You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #189: Russian experience in Afghanistan and Why we don't torture [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
WilliamHenryMee Donating Member (11 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Nov-28-08 11:43 PM
Response to Original message
189. Russian experience in Afghanistan and Why we don't torture
Once again a great blog. I saw a replay of an amazing television program by PBS that really brings a realism to our situation in Iraq---maybe even more so than our past comparisons to Vietnam. The chilling part of this all is Senator John McCains comment to a question about us staying in Iraq for 50 years and his retort was that it might be more like 100 years and he would back that occupation. LATER WHEN QUESTIONED HE SAID 1,000 YEARS or until the end of global climate change (imagine this at $10 billion dollars a month). The 63 years comes from our occupation of Japan and Germany and the 50 years for Korea. 100 years if you fast forward it would leave us like a busted up Soviet Union with rich states like Texas seceding from the union and everyone in a depression.

Anyway back to the PBS TV program---about the Soviet Unions preemptive invasion and subsequent ten year occupation of Afghanistan. A country with a much larger military, slightly larger in population, with more natural resources and smaller in economy than the United States. Here we are in recession after just six yearswait until ten years of Iraq occupation like the Soviet Union did in Afghanistan!!!!!!!

From the PBS series The Peoples Century Episode: Guerilla Wars-----
Despite their small numbers, guerrilla movements defeat larger, more sophisticated military forces in Cuba, Vietnam, and Afghanistan. In addition to using the natural terrain to their advantage, the movements' strong political philosophies inspire the loyalty of peasants.
Unit Themes and Topics:
the Cuban Revolution
geography
guerrilla warfare
human endurance
the Soviet war in Afghanistan
the Vietnam War
The Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989 after losing 15,000 killed and 35,000 wounded.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan_...
Started on December 25, 1979. CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980. The force that entered Afghanistan, in addition to the 103rd Guards Airborne Division, was under command of the 40th Army and consisted of the 108th and 5th Guards Motor Rifle Divisions, the 860th Separate Motor Rifle Regiment, the 56th Separate Airborne Assault Brigade, the 36th Mixed Air Corps. Later on the 201st and 58th Motor Rifle Divisions also entered the country, along with other smaller units. Soviet force was comprised of around 1,800 tanks, 80,000 soldiers and 2,000 AFV. In the second week alone, Soviet aircraft had made a total of 4,000 flights into Kabul. The Soviet force rose with the arrival of the two later divisions to over 100,000. Under Soviet guidance, the DRA (?) armed forces were built up to an official strength of 302,000 in 1986. To minimize the risk of a coup d'tat, they were divided into different branches, each modeled on its Soviet counterpart. The ministry of defense forces numbered 132,000, the ministry of interior 70,000 and the ministry of state security (KHAD) 80,000. However, these were theoretical figures: in reality each service was plagued with desertions, the army alone suffering 32,000 per year.

Official Soviet personnel strengths and casualties
Between December 25, 1979 and February 15, 1989 a total of 620,000 soldiers served with the forces in Afghanistan (though there were only 80,000-104,000 force at one time ), 525,000 in the Army, 90,000 with border troops and other KGB sub-units, 5,000 in independent formations of MVD Internal Troops and police. A further 21,000 personnel were with the Soviet troop contingent over the same period doing various white collar or manual jobs.
The total irrecoverable personnel losses of the Soviet Armed Forces, frontier and internal security troops came to 14,453. Soviet Army formations, units and HQ elements lost 13,833, KGB sub units lost 572, MVD formations lost 28 and other ministries and departments lost 20 men. During this period 417 servicemen were missing in action or taken prisoner; 119 of these were later freed, of whom 97 returned to the USSR and 22 went to other countries.
There were 469,685 sick and wounded, of whom 53,753 or 11.44 percent, were wounded, injured or sustained concussion and 415,932 (88.56 percent) fell sick. A high proportion of casualties were those who fell ill. This was because of local climatic and sanitary conditions, which were such that acute infections spread rapidly among the troops. There were 115,308 cases of infectious Hepatitis, 31,080 of Typhoid fever and 140,665 of other diseases. Of the 11,654 who were discharged from the army after being wounded, maimed or contracting serious diseases, 92 percent, or 10,751 men were left disabled.
Material losses were as follows:
118 aircraft
333 helicopters
147 tanks
1,314 Armored personnel carrier
433 artillery guns and mortars
1,138 radio sets and command vehicles
510 engineering vehicles
11,369 trucks and petrol tankers
Over 1 million Afghans were killed. 5 million Afghans fled to Pakistan and Iran, 1/3 of the prewar population of the country. Another 2 million Afghans were displaced within the country. In the 1980s, one out of two refugees in the world was an Afghan. Along with fatalities were 1.2 million Afghans disabled - both Mujahideen and noncombatants -and 3 million maimed or wounded - primarily noncombatants.

The Soviets withdrew from Afghanistan in 1989 after losing 15,000 killed and 35,000 wounded.
This is taken from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_war_in_Afghanistan_...
We are at that 35,000 wounded figure now in Iraq.

The war started on December 25, 1979. CIA aid to the Mujahadeen began during 1980. The Soviet force was comprised of around 1,800 tanks, 80,000 soldiers and 2,000 AFV; then rose with the arrival of two more divisions to over 100,000. Under Soviet guidance, the Afghan armed forces were built up to an official strength of 302,000 in 1986. We once had that number in the new Iraqi Army. The Afghanistan armed forces were plagued with desertions, the army alone suffering 32,000 per year. Sounds familiar?

Soviet material losses were as follows: 118 aircraft, 333 helicopters, 147 tanks (each one of ours is a billion dollars and we have lost more), 1,314 Armored personnel carriers, 11,369 trucks and petrol tankers. Over 1 million Afghans were killed (over 1 million Iraqis have been killed). 5 million Afghans fled to Pakistan and Iran, 1/3 of the prewar population of the country, and another 2 million Afghans were displaced within the country (similar to Iraq).

The true cost of war/occupation in Iraq are the above. But we also have the $9 billion dollars in cash sent on pallets that went unaccounted for. The last two years of reports from the GAO have unearthed massive contractual fraud, war profiteering, overcharging, and defective materials provided by Halliburton for which Dick Cheney is still accumulating stock options. The Project for a New American Century (PNAC), Downing Street Memo, the oil maps of Iraq at Cheneys Task Force in 2001, and the FISA requests to the Telecom companies in 2001; all show the war was preplanned before 9-11. Any way you slice it---it stinks like Watergate or Teapot Dome Scandal.


TORTURE:
In the founding of this country, our commanding general in the revolution, George Washington,
was approached by his officers who asked for permission to torture British prisoners. The British used torture-to-the-death for both soldiers and civilians---even women. They were particularly gruesome in their treatment of prisoners and often piled on thousands into prison ships in New York harbor---almost no one survived being a prisoner. They literally "rotted to death." Our officers wanted something even worse as a revenge. To make a political statement to the British slugs. Washington decided that a country founded on freedom was better than its enemies and we would not torture. In fact, we would befriend the prisoners and give them the same food and drink that our own soldiers had. Even though we had little to spare. This made it easy for the Hessians to surrender at Trenton in 1776. Had they fought the British, who tortured, they would have had to fight to the death instead.

In all of our wars, this practice saved much bloodshed. Wars ended earlier. We took the morally right and just position.

In World War II, we were challenged again by the Japanese whose cultural practices could not understand or accept surrender. Yet, we did not torture and held those accountable who did torture through the International Courts. The Japanese used waterboarding against Americans. Many times Americans guess what their captors wanted to hear and they made up information to give them (official US military after-action accounts). So how effective is torture?

Nations around the world adopted our practices. To torture now, although convenient---would jeopardize our moral standing in the world. We broke the vicious Japanese and Germans with kindness at their trials. They realized a compassionate democracy was more powerful than any dictatorship or religion. It might take longer but it would ultimately prevail and be morally right.

John McCain in his failed campaign demonstrated he was a soldier at heart and incapable of viewing war as a citizen like George Washington said a President should (thus the new role of "commander in chief" is different than the "commanding general" role General Washington played). McCain was really trying to re-fight the War in Vietnam and win it. A war that was un-winnable as it became a jungle guerrilla war. An un-winnable "occupation" as the Iraq War has become. McCain cannot let go of his past to accept the future. He cannot accept the fact that we have lost the war in Vietnam just as the Soviets lost the ten year war in Afghanistan (1979-1989). We have won the Iraq War and lost the occupation of Iraq. We lost it when the President and his Administration knowingly lied us into the war---the Iraq people know these facts whether or not the American People choose to believe it or not. We lost this occupation when the troop strength was reduced and when arms were not secured. We lost it when our contracts went only to Bush campaign contributors and huge cost overruns and $9 Billion dollars in missing cash on pallets went unaccounted for. McCain oversaw this and said nothing. This is what also happened in Vietnam so maybe he was use to it. The military industrial complex that President Eisenhower warned us against profited immensely while the nation borne the costs of lives and billions that the Vietnam War cost us. Those complicit in the torture scandal (Even McCain?) and the degradation of the American Military should now be held publicly accountable. Or Bush can accept all blame in a civil suit against his family's assets to be seized and set up a fund for wounded U.S. Soldiers. This is the Bush LEGACY.

Thanks for reading this.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
  -Why Bush Cant Allow Habeas Corpus And Why we Need to Leave Afghanistan Time for change  Nov-22-08 09:45 PM   #0 
  - Bin laden denied responsibility for the 9/11 attacks from the beginning  seemslikeadream   Nov-22-08 09:49 PM   #1 
  - If bin Laden had done it,  HeresyLives   Nov-22-08 09:52 PM   #2 
  - That's what I think  Time for change   Nov-23-08 01:45 AM   #9 
  - i think we need to leave the Muslims to themselves, whatever the consequences, because ..  sam sarrha   Nov-22-08 09:57 PM   #3 
  - I do not give a flying fuck in the Afghans eat each others' children  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 04:26 PM   #40 
     - but we need evidence to support that assertion....  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 07:29 PM   #51 
     - Bill, read your own link... there is no mis-translation of the admission of guilt.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:53 PM   #53 
     - eyes only  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 04:32 PM   #126 
  - "Not a "Good War" Gone Bad"  JohnyCanuck   Nov-22-08 10:13 PM   #4 
  - 1 other reason/factor  Aragorn   Nov-23-08 07:52 AM   #18 
  - True  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 08:17 AM   #19 
  - "..an unjust, imperialist war of empire,.." should be a no-brainer,  G_j   Nov-23-08 08:45 PM   #62 
  - Another reason Afghanistan is NOT our "good" war.  aquart   Nov-22-08 10:15 PM   #5 
  - The Bush administration promised we the people  gratuitous   Nov-22-08 10:25 PM   #6 
  - WOW - Does Obama Know????? nt  Traveling_Home   Nov-22-08 10:43 PM   #7 
  - He knows or he's ignorant.  Oregone   Nov-22-08 11:11 PM   #8 
  - Ah yes, PIPELINES..  Karenina   Nov-23-08 03:28 AM   # 
  - Jesus Christ. Is it 2002 again?  theboss   Nov-26-08 01:35 PM   #178 
  - Ah yes, PIPELINES..  Karenina   Nov-23-08 03:28 AM   #13 
     - Indeed. The pipelines  RufusTFirefly   Nov-23-08 09:55 AM   #22 
        - A carpet of gold or a carpet of bombs...  Karenina   Nov-23-08 10:31 AM   #23 
  - I don't see how he could not  Time for change   Nov-23-08 12:35 PM   #25 
  - Thank you for this and k&r!  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 01:56 AM   #10 
  - Yes and I always think the answer to that question is  illuminaughty   Nov-23-08 03:23 AM   #12 
  - "Smirk." - Commander AWOL & cabal of corrupt republicon cronies  SpiralHawk   Nov-23-08 06:47 AM   #17 
  - Thanks for so clearly laying this out.  BlueMTexpat   Nov-23-08 03:12 AM   #11 
  - "I have always maintained that our launching a war against Afghanistan after 9-11 was not justified"  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 05:28 AM   #15 
  - Wow man. Mind blowing. Bush-Co never ceases to amaze me.  DUlover2909   Nov-23-08 04:15 AM   #14 
  - The Gipper in effect threw us a $1 trillion party: junior's policies and actions/inactions  indepat   Nov-23-08 07:23 PM   #49 
  - And what IS the incentive for the "War On Terror" and presence in Afghanistan (and all the Stans)?  Dover   Nov-23-08 06:21 AM   #16 
  - Excellent bit  Orwellian_Ghost   Nov-24-08 08:09 AM   #76 
  - A Timeline Of Oil And Violence Afghanistan  OmmmSweetOmmm   Nov-23-08 08:25 AM   #20 
  - Interesting link, thanks. Wish they would update it to present.  Dover   Nov-23-08 03:06 PM   #32 
  - Another great thread  malaise   Nov-23-08 08:31 AM   #21 
  - TFC, you're one of the main reasons I stay tuned to DU!  nashville_brook   Nov-23-08 11:24 AM   #24 
  - Thank you very much nashville  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:25 PM   #60 
  - T/C - you do know that Obama plans to send more troops to Afghanistan - right?  pirhana   Nov-23-08 01:02 PM   #26 
  - Sure  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:24 PM   #59 
  - Twoofer BS  Odin2005   Nov-23-08 01:17 PM   #27 
  - you want Usama's head on a pike but Bush does not! nt  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 01:36 PM   #28 
  - No contry in history has ever survived the occupation of Afganistan  Phred42   Nov-23-08 02:39 PM   #31 
  - Comparing the Soviet occupation to the American's is a facile analogy.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 08:03 PM   #55 
     - Your assumptions puzzle me. What evidence do you have that  Mithreal   Nov-24-08 03:51 AM   #71 
        - We're not fighting a proxy war with a *superpower*. We are fighting  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 08:33 AM   #78 
           - The Russians had their hands full in Georgia.  Swede   Nov-24-08 11:33 AM   #84 
              - Good article - so it really wasn't a cakewalk at all. nt  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:11 PM   #89 
  - Why?  Time for change   Nov-23-08 04:22 PM   #38 
     - Afgansitan needs to be stablized so it can't be a haven for A-Q and the Taliban.  Odin2005   Nov-23-08 04:41 PM   #42 
        - What makes you think that Afghanistan won't turn out to be another Iraq or Vietnam  Time for change   Nov-23-08 05:03 PM   #43 
  - So if Bin Laden didn't do 9/11  BecauseBushSaysSo   Nov-23-08 02:20 PM   #29 
  - False Flag. It was an inside job  Phred42   Nov-23-08 02:37 PM   #30 
     - I agree  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:21 PM   #58 
  - "bin Laden didn't do it" is not a convincing reason to abandon Afghanistan,  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 03:09 PM   #33 
  - What reason would you give to stay there and  Time for change   Nov-23-08 03:35 PM   #34 
     - You might want to re-examine "Assuming that the Afghanis don't want us there."  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 03:55 PM   #35 
        - Why ARE we in Afghanistan to begin with?  Dover   Nov-23-08 04:06 PM   #36 
        - Because failed states result in worldwide proliferation of  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 11:39 PM   #66 
           - I hope you are being sarcastic.....you are actually quoting Busholini in your statement..  KoKo01   Nov-24-08 12:05 PM   #87 
        - Here's a re-examination:  Time for change   Nov-23-08 04:14 PM   #37 
        - Oh, wow, "Worker's World." I trust their opinion, especially when it's offered without any support  Occam Bandage   Nov-23-08 11:40 PM   #67 
           - Talk about intellectually insulated  Time for change   Nov-24-08 11:23 AM   #83 
        - Absolutely spot-on in every point. Thanks. nt  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 08:05 PM   #56 
  - It never ceases to amuse (and amaze) me that people who  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 04:24 PM   #39 
  - Those tapes are very controversial  Time for change   Nov-23-08 04:31 PM   #41 
  - Look at the bigger picture... al Qaeda declared war on the US in 1998  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:46 PM   #52 
     - The bigger picture  Time for change   Nov-23-08 08:20 PM   #57 
        - I respectfully disagree - the Taliban were playing games.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 10:27 PM   #65 
  - Which Bin Laden?  arikara   Nov-23-08 06:20 PM   #45 
     - Are you aware of the PAL to NTSC conversion issue?  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:16 PM   #47 
        - not very persuasive! nt  wildbilln864   Nov-23-08 07:24 PM   #50 
           - It's only non-pesuasive if one is ignorant of the technical issue.  Flatulo   Nov-23-08 07:57 PM   #54 
           - Ridiculous. What about line doubling?  EOTE   Nov-24-08 07:08 AM   #74 
              - Simple PAL to NTSC converters just throw away every fifth line.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 08:20 AM   #77 
                 - Both vertical and horizontal resolution is tossed.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 09:00 AM   #79 
                    - You're full of beans. Analog video does not contain pixels, only  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:38 AM   #80 
                    - And what are those lines comprised of?  EOTE   Nov-24-08 10:13 AM   #81 
                       - What is the resolution of an analog TV set?  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 11:56 AM   #85 
                          - The NTSC standard is 480x720.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 12:08 PM   #88 
                          - You should quit while you're behind.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:29 PM   #91 
                             - Analog video does not contain pixels, only lines of resolution.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 01:00 PM   #93 
                          - And read this if you want to find out why horizontal resolution typically isn't listed.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 12:15 PM   #90 
                             - Well, thanks for proving my point. This is what I have been trying to explain to you.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:33 PM   #92 
                                - Output resolution, not input resolution.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 01:06 PM   #94 
                                   - At this point you're just arguing with yourself. nt  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:19 PM   #101 
                                   - I'll take that as a concession.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 02:38 PM   #104 
                                      - OK, please explain for us how a cheap analog converter handles  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:46 PM   #106 
                                         - They "squash" the image horizontally just as it is done vertically.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 03:03 PM   #111 
                                            - Oh, I understand that it can be done correctly using a digital  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:27 PM   #117 
                                            - Because once he denied it, the cat is out of the bag.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 03:46 PM   #118 
                                            - EOTE, Thanks for the info regarding video....  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 04:32 PM   #127 
                                            - No problem.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 04:47 PM   #128 
                                            - I'm in complete agreement on that also. thanks for the response. nt  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 05:10 PM   #129 
                                            - You continue to ignore data that conflicts with your pre-conceived notions.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:39 PM   #138 
                                            - You've got some nerve talking about ignoring data.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 06:02 AM   #142 
                                            - Semantics 101  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 02:27 PM   #150 
                                            - You are some piece of work.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 03:11 PM   #152 
                                            - You are incapable of understanding a simple concept...  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 05:08 PM   #156 
                                            - Why has Bush not provided any evidence of Bin Laden's involvement?  EOTE   Nov-25-08 05:31 PM   #159 
                                            - Self-delete  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 05:41 PM   #160 
                                            - There was a strong chain of evidence of al Qaeda attacks on US interests going  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 08:20 PM   #167 
                                            - Once again you launch into the non-sequitors.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 08:45 PM   #168 
                                            - Deleted message  Name removed   Nov-25-08 10:31 PM   #170 
                                            - Have yourself another big helping of fail.  EOTE   Nov-26-08 09:28 AM   #171 
                                            - Epic WIN!  wildbilln864   Nov-26-08 12:16 PM   #172 
                                            - You too! You can have my extra portion of stuffing :)  EOTE   Nov-26-08 12:17 PM   #173 
                                            - Thank you. nt  wildbilln864   Nov-26-08 12:34 PM   #175 
                                            - Bill, reading has never been your strong suit, so here's some help....  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 12:28 PM   #174 
                                            - I read as well as you.  wildbilln864   Nov-26-08 12:41 PM   #176 
                                            - You were right about the Bush Doctrine and I was wrong.  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 01:33 PM   #177 
                                            - I'll try to reply one by one.  EOTE   Nov-26-08 08:15 PM   #179 
                                            - What was the level of proof for the prior indictments?  Flatulo   Nov-28-08 09:47 PM   #188 
                                            - technically it was first known as "the wolfowitz doctrine" and the primary author was guess who?  reinvestigate911   Nov-26-08 10:23 PM   #180 
                                            - I completely oppose the notion of pre-emptive war.  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 11:09 PM   #183 
                                            - does the phrase "innocent until proven guilty" mean anything to you?  reinvestigate911   Nov-26-08 10:56 PM   #181 
                                            - I reply below.  EOTE   Nov-24-08 04:22 PM   #124 
                                   - Here's a good article on how NTSC video works....  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 10:02 PM   #139 
                                      - None of this changes anything.  EOTE   Nov-25-08 06:22 AM   #143 
                    - Did you see this article from Muckraker?  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 06:26 PM   #164 
           - It's rather easy to demonstrate  anigbrowl   Jan-04-09 07:31 PM   #193 
  - Because he can't pronounce Habeas Corpus?  DailyGrind51   Nov-23-08 05:10 PM   #44 
  - Robert Fisk on dj double-vu in Afghanistan  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 06:38 PM   #46 
  - Isn't that the truth.  Time for change   Nov-23-08 07:18 PM   #48 
  - Gates and the Urge to Surge  JohnyCanuck   Nov-23-08 08:40 PM   #61 
  - no smoking gun for nine one one  reinvestigate911   Nov-23-08 09:23 PM   #63 
  - Maybe no smoking guns, but certainly some powder burns and fingerprints.  balantz   Nov-23-08 11:46 PM   #68 
  - claims of no-planes and "video fakery" are part the disinformation campaign  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:13 PM   #99 
     - It was a media psyops job. What corporate entities own the media? n/t  balantz   Nov-24-08 02:54 PM   #108 
     - i suppose the media psyops also created the airplane debris that crushed pedestrians...?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 04:07 PM   #121 
        - I'm not calling you a disinfo agent, though I could attack you like you are me.  balantz   Nov-24-08 04:29 PM   #125 
           - evidence of aircraft parts directly refute the so-called no-planes "theory"  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 06:22 AM   #144 
     - The funny thing about the Truth Movement is that each camp  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:05 PM   #113 
        - presence of these hare-brained "theorists" should tell you something--or do you deny counter-intel?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 04:10 PM   #122 
           - Why do you assume that there are no people dumb enough to believe in no-planes  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:27 PM   #136 
              - you cannot disprove the existence of what people call god. no-planes can be disproven.  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 07:07 AM   #145 
                 - Heh, I agree, but no-planers would call you a fool.  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 01:50 PM   #148 
                    - it might proven that i am a fool... just show me a survivor who believes there was no planes.  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 09:21 PM   #169 
                       - Time for a second helping of crow.  Flatulo   Nov-26-08 10:59 PM   #182 
                          - just saw this  reinvestigate911   Nov-26-08 11:41 PM   #184 
  - Thank you for all these links  Time for change   Nov-24-08 06:43 AM   #72 
     - check this one out  reinvestigate911   Nov-27-08 12:16 PM   #185 
  - K&R !  G_j   Nov-23-08 09:23 PM   #64 
  - I have a compromise: We still find and kill OBL, but refuse to do any nation building/occupying  anonymous171   Nov-24-08 12:05 AM   #69 
  - OBL not wanted for the crime of 9/11  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 12:42 AM   #70 
     - And as Operation Northwoods and Operation Gladio bear witness,  JohnyCanuck   Nov-24-08 06:49 AM   #73 
     - anthrax letters, clearly false-flag terrorism  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 01:54 PM   #96 
     - OBL is already on the 10 most wanted list. How many times would you like him to be listed?  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 12:00 PM   #86 
        - let's ask washington, shall we?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 01:44 PM   #95 
        - guess you missed that silly movie on this very topic  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 01:58 PM   #97 
        - Go here...  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:10 PM   #98 
           - .. and he's not listed for the crime. what's your point?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:19 PM   #100 
              - My point is that he's one the top-10 list. He was on it before 9/11.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:30 PM   #102 
              - considering FBI's rex tomb said No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11 that's relevent how?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:36 PM   #103 
              - bin Laden didn't hijack or pilot any of the aircraft. So no, there is no  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:49 PM   #107 
                 - did i say bush did it?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:10 PM   #115 
              - you've been lied to, friend  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 02:40 PM   #105 
              - Ah, the Big Gun of the Truth Movement... ...YouTube!  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 02:55 PM   #109 
                 - be as snarky as you like but "press for truth" is sourced entirely from mainstream media...  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:03 PM   #112 
                    - Oh, I don't pretend to know the truth. Please don't put those words  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:16 PM   #116 
                       - i suggest you engage those college-honed critical thinking skills you paid so much money for and...  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:50 PM   #119 
                       - Wow, did you just watch 'Network' this afternoon?  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 09:35 PM   #137 
                          - nah - but you seem to be pretty out of touch with ideas contained therein  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 07:22 AM   #146 
                             - No, I'm completely familiar with the premise of your screed.  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 01:51 PM   #149 
                                - you just take joy in debate then?  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 03:19 PM   #154 
                                   - I've been hanging out here for a few years now, mostly in the Dungeon.  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 04:55 PM   #155 
                                      - your assertion is simply untrue  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 05:46 PM   #161 
                                      - Alrighty then, I guess we're done here...  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 06:19 PM   #163 
                                      - sounds more like you're done  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 06:49 PM   #165 
                                      - just a sec  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 05:53 PM   #162 
                       - the purpose of any investigation....  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 03:15 PM   #153 
                          - So should we investigate space beams and mini-nukes?  Flatulo   Nov-25-08 05:13 PM   #157 
                             - "we" won't be investigating anything.  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 05:19 PM   #158 
              - Did you happen to read in the OP the reason why 9/11 is not listed as one of bin Laden's crimes  Time for change   Nov-24-08 04:15 PM   #123 
              - Your YouTubing is seriously out of date. Go here to see the  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 03:02 PM   #110 
                 - youtubing? it's from the BBC. maybe you should send them this link in order to redact their story?  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 03:08 PM   #114 
                    - Great job man!  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 05:35 PM   #130 
                       - I'm curious, do you also agree with his post 121? n/t  balantz   Nov-24-08 06:17 PM   #131 
                       - I do believe disinfo is used to foil any prospect of investigation...  wildbilln864   Nov-24-08 07:44 PM   #132 
                          - I agree with that. But attempts to discredit with disinfo aren't limited to one research area.  balantz   Nov-24-08 08:02 PM   #133 
                             - i don't know anyone stupid enough to deny the fact that airplanes collided with WTC towers 1 & 2  reinvestigate911   Nov-24-08 08:48 PM   #134 
                                - I know plenty of people stupid enough to believe in no-planes.  Flatulo   Nov-24-08 10:07 PM   #140 
                                   - for those who haven't seen the argument against this "theory"  reinvestigate911   Nov-28-08 07:07 PM   #186 
                       - thank you, and i appreciate the welcome  reinvestigate911   Nov-25-08 08:16 AM   #147 
        - once is enough.....  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 03:03 PM   #151 
           - There is hard evidence. The media record. n/t  balantz   Nov-25-08 08:12 PM   #166 
              - one more time for the thinking impaired  reinvestigate911   Nov-28-08 07:32 PM   #187 
  - K&R  valerief   Nov-24-08 07:53 AM   #75 
  - Americas Wars of Self-Destruction  JohnyCanuck   Nov-24-08 10:39 AM   #82 
  - If You Want To Know Why  Mark D.   Nov-24-08 03:59 PM   #120 
  - Kicking  Orwellian_Ghost   Nov-24-08 09:07 PM   #135 
  - kick. nt  wildbilln864   Nov-25-08 12:28 AM   #141 
  - Russian experience in Afghanistan and Why we don't torture  WilliamHenryMee   Nov-28-08 11:43 PM   #189 
  - a kick  Twist_U_Up   Jan-04-09 11:17 AM   #190 
  - and a plummet  boloboffin   Jan-04-09 11:26 AM   #191 
     - you don't make yourself look too intelligent.  Twist_U_Up   Jan-04-09 06:14 PM   #192 
  - So how do we get Obama to reveal the truth?  I814U   Jan-05-09 03:08 PM   #194 
     - I suggesting hiding and watching.  boloboffin   Jan-05-09 06:07 PM   #195 
        - You know what you get when you hide and watch criminals?  I814U   Jan-06-09 11:59 AM   #196 
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC