|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 6071 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Please explain Cut and Run criteria in light of Afghanistan | |||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
Do you suppose this might work?
Peace in Our Time - Wikipedia
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
Do you suppose this might work? Peace in Our Time - Wikipedia I'm not following you....? What does this mean?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Silent H Member (Idle past 6071 days) Posts: 7405 From: satellite of love Joined: |
In regards to the OP, we have not abandoned Afghanistan, and quite honestly are doing quite a bit there. The premise, that we have “cut and run”, is based upon a knowledge of only what is reported in the media.
This thread has gotten way beyond my OP, so I'll excuse you for not being clear on what it meant. Let me re-introduce it... Given that reps slam dems with the label of cut and run for introducing strategies for turning power over to the Iraqis and getting our troops out of Iraq, why are reps not guilt of the same in Afghanistan? You are completely wrong that I came up with anything from the media. I hadn't heard anyone mention Cut n Run with respect to Afghanistan at all, which is why I was raising the question. I fully support our mission in Afghanistan, and though against the invasion of Iraq fully support keeping our troops there now. Heck, I'm not even a dem so you can't play that card on me either. So please deal with this question as I give it to you.: Traditionally conservatives, specifically reps, have criticized allowing US troops or missions to be controlled by foreign military forces, even when they are allies. Yet in Afghanistan we have turned the mission over to NATO, as well as troops. Instead of adding US troops, we are allowing NATO allies to fill in force strength. This is all being done at a time when Taliban strength is growing and the Afghanistan gov't is asking for more help. So how does this avoid being Cut n Run, as well as contrary to longstanding rep military policy (for which dems have been criticized in the past)? holmes {in temp decloak from lurker mode} "What a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away." (D.Bros)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1657 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Edited by RAZD, : duplicate
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1657 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Because ignoring them hasn't worked. THIS IS NOT IN ANSWER TO THE QUESTION READ THE POST FOR WHAT IT SAYS - NOT WHAT YOU THINK IT SAYS. YOU'VE HAD TWO TRIES AT tTHIS AND MISSED BOTH TIMES! When you correct that mistake the rest of your post MIGHT be worth reading. If you don't understand what YOU have got so wrong, nattering on about it won't help. Go back and read. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
iano Member (Idle past 2192 days) Posts: 6165 From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland. Joined: |
This is amusing coming from you. You had it explained to you 2 or 3 times yet you only ever saw the significance of 30 planes falling out of the sky in terms of the numbers flying in those planes (and their close relatives grief perhaps)
Like, hallo?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1657 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
What you might have missed is that RAZD isn’t ignoring them either, regardless of his denial of that fact and advocating ignoring as a “solution”. ok people listen up! I did not say to blanket ignore the terrorists as a solution. What I said was IN RESPONSE to Tal's characterisation of their PURPOSE, that ignoring them would defeat THAT PURPOSE. WHY? because (1) it is a false characterisation of the terrorists, and (2) terrorism could NEVER achieve that purpose through terrorism. Clear reading should make this EVIDENT to you. There is a difference however between the two positions. You and I are not doing anything close to what the terrorists wish. RAZD is doing and advocating exactly what they wish him to do. I’m sure you realize, as well as I do, that the terrorist’s only hope of victory is to create, by their terror and the use of the media, ROFLOL. There is also a big difference between what you think my policy is and what it really is (see above for a CLUE). No, all the terrorist need is for the same old policies of the Schwubbia administration to continue.
... more people in this country exactly like RAZD. Tell you what -- you reply posting what you think my policy is and I will grade it. Think of it as remedial make-up test with open books, and you are starting with an F-
... otherwise, I have better stuff to do. Like mis-representing what people are really saying? Or defending a FAILED policy of the BOTCH Administration that was based on LIES? Enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1657 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
iano, I like you. I don't like people that misrepresent what I am saying.
You are doing that, by using NJ's misrepresentation of my position instead of READING what I am saying.
You had it explained to you 2 or 3 times ... You have explained your position, and I have said why I think it is wrong. I understand what you are saying, it just IS NOT WORKING, the typical response to terrorists by Botch or Israel or whoever is a TOTAL FAILURE. Once you understand that tid-bit of reality then you realize it is time to look for a NEW solution, one that deals with WHY people become terrorists, instead of IGNORING that and running after terrorists al the while advertising how successful they were at terrorising you. For a working program to eliminate terrorists you need to look at programs that HAVE accomplished the elimination of terrorism, not ones that are failures. England and the IRA come to mind for some reason eh? There is no global "war" on terrorism because each new generation will always have terrorists generated -- BY the "war" on terrorism. It is a false paradigm, one that is dangerous because it accomplished the opposite of what it thinks it is accomplishing. Look at the rise in terrorism in the last 5 years - it has more than doubled. What the terrorists are capable of accomplishing is really negligable, insignificant, and pales into pointlessness when you look at the big picture -- unless we ALLOW them to terrorize us. Look at London in the second world war with V-bomb raining down, but the PEOPLE uncowed, picking up the bits and pieces and carrying on -- and that was FACTORS greater threat to personal life than anything terrorists can throw at BRITAIN to say nothing of throwing at the USof(N)A. Of course they had a leader, instead of a spoiled prima donna with no principles. I am not saying ignore the threat, what I am saying is don't ignore the reasons why the threat is there in the first place - treat the cause, not the symptom. Terrorism is incapable of defeating the ideologies of freedom, justice, liberty, equality, and basic human rights: thus they can only succeed if we give them up. Enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: That's fine, I guess, but it seems to me like a strange way to make decisions that involve complex geopolitical, social, and historical considerations. But it seems to me like trusting what an assemblyline worker in an automobile plant has to say about automitive engineering, or the fry cook at McDonald's about agriculture policy. Edited to change subtitle, and to add: Like these individuals, I'm sure that the experiences of "these guys" are relevant in understanding the effects of our political and social policies on the people most directly involved; however, it does not automatically give these individuals a deeper understanding than, say, jar or RAZD of the complex interplay of history, politics, or economics that would be necessary to determine the most practical course of action to achieve the desired political or economic goals, nor do they even have a unique ability to determine whether those goals are even desirable or ethical to begin with. Edited by Chiroptera, : No reason given. "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." -- George Bernard Shaw
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tal Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 1140 From: Fort Bragg, NC Joined: |
Then ignoring them will defeat that goal. You are almost correct here. If the Media ignores them, then terrorists have no way to braodcast their message. The media is their biggest weapon.
They are totally incapable of achieving any kind of dent in the USof(N)A. I guess I don't have to mention 911. They are very capable hitting us. Take however many attacks you think we've stopped on the US, then multiply that by alot. I would say that less than 0/1% were not affected.
What is your policy achieving? How many times has the US been hit since 911?
Right out of the NRA handbook - guns don't kill people. They are bad because they fight back for their country? They are fighting back because the invasion was (1) wrong and (2) stupid and (3) was not what the people of Iraq wanted. Almost correct here again. The violence going on in Iraq right now is primarily caused by extremist shia and extremist sunni carryout out attacks against each other; instigated by former bathists and foreign fighters to destabalize the government. But thanks for speaking for the people of Iraq. How many Iraqis have you talked to? I've talked to many. While there are issues, they are most definately glad we are there and Saddam is out of power.
First off the invasion of Iraq has nothing to do with the suppossed war on terror - even Schwubbia has admitted it (then turned around and claimed a link to 9/11 to appease your war fanatics). I've seen the intellegince. I've been to Salmon Pak.
So yes he is responsible for the number of americans that have died in Iraq as a direct result of his decision to invade. What part of that do you NOT understand? I understand that I took an oath to defend to the Constitution of the United States and to follow the orders of the Commander in Chief. If you are going to follow this logic, you must also blame every member of Congress, for they authorized the invasion, funded it, and continue to fund it.
He is also responsible for the number of Iraqiis that have died -- the innocent men women and children that number in the hundreds of thousands, many times the numbers that were killed in ALL terrorist attacks in the last 50 years. That, imh(ysa)o makes him a worse threat to world peace than any terrorist activity. So FDR is responsible for all the US Servicemen and innocent German citizens that were killed in WWII? I guess he was responsible for the 6 millions jews that were tossed into ovens too. I bet he even signed the order.
I don't expect them to lay down Tal, I expect them to get marginalized when you deal with the issues in a rational way that prevents them from making new recruits. If they cannot recruit and their "voice" is increasingly ignored by those who see real progress in respecting human dignity, justice, and equality then they will become irrelevant. Oh, you want to marginalize them? How exactly? What master plan do you have up your sleeve to cut off their recruiting? Read some history. BTW if you want to marginalize them, cut off media coverage of thier attacks.
You don't need to deal with them, cater to them (such as reacting in terror to them), or negotiate with them -- all you need to do is make sure that the items on their grieviance list become irrelevant. Items on thier grievance list: Wipe Israel off the map. Turn the US into an Islam State. Return the Caliphate. These things will never be irrelevant to them. You have displayed such a lack of understanding about these guys motivations its mind-boggling. Let the soldiers fight the war, you just go shop and Dillards and eat McDonalds.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: That's right, RAZD. Don't try to have any say in policy decisions; don't question the authorities, just do what you are told. Democracy is for suckers. "The fact that a believer is happier than a skeptic is no more to the point than the fact that a drunken man is happier than a sober one." -- George Bernard Shaw
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tal Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 1140 From: Fort Bragg, NC Joined: |
RAZD has no say in policy decisions. That's just the way it is. There is information that is not fit for public consumption. If you don't like the way the war is being handled, vote a new President and new Congress into power. You have your chance next month and in 2 years. However, the reality is still that soldiers are at war, and civilians are at the mall.
Once we have a war there is only one thing to do. It must be won. For defeat brings worse things than any that can ever happen in war. --Ernest Miller Hemmingway-- Edited by Tal, : No reason given. Edited by Tal, : No reason given. Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking. --Ferdinand Foch-- at the Battle of the Marne
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Chiroptera Inactive Member |
quote: Thanks for reminding us that whatever it is that you think your fighting for, it's not democracy. -
quote: I understand. Information management is very important in the manipulation of public opinion in a pseudo-democracy. Edited by Chiroptera, : typo "My country is the world, and my religion is to do good." -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Tal Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 1140 From: Fort Bragg, NC Joined: |
Thanks for reminding us that whatever it is that you think your fighting for, it's not democracy. We are a representative republic, not a true democracy. This was specifically set up by the founding fathers.
I understand. Information management is very important in the manipulation of public opinion in a pseudo-democracy. Information is classified if it has to do with National Security. The american public doesn't need to know if Salaam Al Wanna kill you is planning to blow up 14 targets in America and 5 in Britian a year from now. What would you do with that information? Nothing. Enjoy shopping at Dillards. Congress has oversight of intelligence, so they see what the President sees. Its called the NIE (National Intelligence Estimate) and if I'm not mistaken, the President declassified one of those a couple of weeks ago. That's a pretty big deal. Anywho, Congress has oversight (The Intelligence Oversight Act of 1980). So, again, if you don't like the way things are going, vote someone else into Congress or run yourself. Hard pressed on my right. My center is yielding. Impossible to maneuver. Situation excellent. I am attacking. --Ferdinand Foch-- at the Battle of the Marne
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1657 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
You are almost correct here. If the Media ignores them, then terrorists have no way to braodcast their message. The media is their biggest weapon. Now take your head out of the sand and complete that thought. Who has kept this in the media spotlight for the last 5 years? The terrorists or your poor excuse of a president? Thus the president is doing the work of the terrorists. As a general statement I agree with you on this. But my comment was NOT that generally made. You claimed a purpose for the terrorists that could not be achieved by the use of terrorism, thus ignoring them would defeat that purpose.
I would say that less than 0/1% were not affected. Fuzzy on math? Less than 3,000 were killed on 11SEP01 in a nation of just under 300 MILLION, so that is 0.001% of the US population. Many of them were not US citizens either. While more than 5 times that - 16,000 - were murdered last year in the US by US citizens. And the same for every year after 11SEP01. I would be more worried about being murdered in the US than about getting killed in a terrorist attack. Then there were 14 times that from traffic deaths - 42,443 deaths in USA in 2001 - and the same for every year after 11SEP01 I would be much more worried about being in a fatal traffic accident than about getting killed in a terrorist attack.
I guess I don't have to mention 911. They are very capable hitting us. Take however many attacks you think we've stopped on the US, then multiply that by alot. Funny thing is, if you had mentioned 26FEB93 you might have made points for being able to connect some of the dots.
1993: World Trade Center bomb terrorises New Yorkquote: Of course most republicans had their collective heads in the sand, because they were more concerned about a blow job than national security. Multiply zero by as big a number as you want and it is still zero. Between 26FEB93 and 11SEP01 there were zero terrorist attacks on US soil. That is 8 years and 9 months. With NO added security measures. Given that record, the fact that there have been none on US soil since 11SEP01 is not surprising -- even without a single security precaution taken since 11SEP01 we would not be "expecting" one. The Botch administration has made the use of terror such a big part of their political platform that it would be impossible for them to stop a terrorist act and NOT trumpet it to the world so they could show a POSITIVE result. Conclusion: there have been NO terrorist attacks that the Botch administration has stopped. Good thing, given their general level of accomplishment on any topic they try.
The violence going on in Iraq right now is primarily caused by extremist shia and extremist sunni carryout out attacks against each other; instigated by former bathists and foreign fighters to destabalize the government. So you agree that they have devolved into civil war between factions due to the removal of government structure by the Botch administration and their failure to comprehend the vacuum they were creating. But again, this is not what the argument was about. YOU characterised the ones fighting and killing US soldiers as "bad"
Message 124 If you mean he is responsible for soldiers'/sailors'/airmen/marines' deaths in the GWOT, then I'll say that's innacurate. Bad guys with bad toys caused those deaths. ... and that is what my comments relate to, not to the general state of affairs going on in Iraq due to the incompetence of the Botch administration and their lack of understanding. So you haven't answered the comment in relation to the ones that are fighting and killing US soldiers. You could take your head out of the sand and address the issue eh?
I've talked to many. While there are issues, they are most definately glad we are there and Saddam is out of power. Many is not ALL. This is pure anecdotal evidence and is self-selecting for only those who say this wanting to say it to you. What they tell other Iraqi we don't know. Talk to the ones that have had their families blown up by US bombs even though they have had nothing to do with the fighting and the picture is different. The surveys I have seen that look at the public attitude of all Iraqi in an unbiased manner:
What Iraqis Really Think - Wednesday, September 10, 2003quote: That was 3 years ago. Too bad they didn't choose a constitution or government modeled on the US one ... (oops eh? ... what happened there? Guess those 37% lost out.)
Religious Leaders Ahead in Iraq Poll - Friday, October 22, 2004quote: And that is still before Abu Ghraib. Before the US was seen as being as bad as Saddam had been.
quote: That's not a good place to be.
New Poll: 71 Percent Of Iraqis Want U.S. Forces To Withdraw Within A Year - September 27, 2006quote: Looks like your anecdotal evidence comes from the 1 in 7 Iraqi in that last 14% number ... or it comes from before US popularity shrank to that level.
I've seen the intellegince. I've been to Salmon Pak. This means nothing, really: you haven't said anything to give your opinion credence. You've seen "something" designed to make you think what you are doing is justified? Have you been to Disney World too? There is no connection between Iraq and the terrorists behind the trade tower attack. Take you head out of the sand and look at the facts.
So FDR is responsible for all the US Servicemen and innocent German citizens that were killed in WWII? Yes.
I guess he was responsible for the 6 millions jews that were tossed into ovens too. No. Don't be silly.
I bet he even signed the order. With a little work you could try for the stupidest comment on the board award. Or you could take your head out of the sand and look at the facts. The point is clear: the commander in chief is the one who sends soldiers into harms way, he commits them to a course of actions that result in their deaths and the deaths of innocents. The justification for it is that this is a lesser evil than not sending them, but that does not alleviate his responsibility for sending them, and it certainly REQUIRES his responsibility for assuring that it IS IN FACT a lesser evil than not sending them. From the results it looks to me like more evil has been done by invading Iraq that would have occurred without invading Iraq, and it isn't over by half yet. Another Botch Administration triumph of incompetence eh?
I understand that I took an oath to defend to the Constitution of the United States and to follow the orders of the Commander in Chief. If you are going to follow this logic, you must also blame every member of Congress, for they authorized the invasion, funded it, and continue to fund it. Notice that you took an oath to follow the orders of the Commander in Chief, and not of congress. Notice that congress did not send the troops to Iraq. Notice that congress was lied to in order to get that authorization. Notice that if you take your head out of the sand and look at who is responsible for troops being in Iraq there is one answer: Schwubbia. The buck stops there.
Oh, you want to marginalize them? How exactly? What master plan do you have up your sleeve to cut off their recruiting? Read some history. BTW if you want to marginalize them, cut off media coverage of thier attacks. If you would take your head out of the sand you would see that the one person most capable of cutting off media coverage of their attacks is the one person who is making sure they are revisited again and again in the media, every chance he gets. If you would take your head out of the sand you would see that I already told you how you marginalize them. You deal with the issues that cause people to become terrorists. Look at history yourself. Look at why the IRA stopped terrorist attacks in England, look at why Hamas got elected in Palestine. The Israel model for fighting terrorists is a failure. Adopting it for Iraq has also been a failure.
Items on thier grievance list: Wipe Israel off the map. Turn the US into an Islam State. Return the Caliphate. These things will never be irrelevant to them. Ya gotta love the propoganda regurgitators with their collective heads in the sand eh? Once again -- it is impossible to force a nation's character to change by making terrorist attacks, so those "grievances" really can be ignored as totally irrelevant and impractical. What you do to marginalize the terrorists is to make it irrelevant to the rest of the population. You do that by treating people as people, and work for international standards of freedom, liberty, justice, equality, and respect for basic human rights. That also means that you don't let the thugs that murder innocents off easy either, but that you deal with them as the criminals they are, and you treat them as the social misfits that they are. You do NOT glorify them by dedicating a superpower to a "war" against them and constantly trumpet about how much they have terrorised you. The Botch Administration policy is a FAILED policy, they have created more terrorists than they have destroyed and they have accomplished nothing against the terrorists that attacked the towers -- not once but twice. Take your head out of the sand and look at the facts. Enjoy. we are limited in our ability to understand by our ability to understand RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024