast says, an earthquake in India? We send tons of food and supplies. A devestating earthquake in San Fransisco? It's the US's problem, no one elses.

Don't tell us that we should be using help when you're not willing to give it.

This is for me?
I don't understand. If you quote the fragment you are talking about, I'll be glad to reply.

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:34 am

Originally posted by Tom:

I will also just remark that in a sense we are all fumbling in the dark for the right solution to this problem. .

Yes we are.

Originally posted by Tom:
We don’t have the information we need to be sure we have made the right decision.
Therefore I would again err on the side of caution and wait – delay bombing if it really is needed till the spring when we have more intelligence.

I'm on the other side, action now. Everyday they have in peace is another day they get more dug in. Another day they move what little tanks and troops into towns where innocent people will be used as shields.

Originally posted by Tom:

and hundreds of thousands of people wont starve.

The government choose to starve their own people. Put the blame for the starving on the US if you want to, but the truth is...their government caused this. To let your country starve over one man and his followers. The truth is, the US played a card...give him up. If he would have been given up , the attacks would not have been supported. The US won on the bluff. Even giving him to another country besides the US would have saved them. I'm no genuis, but even I can see the mistake they made here.

CM · Post by CM » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:38 am

Originally posted by Quark:
Ivan, you conveniently ignore the fact that bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki saved lives. American and Japanese lives.

Of course, just because the US did it, it has to be evil, right? I know many foreigners think that way.

About the innocents killed in the bombings - Gruntboy is not saying they are OK. He's saying they would have never happened if those terrorists had not killed thousands of innocent lives here. They would never have happened if the Taliban turned over bin Laden.

You say they want proof? They don't want proof. They want to export bin Laden to another Muslim country 'middleman'. That just means another chance for bin Laden to escape. We can't take that risk. Either they give him to us or they don't.

You say you don't like the image of the US going in this gung-ho and alone? Welcome to the real world. Who truly helps out the US? Do you guys know? Only Britain. Our own 'allies' of Canada, France, and others never help us. It's always the US versus the world purely because too many people don't like that we're the sole superpower. Only Britain was ever able to get over that hump. Everyone else just 'joins' our side in fear of what happens if they join the other.

We don't want, we don't expect help because we've never gotten any help. Just like that Canadian newscast says, an earthquake in India? We send tons of food and supplies. A devestating earthquake in San Fransisco? It's the US's problem, no one elses.

Don't tell us that we should be using help when you're not willing to give it.

I guess after the first short para is meant for me.
First just becuase i don't agree with the US policies, i think everything the US does is wrong?
No.
The US has a uni-lateral FP and has done a great deal of wrong in the world.
They have done some good as well.
Nothing is black and white, or good or bad.
The US record in eyes has done more bad than good with their FP.
That is my opinion.

It may not happened in Afghanistan but it has been happening in Iraq for the past 10 years.
It means nothing to the muslim people, at this point as innocents are dying in Afghanistan.

Second yes they have asked for proof and then they would hand them over.
This was covered by CNN and BBC including Pakistani and various ot her medias.
And Yes they have said they would handed it over to a middleman.
Is there anything wrong with that?
Is it not better than bombing innocents in Afghanistan?

Oh we are willing to help just don't expect it to be cheap.
Also Germany has offered troops and NATO has invoked article 5.
The US has to ask for the support to start.
You haven't asked.

[ 10-30-2001: Message edited by: Fas ]

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:40 am

I would like to know what the "anti-bombing" people would like to see happen instead of the bombings?

And don't just say to stop the bombings, what concrete should happen to rid the world of terrorisme, if not using military force?

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:46 am

Originally posted by Ivan Cavallazzi:

I don't understand your sarcasm.
So I'll respond seriously your jokes.

It wasn't sarcasm. I was serious.

Originally posted by Ivan Cavallazzi:

About the great idea:
USA will not alow. Will not permit. Some try to resist. Good for them. courage they have.
1) Sapient Weasel, I'll write this in my notepad.

So if every other country decided to stand up to the USA, the USA could just blow them off.

My the military has gotten strong here in the US.(sarcasm!!)

Originally posted by Ivan Cavallazzi:

2) It is impossible to don't by their product, impossible to don't sell their product. Anyway, I don't like USA international policy, but their product don't have nothing to do with the policy. Your argument don't have procedence.

Do products bring money it the US?
Is the government run by money? Does the policy come from said government?

I believe you need to check your 'procedence'

Originally posted by Ivan Cavallazzi:

3) My country is USA too, your proposal is ilogic and don't have procedence.

Ps: Why do you think I'm anti-american? Ihave some restrictions, like I have to anything else. My principal restriction(the one you quoted) become to the fact that I think crudel to the USA revenge permit the same procedement of the terrorist.
Drop fragmentation bombs over civilian area is the end of the end.

If you don't like how it's run....leave. Point Blank.

CM · Post by CM » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:47 am

Originally posted by Weasel:
<snip>
@Fas, so you are saying the Red Cross in the three to four weeks leading up to the attacks decided not to move the food to where the people where headed to? Instead they thought in a bombing attack that gas supplies would never be hit?

Can you imagine the logistic of actually moving all that stuff.
Second there are no exact places where these people would go.
They are a nomadic people so they move with mood and the weather.
So the Red Cross can't guess where they would move and just pick up and leave and then find no people there.

Originally posted by Weasel:
I can see the point of having a center to transport the food out, but I cannot see the point in having it in a place the people are fleeing from, a place the people started fleeing from three to four weeks before the attacks started. Why at time did they not start moving the food.

Well they need food for the people who aren't fleeing.
There are 10 million people in Afghanistan at this point.
These people need food.
The Red Cross have food depots in Pakistan as well as Iran.

Originally posted by Weasel:
As for the food drops, some people will not be happy unless they are given this..or that. I believe when you are starving any food should do. But far from me to force someone to eat. I offer food and they spit it out. I can sleep at night knowing this. I know aid was given, they decided not to take it.

Well the thing is that the actual people and organizations that have long term ties with getting food to these people have not been able to do there job.
The US military should fight the war and allow the Red Cross and Medicine Sans Frontier to do their job.
In a CNN interview the spokesman for MSF said that the US drops were having a adverse affect on their abilities.
I don't have a link to this as i saw it on CNN.
You can check the website it might have it.

CM · Post by CM » Tue Oct 30, 2001 8:53 am

Originally posted by Xandax:
I would like to know what the "anti-bombing" people would like to see happen instead of the bombings?

And don't just say to stop the bombings, what concrete should happen to rid the world of terrorisme, if not using military force?

I have answered this before but will repeat it.
Use the carrot and stick policy.
Provide the proof get the muslim people behind you.
Then you use them proxies to put pressure on the Taliban.
And then you use the Muslim nations to get Osama.
You turn the people away from Osama, he can't stay anywhere.
And then the Taliban will not hold the issue of religion as the moral high ground and then you get Osama.
This in lay-mans terms would be what i think should be done.

Xandax · Post by **Xandax** » Tue Oct 30, 2001 9:05 am

Use the carrot and stick policy.

Wich would be done how?
Give "them" all the money and supliest they want without "they" have to do nothing in return?
This would cripple world economy.

Provide the proof get the muslim people behind you.

And the anti-USA muslim population in the middle east and proximity, and around the world would belive proof, as not being fabricated by the "evil" USA or the decadent west?

Then you use them proxies to put pressure on the Taliban.
And then you use the Muslim nations to get Osama.
You turn the people away from Osama, he can't stay anywhere.
And then the Taliban will not hold the issue of religion as the moral high ground and then you get Osama.

The last part I find very hard to belive, the Taleban is IMO fundamentalistic and would not for any thing give up their belifs.

[ 10-30-2001: Message edited by: Xandax ]