I'm Curios, after 9/11, what would those who opposed invading Afghanistan

[trumad]

would have done. Nothing? Diplomacy? Give in to Bin Laden and leave the Middle East? Dump Israel? What... And what if we knew that Osama was plotting more attacks... We'd just let him sit there?

WHAT GOD DAMN IT! I'd love to really know?

[oblivious]

1. I would have tried to find out who was responsible.

Bin Laden has denied responsiblity in all interviews since 911. The "video" is a proven fake. The government of Afghanistan at the time denied Bin laden was responsible and asked for proof before handing him over. No proof was given, only bombs.

My country, Canada, engaged in a war against one of the very poorest and weakest countries on earth supposedly because they asked for evidence of guilt before handing over an alleged criminal.

This was wong.

[greenman3610]

3. I was against going to war

in Afghanistan, because I feared
getting drawn into a quagmire.
I feared the images of dead
muslims going all over the world.
Maybe I was wrong on that particular action,
but I also understood that the Bushies would
not stop there, and I felt
a non violent, or more surgical military
solution, should be tried.

[trumad]

6. Fine..but what was the alternative?

[pretzel4gore]

44. bush stole the election...

it's doubtful anyone in afghanistan had any responsibility for THAT, and the things the bush crims did in 8 months after that (remember bush twins getting busted for drinking under age, as if anyone could get near them w/out wh approval!) all were dedicated to keeping attention away (remember 'get over it'?) from the fact bush was not elected. 911 was necessary to distract america from NORC results, and green light bush attack on afghanistan....
how to say this??? Bush inc has gotten where it is by SCAMMING the US electorate, creating urban legend type consensus (clinton's penis, Al Gore invent internet, inspired 'love story', whitewater, murdered foster etc) and the best SCAM was to get the US embroiled in actual shooting war, it mattered not with who. Remember that OBL was id'ed as culprit as result of Olsen Ph call to her husband, Ted, who was the Arkansaw project (richard mellon scaife) lawyer.....remember the media response to the crash of flight 587 2 months after 911, on nov 10th? it was IMMEDIATELY, and nationwide, found to be an accident, as an accident nicely served to distract att'n from NORC results published that very morning (whereas a terror event would have destroyed the US airline industry, a no no no!)
the alternative was arrest the lawbreaker AFTER his crimes were investigated.

[trumad]

4. I keep hearing that the video(s) were fake

but I have yet to see evidence. So the 9/11 hijackers were not Al-Queida? I'd like to proof refuting that to... And what about the Cole... Was Osama not involved with that as well? The burden of proof is on you to prove that AlQueida was not involved because there is substantial proof that there were..IE the Hijackers themselves.

[oblivious]

15. No the burden of proof is on you to prove it WAS al-quaeda

How can I prove it wasn't someone? How can I prove it wasn't you? Because someone on high says it was you, does that make it so? Or do you demand that they prove it?

Even if the hijacker story were basically true, 7 or 8 of the 19 are known to be alive today, and most of the rest were trained in the US, some in US military facilities, and the planning was allegedly done in the UK and Germans.

Where is Afghanistan in all this? It has been said many times here, the head of the FBI has even washed his hands of that story, claiming they have not found one piece of evidence to support it.

[bryant69]

21. 7 or 8 are known to be alive?

By whom?

Point me to the website that has this sort of information, if you would.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[oblivious]

23. Here's two I posted last week

23 September, 2001, 12:30 GMT 13:30 UK
Hijack 'suspects' alive and well

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/1559151.stm



EIGHT of the alleged September 11th Hijackers are Alive

http://www.worldmessenger.20m.com/alive.html

[oblivious]

36. Just a warning about these links

When I posted them last week, I didn't have a firewall up on this computer. That day my hard disk was hacked and the file with these URLS was infected with a virus that my anti-virus software can't remove so the file has to be deleted. I guess someone doesn't want this getting out.

[keithyboy]

13. Actually, our actions have permitted Osama to get exactly what he wanted

Yesterday, the Saudis asked all Americans to leave Saudi Arabia because they could no longer protect them. Especially since, as the Prince says, he has evidence that the latest killings there were the responsibility of Zionists inside of Saudi Arabia. (a news story that is obviously being squelched in the American media).

So, what has been accomplished by our taking the actions that we have?
God Damn it!! I would really like to know!

[bobbieinok]

2. well, what happened - we went in, made some deals and mostly left

Didn't get Osama; Talliban is recovering; life is horrific for girls and women again; it's back to warlords; and we've got a bunch of non-POWs in Gitmo causing all sorts of legal, PR, etc problems.

And the 'rumors' of tortur/murder of Afghani prisoners.

And how many returned special operations people killed their wives.

What improved for us and for the people in Afghanistan after the invasion?????

As far as I can tell, some Americans feel better because we struck back at those who attacked us. And that's the total 'gain.'

BTW, I was somewhat ambivalent about Afghanistan...

...1st they said they show the 'proof' they had that Osama did it

...then they didn't

...I was offended/insulted by the 'bring 'im back dead or alive' speechifying

"And what if we knew that Osama was plotting more attacks... We'd just let him sit there? "

... .He's still sitting there, isn't he???? Or where is he??

[trumad]

5. I agree Bush fucked it up...

But what?? You telling me that the Hijackers weren't Al Quedia?

[kalian]

11. WHAT did Bush "fuck up"?

:shrug: Care to explain? What makes you believe that he is
"fucking up"? What if its going ALL according to his friggin
plan (and that of PNAC)? Huh?

[Zan_of_Texas]

7. okay, here ya go.

Most important, the 19 hijackers (if indeed there were 19 hijackers) and their accomplices did CRIMINAL acts.

No country declared war on this country.

Therefore, the proper response was to FIND THE CRIMINALS and punish them.

Not find various countries and punish them.

So, no, do NOT declare war on any state (any more than declaring war on drugs is effective -- if you want to make certain drugs illegal, you go after those who use or make or sell them).

In fact, Afghanistan offered to produce bin Laden IF THE US SUPPLIED PROOF THAT HE DID THE DEED. We did not.

There were shorts (bets that the stocks would go down) placed on American Airlines stock and United Airlines stock and other related companies that were affected by 9-11. On numerous stock exchanges around the globe. In large amounts, very unusual.

So, you use every tool available to track down who bought those shorts. Give em immunity, if necessary, to find out how they knew. And trace it back to the criminals.

There were warnings from something like 8 foreign countries that we would be attacked. Trace those down.

We have Echelon and god knows what else and a $25 - 40 billion intelligence establishment. Make 'em work for crying out loud.

If it's legal to attack "places that harbor terrorists," we should've bombed Florida.

[Zan_of_Texas]

22. War crime in Afghanistan

Even if you think we should have invaded Afghanistan (and I don't and I didn't and I published an article to that effect shortly after 9-11), do you think we should have committed or overseen atrocities there?

Don't think we did? It was in Newsweek. Front cover article.

August 26th, 2002 Newsweek, "The Death Convoy of Afghanistan," is an exclusive investigation about 1000 Afghan people who were captured and put in rail boxcars with no air and no water. These prisoners were captured by troops who, while not American, were under American control and supervision. The people died excruciating deaths of thirst, suffocation and crowding, and were secretly buried in a mass grave, which was bulldozed over. Drivers told those in charge that the people were suffering inhumane conditions, and attempted to at least poke holes in the boxcars so the prisoners could get air. The drivers were beaten. You can find this story at Newsweek.com (for a fee), or at a mirror site: http://www.scc.losrios.edu/~bodleyd/DeathConvoy.html

OR mirror site http://www.truthout.org/docs_02/08.21A.death.convoy.htm

In at least one container, the prisoners themselves managed to rip holes in the wooden floor, and
all of them survived. Abdul, a 28-year-old pashtun, is one who lived. NEWSWEEK interviewed him in Sheberghan prison. He recalls that his container was packed to the breaking point. After nearly 24 hours without water, Abdul says, the prisoners were so desperate with thirst that they began licking the sweat off each other's bodies. Some prisoners began to lose their reason and started biting those around them.

I read the actual article -- the photos upset me tremendously.

This was done in our name. Our country is committing heinous war crimes.

You read the whole article and tell me (a) that those people did anything to us, and (b) even if, by some wild stretch of the imagination, you believe they did, that that was a way for human beings to treat other human beings.

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[trumad]

16. Well...,reading threads at DU is quite helpful

Welcome and by the way. I am trumad.

[kalian]

9. So....

you actually believe the "official" story behind 9-11. You actually
believe what the bushistas said was "the truth".
You believe that it was 19 "terrorists" that flew those planes into
the WTC. You believe that burnt passports were found at the WTC.
That the bound body of a stewardess was found amongst the wreckage.
You believe that a man by the name of Osama bin Laden was responsible.
You believe that a group called "Al Qaeda" was behind the attack.

Again, you believe EVERYTHING that Bush and his cronies want you to
believe.

What does Israel have to do with this? :shrug: (And yes, we should
have "dumped" israel a LONG time ago....)

First things first: I would not have gone on a vengeance spree.
I would not have driven my fellow Americans into a bloodlust. There
is NO NEED for such behavior if we believe ourselves to be on
the "moral high ground".
I would have invited the UN to assist us in searching for the
true perpetrators. I would have tightened our alliances across
the globe...not just militarially but economically.

Too bad all this is about OIL. Whether you care to believe this is
up to you...unfortunately, we all know what you have already
decided to believe.

[tinanator]

10. you might review the facts and decide for yourself

because on the basis of your statements, they are clearly a stranger to you. You come to Fresno, I'll introduce you to a Pakistani friend of mine. He'll spin your head around with information and facts that I cant even begin to absorb. We had no legitimate business invading Afghanistan, nor Iraq. Only Petroleum business. If you want to pretend otherwise, or foolishly assume differently, thats too bad. You really have a burr under your saddle, dont you?

[leesa]

12. A criminal investigation involving international investigators to

INVESTIGATE (remember that word?) the crime in order to find out who actually committed the crime and then use international forces to apprehend the individuals. It's the way it is usually done in civilized countries...quite effective!

The way you prefer, randomly bombing a sovereign nation for ten months, murdering tens of thousands of innocent people having nothing whatsoever to do with 9-11 in order to catch a few alleged suspects (have we actually caught any suspects yet??) is entirely inappropriate and uncivilized.

Why in the world would you think carpet bombing a nation for ten months is an appropriate response?? Is it to rationalize knee jerk, revenge actions??

[ForrestGump]

14. The proverbial 'limited incursion'

of special-ops teams or whoever else might be abke to move and react swiftly, with minimal firepower and maximum intelligence feedback, and ferret out the bad guys. In the end, though special-operations units were used, it came down to just another sledgehammer-mosquito situation. Bad as the Taliban were, invading and overthrowing them was not the right task to be focused on.

[EdGy]

17. no, of cours,

we had to kill a shit load of Afghanis. Hey, they're nothing but a primitive bunch of towel heads anyway, so we killed a bunch of them, we had to do it. We were really really pissed off, and we had to vent our rage someone. What better way than to drop daisy cutters -- bombs that destroy everything in a diameter of six football fields -- on a poor defenseless country in order to "find Osama" and "punish Al Qaeda"...

:eyes:

[trumad]

18. It took Forest Gump to answer my question

Thanks Mr. Gump.... The rest of you can go back watching X-Files. ;-)

[ForrestGump]

24. Brilliant is as brilliant does

:P

[RobinA]

19. Against the War

I was against the war in Afghanistan because I knew we wouldn't do it right. The only good that would come of the war is if we rebuilt the country into something better than it was before. I was afraid we'd bomb the crap out of it and then leave. Which is exactly what we did. It was a golden opportunity to show the GOOD we can do when we set our minds to it, but we blew it because the administration is run by idiots with zero imagination. A totally lost opportunity. PLUS if we were over there making friends and influencing people by rebuilding Afghanistan, we wouldn't be recruiting for al-Quaeda in Iraq. We'd be +1 in the Arab world instead of -2.

[Solly Mack]

20. Treated it like the criminal act it was...

and sought to arrest and try those responsible.

The people of Afghanistan didn't invade America. They didn't commit an act of war against America. A terrorists* group did. Criminals did.


and neither did Iraq, for that matter.

[Zan_of_Texas]

25. Our nation building in Afghanistan is a miserable failure too.

Okay, <> we had no legal reason to declare war.

<> US military's agents committed at least one instance of a war crime involving 1000 people in Afghanistan. (see above Newsweek exclusive)

<> AND, to top it off, there is now more heroin poppy growing there under US rule than there was before the Taliban.

Check it out.

‘Afghanistan at risk of becoming a failed, narco state’

* Produces three-quarters of global opium, warns a UN report

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_30-10-2003_pg4_15
Nov 3 2003

KABUL: Afghanistan, the world’s leading producer of opium, risks becoming a failed state once again in the hands of drugs cartels and narco-terrorists, the United Nations warned Wednesday. Opium cultivation was virtually eradicated in 2001 by the hardline Taliban regime, but since it was forced from power two years ago, Afghanistan has massively resumed harvesting and now accounts for three-quarters of global opium production, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime said in its latest annual report.

“The country is clearly at a crossroads. Either major surgical drug-control measures are taken now, or the drug cancer in Afghanistan will keep spreading and metastatise into corruption, violence and terrorism,” UN anti-drugs chief Antonio Maria Costa said in the report.

“There is a palpable risk that Afghanistan will again turn into a failed state, this time in the hands of drugs cartels and narco-terrorists,” he added. In the war-ravaged country, this year the area under opium poppy cultivation increased by eight percent, from 74,000 hectares in 2002 to 80,000 in 2003, the Vienna-based body said in its report, due to be presented in Moscow on Wednesday.

Opium production went up by six percent, from 3,400 to 3,600 tonnes. Even more alarmingly, 28 out of 32 provinces in Afghanistan now harvest the drug crop, up from 18 provinces in 1999, as cultivation spreads outside the traditional eastern and southern producing areas. The total revenues earned by poppy farmers and traffickers amounted to more than half of Afghanistan’s gross domestic product of 4.4 billion dollars. “The income of Afghan opium farmers and traffickers was about 2.3 billion dollars, a sum equivalent to half the legitimate GDP of the country,” the report said. <snip> With up to 90 percent of heroin on the streets of Europe derived from Afghan opium, the international trafficking chain from Afghanistan to Western Europe has an estimated annual turnover of 30 billion dollars and involves half a million people.

<more>

[oblivious]

26. It was so absolutely, so horribly wrong.

It was turned into a belief-based patriotic thing. Masterful propaganda stroke. Even most DUers seem to have been infected.

You must BELIEVE that Osama did it. Proof? You demand proof? Are you a patriot or aren't you? We have proof, don't you worry about that. Now you're either with us or against us. You start qurstioning your government, and you're just giving support to the enemy. Proof? You unpatriotic, osama-lovin America-hating bastard. Proof. Ha! Why don't you go to Afghanistan and join the Taliban. Proof! He wants proof. Didn't we tell you he did it? Now just shut up or you'll be charged as a national security risk.

Damn, it sure worked!

[Iceburg]

27. Just as a point of comparison -- do you remember Air India Flight 182?

<snip>
3 years before Lockerby Pan Am flight 103.

snip...
On June 22, 1985, Airlines agent Jeannie Adams checks in two pieces of luggage at Vancouver International Airport that changed the course of history ... for Canada.

Hours later, the first suitcase explodes inside the baggage terminal at the Tokyo's Narita airport while it was being transferred to an Air India flight. Two baggage handlers are killed. Exactly 55 minutes later, the other bag, a dark-brown hard-sided Samsonite suitcase, explodes in mid-air in the forward cargo hold of Air India Flight 182 as it approaches the coast of Ireland.

Some passengers actually survived the 747's fall from 31,000 feet only to drown in the frigid waters of the Atlantic.

Three hundred and twenty-nine people are killed. Eighty-two of them are children. Most of the people onboard Air India Flight 182 are Canadian citizens.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/airindia/

Did Canada bomb India? Did Canada ask allies to bomb India?
It took Canadian decades of resolve to track down and bring to trial the perpetrators of this crime. Almost 20 years after this horrendous act... the trial still goes on.

Some persons, and perhaps some nations may criticize the logic or passion of Canadians. Count this Canadian out -- we saved lives by dealing with this despicable act in a legal and civilized manner

snip (from the original article)
The outcome doesn't matter for one Canadian who lost his family. Anant Anantaraman says he no longer cares.

"It doesn't make any difference, I swear," Anantaraman told CBC News. "I'm totally indifferent to this, whether they catch, whether they find, whether they punish. It doesn't matter to me at all. Because after all what has happened to me and what has happened to others, it cannot be reversed."
/snip

Can America bring back the 3,000 lives lost on 9/11?

I'm guessing but close 100,000 civilian lives have been taken in Afghanistan and Iraq.

end of rant

[JanMichael]

28. This is Stephanie, not Michael

This administration coddled and sucked up to the Taliban for years...invited Taliban leaders to Texas to try and work out deals for an oil pipeline--therefore, after 9/11, quite frankly, I don't understand why they didn't accept their friend's deal to hand over Bin Laden.

So, no. I did NOT agree with the invasion, particularly in light of how badly they have fucked up things over there.

Steph

[robbedvoter]

29. Intelligence, police action. Full scale war not needed. Clark on it

They offered OBL to W 3 times that I counted.


http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,3858,4257771-103677,00.html

> Decisive force
>
> We must target and destroy the terrorist network. There is no room for
> half measures
> Special report: terrorism in the US
>
> Wesley Clark
> Saturday September 15, 2001
> The Guardian
>
> America is indeed at war. The attacks in New York and Washington have
> raised the dangers posed by international terrorism to a new level. But
> despite the awful familiarity of the devastation, an effective US
> response is likely to be something unfamiliar.
>
> For the US, the weapons of this war should be information, law
> enforcement and, rarely, active military force. The coalition that will
> form around the US and its Nato allies should agree on its intent, but
> not trumpet its plans. No vast military deployments should be
> anticipated. But urgent measures should be taken behind the scenes
> because the populations and economic structures of western nations

[Iceburg]

30. I agree robbedvoter ... see my post #27

[robbedvoter]

31. Right on. See also Clinton after the first WTC bombing. he got the guilty

and brought them to justice. No war needed.
It's the difference between BFEE and rational people: BFEE clings to the "state sponsored" thingy and blasts the idea of "criminal justice" (may be turned againat them, you see)

[Iceburg]

33. Robbedvoter -- to take the argument home

Imagine if all the muslims in the world decided to take out revenge and retribution on ALL Americans for the most recent round of attrocities. Gosh, for your sake I hope they limit it to the current administration.

[fairfaxvadem]

32. what robbedvoter and forrestgump say....

I couldn't believe we used that kind of military action, for a lot of reasons, including there being very little left to blow to bits in that poor country.

But the use of investigation, intelligence and small groups would have been the key, not full fledged military ops. This is better suited for stealth, hunting criminals, etc.

Heck, the Israelis used similar tactics to hunt down all those Nazi war criminals and we should have been doing the same thing.

At a minimum, I'd say we should have taken the best trained we have from all the forces, put them into one smooth operating group, and turned them loose in Afghanistan quietly and told them "don't come back until you've found that SOB."

But as usual, Bush screwed the pooch and now we're not in just one mess, but two.

[ForrestGump]

46. Always thought that the Mossad could find him, if anyone can

nasty types, rerally, but very good at what they do.

Of course, right along with that I wondered if they'd avoid finding him -- if asked to do so -- because it's in Israel's interests to have the yanquis engaged with a more-or-less common enemy.

But they'd be at least a good model to follow in covert intelligence-gathering to work in concert with the chaps from the SAS et al. Unbelievable how the CIA was so lacking in operatives fluent in Arabic, etc.

[serryjw]

34. Answer is ALWAYS in ROOT causes

This didn't need to happen. We have had a f*cked foreign poilcy for years. We should not be in Arabia...amd should gave worked to give Palestine a homeland. If we had dont that chances are 9-11 would not have happened.

[markomalley]

39. I'm glad I am not the only one saying this...

...it gets sort of lonely out there. We need to look within and change what's wrong with us before we try to change another country.

[serryjw]

42. I'm sick of America is NEVER wrong.....

I just finished watching Nightline. They once again are discussing the human atrosities in Iraq prisons. Bushit is on a campaign tour. He could NOT simply say " America is sorry for this....and we will get to the bottom of how this happened." See, That wasn't so tough.......why can't the idiot say it?

[dpibel]

45. Thank you very much

This one seems so obvious, but nobody ever wants to talk about it. What an odd, bipolar place is America.

Maybe we should start responding to cries of "blame America first," by pointing out that the accuser believes in "blame America never."

[Darranar]

35. Destroyed the terrorist camps...

not the country or the government.

[Misinformed01]

37. Kill them in their kitchen (tent), that's what. It was a criminal matter.

What happened when a huge army spent several weeks travelling to a cave infested shithole? THEY LEFT!

Sure we trapped a few, killed a few Taliban, but guess what? THEY'RE BACK!

Brilliant, fucking brilliant.

Kill them in their kitchen...

BTW~ I hated the fucking Taliban WAY prior to the WTC Murders, I wanted them dead, so this isn't some pacifist bullshit.

[flaminbats]

38. Simon says find Bin Laden...

Members of the Bin Laden family were allowed immediate transportation out of the country after 9/11 by Bush, I find it a little hard to believe this administration has ever been serious about finding Bin Laden. Considering that Bush was pushing for a second round of taxcuts shortly after 9/11..I did not believe this Administration was willing to pay for this war, and considering that settlements are being built on the West Bank I see no justification for giving foreign aid to an undemocratic nuclear power.

[bigtree]

40. Sit where?

Where was bin Laden sitting? My guess would be Pakistan, under the protection of compatriots across the Afghan border.

Why did we bomb civilian areas? To kill Taliban members? Blood revenge? Were bin Laden's ties to the Taliban deeper than ties to Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? I don't think so. But, we took to bombing Kabul and installed a government there, instead of pursuing bin Laden across Pakistan's border.

I'll wager that there were less than a handful of Afghan citizens who lost their lives in our invasion and occupation who had ever heard of the World Trade Center.

There were more than enough reasons to want the regime changed in Afghanistan. The capture of bin Laden was not the focus of the assault on Afghanistan's cities.

I just don't believe that indiscriminate bombing of innocent civilians establishes our installed 'authority' there as more legitimate than the one we deposed.

[SarahB]

41. Pipelines

Perhaps if large oil companies (and the mis-admininistration that works for them) weren't so focused on securing a pipeline through Afganistan and did something about the training camps, 9/11 wouldn't have happened to begin with. Lots contributed to it, yes, but they were more into taking care of the oil and money business than protecting our country.

[Ignis]

43. The proper response to a crime is police action--

preferably with the cooperation of existing international police organisations such as INTERPOL--rather than the invasion of one sovreign nation by another.

Now, if that police action involves an investigation which reveals substantial evidence that a foreign nation was directly involved in the planning and execution of said crime, that's a different story.

[iangb]

47. Remember the Taliban......

.....were keen to get rid of Bin Laden and his followers?

I know that the Taliban were not what we would have chosen as the best Gov't ever.......but they sure as hell beat what the Afghans had had before.....and they were at the time trying to normalise relations with the West.

What response did they get from the WH? 'We don't do deals with terrorist sympathisers' is what.

[Mr.Green93]

48. We should have Peace Talks.