anigbrowl
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Mon Mar-15-10 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #28 |
| 30. No Bigtree, that is simply untrue |
|
We largely left them alone, both through the Clinton and early parts of the Bush administration, doing little more than expressing out disapproval and hoping they would ease up a bit. The last war before 2000 that the US was involved in was in Bosnia, where we were defending the Muslim population against Serbian genocide.
We did not provoke the Taliban in any significant way, nor did we force them to support bin Laden's quasi-military ambitions, nor did we force bin Laden himself to organize attacks on September 11 that killed over 3,000 people (I do not subscribe to LIHOP or MIHOP conspiracy theories). No country in the world with the military capability to respond would accept such an attack on its territory. That is not opportunistic militarism, it is simple self-defense. To believe that any country would let such an incident go by without responding is delusional.
No, you can argue all day about the degree to which our strategy in Afghanistan has been productive or not (and I'd agree that the answer is 'not' to a large degree, though not completely). but there is simply no disputing the fact that the Taliban were operating a violent oppressive regime of their own free will before we entered into any direct conflict with them. And yes, it is appropriate to compare them iwht the Nazis or any other tyrranical government through history. Their misdeeds took place on a smaller scale, but were both systematic and directed at the entire population under their control.
I can understand things like the Taliban's hunting down and killing of communists. I don't like it, but the USSR killed a lot of Afghans during and following their invasion of that country, up to 2 million by some accounts. It's understandable hat a new government would want to get rid of anyone who had supported the soviet occupation. What is not understandable is going on to crush your own population with religious extremism that didn't even have the bad excuse of being an indigenous tradition.
|
| -In 30 days, 150+ civilians killed in Af-Pak conflict |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 10:00 AM |
#0 |
-
Robb, considering the opposition to HCR it's clear there are many |
NJmaverick |
Mar-15-10 10:07 AM |
#1 |
 -
"Lives are just political pawns to them." |
Forkboy |
Mar-15-10 11:36 AM |
#8 |
 -
boy, we sure 'saved a lot of lives' in Afghanistan this month |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 11:42 AM |
#9 |
-
Do you appreciate how many lives would be lost if the Taliban were to take control? |
NJmaverick |
Mar-15-10 11:50 AM |
#10 |
 -
And if Spartacus had a Piper Cub . . . |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 12:01 PM |
#11 |
-
Just like violence against the Nazis and Imperial Japan saved millions of lives |
NJmaverick |
Mar-15-10 12:13 PM |
#14 |
-
so you think the militarized Taliban resistance is just like the Nazis and Imperial Japan? |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 12:17 PM |
#15 |
-
What's unbelievable is that you think the Taliban is benign |
NJmaverick |
Mar-15-10 01:42 PM |
#17 |
-
"Cheering" isn't accurate, although it does provoke a response. |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 02:10 PM |
#18 |
-
it was 'deadly for civilians because NATO accounted for a great deal of civilians killed |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 07:09 PM |
#22 |
-
I point to what statistics there are, and you guess. |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 07:36 PM |
#25 |
-
Robb, we're unnecessarily killing Afghans, calling all of them Taliban |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 07:53 PM |
#26 |
-
Pointing out a decrease is NOT "pushing past" the problem. |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 08:40 PM |
#29 |
-
It's a weak straw |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 09:49 PM |
#32 |
-
If the strategy were as you've chosen to define it, you'd be correct |
Robb |
Mar-16-10 07:34 AM |
#34 |
-
I listened to the President |
bigtree |
Mar-16-10 10:18 AM |
#35 |
-
You hear what you want to hear |
Robb |
Mar-16-10 03:12 PM |
#36 |
-
We have no power over the actions of the Taliban |
wtmusic |
Mar-15-10 10:16 AM |
#2 |
 -
The likelihood of ISAF leaders perusing DU for policy ideas |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 03:31 PM |
#20 |
-
Why are they killing each other? |
asdjrocky |
Mar-15-10 10:22 AM |
#3 |
 -
For once I agree with you, at least in part. |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 10:34 AM |
#4 |
-
Obviously killing more people hasn't worked so far. |
asdjrocky |
Mar-15-10 11:08 AM |
#5 |
-
We're actually killing *fewer* |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 02:38 PM |
#19 |
-
we didn't escalate this occupation to 'open schools' in Afghanistan |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 07:28 PM |
#24 |
-
mission being accomplished |
branders seine |
Mar-15-10 11:14 AM |
#6 |
-
you're bashing us for not condemning the Taliban here? You can't be serious. |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 11:34 AM |
#7 |
 -
That anger of the Taliban should be aimed at legal military targets... |
Ozymanithrax |
Mar-15-10 12:04 PM |
#12 |
  -
I don't think the Taliban should be attacking anybody |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 12:09 PM |
#13 |
 -
I may not agree with what they think is good government... |
Ozymanithrax |
Mar-15-10 12:23 PM |
#16 |
 -
The Taliban were killing fellow Afghans long before we invaded Afghanistan |
anigbrowl |
Mar-15-10 07:59 PM |
#27 |
-
so, we just jumped right in |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 08:03 PM |
#28 |
-
No Bigtree, that is simply untrue |
anigbrowl |
Mar-15-10 08:42 PM |
#30 |
-
I'm referring to our present escalation |
bigtree |
Mar-15-10 09:25 PM |
#31 |
-
I appreciate that and respect your view although I disagree with it |
anigbrowl |
Mar-15-10 10:17 PM |
#33 |
-
Kick for the evening. nt |
Robb |
Mar-15-10 06:52 PM |
#21 |
-
Excellent OP. Kick, Rec. n/t. |
apocalypsehow |
Mar-15-10 07:19 PM |
#23 |