US Election 2008

[Fop 1]

The CIA and Pakistani secret services funded and trained the Taliban Nicos.

 

Indeed. They threw millions at Afghanistan to defeat the Russians. And then nothing whatsoever to rebuild the country after the ravages of war. I don't see how Clinton could have forced this through 2 presidents before he even got into office. The Taliban were just a symptom of this root failure that grew and fed on the anger of US abandonment.

 

Clinton could have done a lot, he didn't (which generally was his policy).

 

But frankly much like Obama, whatever he'd done would have caused issues, doing the "right thing" by Afghanistan would not have been an easy course, nor would it have been without cost or a lot of criticism.

 

So he stuck his head in the sand and dodged the bullet that Bush caught smack in the face.

 

 

 

In Steven Bauers book he observes that at one point there were so many stinger and anti-tank weapons in Afghanistan, the CIA was offering

$1,000 a piece to buy them back.

 

 

They made a similar mistake in Iraq with debaathification. Sacked an entire nations army and hoped they'd give the weapons back and go home quietly.

 

Nice move Bemmer, created an armed militia in one fell swoop.

 

They were in a no-win situation there too, which was the biggest mistake anyone make over Iraq, not realising that Saddam had keep the lid on an all out civil war for 20 years. Retaining the status-quo was unacceptable to the majority of the population (but it would have been the most sensible course never the less).

 

Add to that the HUGE influx of Bin Lardinists looking for a cause/fight, and Syria and Iran's interests in a nice destabilising rukus and you get what we have.

 

Again no win, and more importantly no easy solution for anyone that takes over now.

Edited November 4, 2008 by Fop

[Park Life 70]

The CIA and Pakistani secret services funded and trained the Taliban Nicos.

 

Indeed. They threw millions at Afghanistan to defeat the Russians. And then nothing whatsoever to rebuild the country after the ravages of war. I don't see how Clinton could have forced this through 2 presidents before he even got into office. The Taliban were just a symptom of this root failure that grew and fed on the anger of US abandonment.

 

In Steven Bauers book he observes that at one point there were so many stinger and anti-tank weapons in Afghanistan, the CIA was offering

$1,000 a piece to buy them back.

 

 

They made a similar mistake in Iraq with debaathification. Sacked an entire nations army and hoped they'd give the weapons back and go home quietly.

 

Nice move Bemmer, created an armed militia in one fell swoop.

 

 

Bremmer is a nutcase, but perhaps there is bounty in keeping Iraq destabalised as so many U.S. companies are making 'a killing' out there (you know the usual list). Sacking the Army (who as you say are essentially leading the uprisings) shows for me that the core strategists are

more than happy with the permanent bases way. At this point they are really unhappy about the fact that the Shia have had so much success in the Govt. Personally I think Iraq will ultimately break up into 2/3 semi-autonomous regions under the control of different factions.

The Kurds will get a chunk.

[Happy Face 29]

 

Amongst other things it's the nuking that motivates evermore suicide bombers to give their lives.

 

The notion that wiping out afghanistan would bring an end to islamic extremism I find hard to go along with.

 

 

That's complete ASS though.

 

 

So you believe that terroristas aren't in some way motivated by the murder of their family and friends and that nuking Afghanistan on 9/12 would have sorted this whole mess?

 

 

I don't know about terroristas , but 9/11 or the 1998 or 1993 attacks (or any of the others) had sod all to do with anyone's family (terrorists or otherwise) being murdered.

 

It did have a lot to do with the rise of islamofacism which broadly came from a sudden lack of an enemy to fight.

 

Aye, they all hate us for our freedom .

 

There'll always be some fundamentalist of who the bold statement is true. The rise in popularity needs a lot more than some nut jobs convincing others to be nut jobs too. It feeds on the perceived evils performed by western governments in response. Osama played a blinder.

 

Again what should have been done about Afghanistan after 9/11 then?

 

Left alone and allowed to train and brainwash more and more hate filled fanatics?

 

Nuked to a glass desert?

 

Or what was done (which is clearly "wrong")?

 

 

 

If you've got the answers by all mean state them, if you haven't...... shush.

 

Again, I have no qualms with going into Afghanistan and getting anyone involved with 9/11. But that's nothing whatsoever to do with the overreaction I'm talking about. I'd like to know where I said that was "wrong"

 

Keep making assumptions and building straw men though.

 

 

Keep backing away from arguments you know you cannot win, after getting yourself in way over your head, and you might make a decent politician one day.

 

Until then:

 

I'm not going to start arguing about the argument. As usual, we broadly agree anyway.

[Fop 1]

The CIA and Pakistani secret services funded and trained the Taliban Nicos.

 

Indeed. They threw millions at Afghanistan to defeat the Russians. And then nothing whatsoever to rebuild the country after the ravages of war. I don't see how Clinton could have forced this through 2 presidents before he even got into office. The Taliban were just a symptom of this root failure that grew and fed on the anger of US abandonment.

 

In Steven Bauers book he observes that at one point there were so many stinger and anti-tank weapons in Afghanistan, the CIA was offering

$1,000 a piece to buy them back.

 

 

They made a similar mistake in Iraq with debaathification. Sacked an entire nations army and hoped they'd give the weapons back and go home quietly.

 

Nice move Bemmer, created an armed militia in one fell swoop.

 

 

Bremmer is a nutcase, but perhaps there is bounty in keeping Iraq destabalised as so many U.S. companies are making 'a killing' out there (you know the usual list). Sacking the Army (who as you say are essentially leading the uprisings) shows for me that the core strategists are

more than happy with the permanent bases way. At this point they are really unhappy about the fact that the Shia have had so much success in the Govt. Personally I think Iraq will ultimately break up into 2/3 semi-autonomous regions under the control of different factions.

The Kurds will get a chunk.

 

If it weren't for Turkey being so violently opposed, Kurds would be away already (although technically the sort of already are).

[Fop 1]

 

Amongst other things it's the nuking that motivates evermore suicide bombers to give their lives.

 

The notion that wiping out afghanistan would bring an end to islamic extremism I find hard to go along with.

 

 

That's complete ASS though.

 

 

So you believe that terroristas aren't in some way motivated by the murder of their family and friends and that nuking Afghanistan on 9/12 would have sorted this whole mess?

 

 

I don't know about terroristas , but 9/11 or the 1998 or 1993 attacks (or any of the others) had sod all to do with anyone's family (terrorists or otherwise) being murdered.

 

It did have a lot to do with the rise of islamofacism which broadly came from a sudden lack of an enemy to fight.

 

Aye, they all hate us for our freedom .

 

There'll always be some fundamentalist of who the bold statement is true. The rise in popularity needs a lot more than some nut jobs convincing others to be nut jobs too. It feeds on the perceived evils performed by western governments in response. Osama played a blinder.

 

There was no power, no cause in peace. The best way of controlling people is to have an enemy or invent/provoke one if there isn't a readily willing one there.

 

(actually ironically Obama is using this too in a way )

 

 

Again what should have been done about Afghanistan after 9/11 then?

 

Left alone and allowed to train and brainwash more and more hate filled fanatics?

 

Nuked to a glass desert?

 

Or what was done (which is clearly "wrong")?

 

 

 

If you've got the answers by all mean state them, if you haven't...... shush.

 

Again, I have no qualms with going into Afghanistan and getting anyone involved with 9/11. But that's nothing whatsoever to do with the overreaction I'm talking about. I'd like to know where I said that was "wrong"

 

Keep making assumptions and building straw men though.

 

 

Keep backing away from arguments you know you cannot win, after getting yourself in way over your head, and you might make a decent politician one day.

 

Until then:

 

I'm not going to start arguing about the argument. As usual, we broadly agree anyway.

 

That's because one of us is right, and the other realises it.

[Happy Face 29]

That's because one of us is right, and the other realises it.

 

Never thought you'd ever make such an admission.

 

kudos.

[Fop 1]

That's because one of us is right, and the other realises it.

 

Never thought you'd ever make such an admission.

 

kudos.

 

[Park Life 70]

Getting back to Obama, one of the key reasons he stands out from the normal order is his stated willingness to 'talk' to the other side (Iran etc) without pre-conditions and threats.

[Fop 1]

Getting back to Obama, one of the key reasons he stands out from the normal order is his stated willingness to 'talk' to the other side (Iran etc) without pre-conditions and threats.

 

Where do you think he's getting his cash from.

[Happy Face 29]

The CIA and Pakistani secret services funded and trained the Taliban Nicos.

 

Indeed. They threw millions at Afghanistan to defeat the Russians. And then nothing whatsoever to rebuild the country after the ravages of war. I don't see how Clinton could have forced this through 2 presidents before he even got into office. The Taliban were just a symptom of this root failure that grew and fed on the anger of US abandonment.

 

Clinton could have done a lot, he didn't (which generally was his policy).

 

But frankly much like Obama, whatever he'd done would have caused issues, doing the "right thing" by Afghanistan would not have been an easy course, nor would it have been without cost or a lot of criticism.

 

So he stuck his head in the sand and dodged the bullet that Bush caught smack in the face.

 

It would have been a FAR easier course for Reagan or Bush Snr at the end of the war with Russia though. It would have been a lot cheaper too.

 

In Steven Bauers book he observes that at one point there were so many stinger and anti-tank weapons in Afghanistan, the CIA was offering

$1,000 a piece to buy them back.

 

 

They made a similar mistake in Iraq with debaathification. Sacked an entire nations army and hoped they'd give the weapons back and go home quietly.

 

Nice move Bemmer, created an armed militia in one fell swoop.

 

They were in a no-win situation there too, which was the biggest mistake anyone make over Iraq, not realising that Saddam had keep the lid on an all out civil war for 20 years. Retaining the status-quo was unacceptable to the majority of the population (but it would have been the most sensible course never the less).

 

Add to that the HUGE influx of Bin Lardinists looking for a cause/fight, and Syria and Iran's interests in a nice destabilising rukus and you get what we have.

 

Again no win, and more importantly no easy solution for anyone that takes over now.

 

I think it had less to do with what was right for Iraq and far more to do with who got paid for doing it. Paying a US corporation to control the country is far more desirable than supplying Iraqi people with jobs.

 

Course it's not just Iraq where that shit happens, they did it after Katrina too. I read an old article this morning which pointed out rather than paying locals, the contract for tarping over roofs was tendered out to the Shaw group at $175 per square, it was subcontracted to such a degree that in the end the men doing the job got $2 per square.

 

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060410/davis

 

 

...and the tarps are provided by FEMA.

[Fop 1]

The CIA and Pakistani secret services funded and trained the Taliban Nicos.

 

Indeed. They threw millions at Afghanistan to defeat the Russians. And then nothing whatsoever to rebuild the country after the ravages of war. I don't see how Clinton could have forced this through 2 presidents before he even got into office. The Taliban were just a symptom of this root failure that grew and fed on the anger of US abandonment.

 

Clinton could have done a lot, he didn't (which generally was his policy).

 

But frankly much like Obama, whatever he'd done would have caused issues, doing the "right thing" by Afghanistan would not have been an easy course, nor would it have been without cost or a lot of criticism.

 

So he stuck his head in the sand and dodged the bullet that Bush caught smack in the face.

 

It would have been a FAR easier course for Reagan or Bush Snr at the end of the war with Russia though. It would have been a lot cheaper too.

 

Initially there was little that could be done that wouldn't have resulted in basically replacing the USSR, a bit later on there was at least one potential window of opportunity though.

 

 

In Steven Bauers book he observes that at one point there were so many stinger and anti-tank weapons in Afghanistan, the CIA was offering

$1,000 a piece to buy them back.

 

 

They made a similar mistake in Iraq with debaathification. Sacked an entire nations army and hoped they'd give the weapons back and go home quietly.

 

Nice move Bemmer, created an armed militia in one fell swoop.

 

They were in a no-win situation there too, which was the biggest mistake anyone make over Iraq, not realising that Saddam had keep the lid on an all out civil war for 20 years. Retaining the status-quo was unacceptable to the majority of the population (but it would have been the most sensible course never the less).

 

Add to that the HUGE influx of Bin Lardinists looking for a cause/fight, and Syria and Iran's interests in a nice destabilising rukus and you get what we have.

 

Again no win, and more importantly no easy solution for anyone that takes over now.

 

I think it had less to do with what was right for Iraq and far more to do with who got paid for doing it. Paying a US corporation to control the country is far more desirable than supplying Iraqi people with jobs.

 

Course it's not just Iraq where that shit happens, they did it after Katrina too. I read an old article this morning which pointed out rather than paying locals, the contract for tarping over roofs was tendered out to the Shaw group at $175 per square, it was subcontracted to such a degree that in the end the men doing the job got $2 per square.

 

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060410/davis

 

 

...and the tarps are provided by FEMA.

 

There were probably commercial interests, but that doesn't take away from the issue that the Shia majority wouldn't have allowed it, one of their biggest complaints after the "war" was that Saddam's structures that had oppressed them for years weren't being dismantled quickly enough, although that rather swiftly developed into complaints that things weren't being rebuilt quickly enough (and all sides were initially happy to shelter foreign insurgents bent just destabilising everything).

 

It was a no win situation. I suspect even with the best and most through planning possible it was no win in the short term, Iraq was only ever going to be something that was looked back at Iraq in 20 years as anything, but an utter mess.

 

 

And again going back to now, pulling out too quickly will be a bad thing, but staying to long will also be.

[Park Life 70]

The CIA and Pakistani secret services funded and trained the Taliban Nicos.

 

Indeed. They threw millions at Afghanistan to defeat the Russians. And then nothing whatsoever to rebuild the country after the ravages of war. I don't see how Clinton could have forced this through 2 presidents before he even got into office. The Taliban were just a symptom of this root failure that grew and fed on the anger of US abandonment.

 

Clinton could have done a lot, he didn't (which generally was his policy).

 

But frankly much like Obama, whatever he'd done would have caused issues, doing the "right thing" by Afghanistan would not have been an easy course, nor would it have been without cost or a lot of criticism.

 

So he stuck his head in the sand and dodged the bullet that Bush caught smack in the face.

 

It would have been a FAR easier course for Reagan or Bush Snr at the end of the war with Russia though. It would have been a lot cheaper too.

 

Initially there was little that could be done that wouldn't have resulted in basically replacing the USSR, a bit later on there was at least one potential window of opportunity though.

 

 

In Steven Bauers book he observes that at one point there were so many stinger and anti-tank weapons in Afghanistan, the CIA was offering

$1,000 a piece to buy them back.

 

 

They made a similar mistake in Iraq with debaathification. Sacked an entire nations army and hoped they'd give the weapons back and go home quietly.

 

Nice move Bemmer, created an armed militia in one fell swoop.

 

They were in a no-win situation there too, which was the biggest mistake anyone make over Iraq, not realising that Saddam had keep the lid on an all out civil war for 20 years. Retaining the status-quo was unacceptable to the majority of the population (but it would have been the most sensible course never the less).

 

Add to that the HUGE influx of Bin Lardinists looking for a cause/fight, and Syria and Iran's interests in a nice destabilising rukus and you get what we have.

 

Again no win, and more importantly no easy solution for anyone that takes over now.

 

I think it had less to do with what was right for Iraq and far more to do with who got paid for doing it. Paying a US corporation to control the country is far more desirable than supplying Iraqi people with jobs.

 

Course it's not just Iraq where that shit happens, they did it after Katrina too. I read an old article this morning which pointed out rather than paying locals, the contract for tarping over roofs was tendered out to the Shaw group at $175 per square, it was subcontracted to such a degree that in the end the men doing the job got $2 per square.

 

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20060410/davis

 

 

...and the tarps are provided by FEMA.

 

There were probably commercial interests, but that doesn't take away from the issue that the Shia majority wouldn't have allowed it, one of their biggest complaints after the "war" was that Saddam's structures that had oppressed them for years weren't being dismantled quickly enough, although that rather swiftly developed into complaints that things weren't being rebuilt quickly enough (and all sides were initially happy to shelter foreign insurgents bent just destabilising everything).

 

It was a no win situation. I suspect even with the best and most through planning possible it was no win in the short term, Iraq was only ever going to be something that was looked back at Iraq in 20 years as anything, but an utter mess.

 

 

And again going back to now, pulling out too quickly will be a bad thing, but staying to long will also be.

 

 

I bet on reflection the Pentagon insiders wish that Saddam had been left in power. Doing their bidding as he did for all those years.

[acrossthepond 706]

So ready for it all to be over. Obama or McCain, it doesn't matter who wins. The blind optimism that Obama inspires is sickening. He's going to change nothing.

[Guest alex]

So ready for it all to be over. Obama or McCain, it doesn't matter who wins. The blind optimism that Obama inspires is sickening. He's going to change nothing.

He's another Tommy Carcetti imo.

[Park Life 70]

So ready for it all to be over. Obama or McCain, it doesn't matter who wins. The blind optimism that Obama inspires is sickening. He's going to change nothing.

 

 

He is the man, this is his time.

[Happy Face 29]

So ready for it all to be over. Obama or McCain, it doesn't matter who wins. The blind optimism that Obama inspires is sickening. He's going to change nothing.

 

 

He is the man, this is his time.

 

"Good afternoon Mr President, welcome to the White House, I'd like to introduce you to this gentleman visiting with us from the CIA. He's come along today to give you a short powerpoint presentation on what we call the Kennedy solution..."

[Guest Stevie]

That the fate of the world is in the hands of a bunch of obese inbred retards.

 

I'm scared.

 

John McCain would be a disaster for planet earth IMO. As for that daft wench with him...fuck me...Please let Obama win.

I must be the only cunt who's not interested, they're yank we are English, we've done more for the world than them, command more respect than them, and are more important than them. Fuckin arseholes. Why do people care? If we end up in a nuclear war it won't necessarily be their fault, same with economic meltdown, China will have a stronger economy than them and no cunt fusses over their election. Fuck them. I know fuck all about America, apart from they're mongrel race cunts, and before you say English people are, so fuck, not as much as them.

[Tom 13847]

China > Russia > America in terms of where the power is going.

[ewerk 26348]

That the fate of the world is in the hands of a bunch of obese inbred retards.

 

I'm scared.

 

John McCain would be a disaster for planet earth IMO. As for that daft wench with him...fuck me...Please let Obama win.

I must be the only cunt who's not interested, they're yank we are English, we've done more for the world than them, command more respect than them, and are more important than them. Fuckin arseholes. Why do people care? If we end up in a nuclear war it won't necessarily be their fault, same with economic meltdown, China will have a stronger economy than them and no cunt fusses over their election. Fuck them. I know fuck all about America, apart from they're mongrel race cunts, and before you say English people are, so fuck, not as much as them.

 

Possibly one of the most ignorant statements ever posted on this forum.

[Guest Stevie]

That the fate of the world is in the hands of a bunch of obese inbred retards.

 

I'm scared.

 

John McCain would be a disaster for planet earth IMO. As for that daft wench with him...fuck me...Please let Obama win.

I must be the only cunt who's not interested, they're yank we are English, we've done more for the world than them, command more respect than them, and are more important than them. Fuckin arseholes. Why do people care? If we end up in a nuclear war it won't necessarily be their fault, same with economic meltdown, China will have a stronger economy than them and no cunt fusses over their election. Fuck them. I know fuck all about America, apart from they're mongrel race cunts, and before you say English people are, so fuck, not as much as them.

 

Possibly one of the most ignorant statements ever posted on this forum.

It was intended to be. I'm ignorant of everything yank, and those Irish yanks are worse than the real thing, collecting money for the IRA in Boston, and McDonalds chipping in. Cunts.

[Happy Face 29]

That the fate of the world is in the hands of a bunch of obese inbred retards.

 

I'm scared.

 

John McCain would be a disaster for planet earth IMO. As for that daft wench with him...fuck me...Please let Obama win.

I must be the only cunt who's not interested, they're yank we are English, we've done more for the world than them, command more respect than them, and are more important than them. Fuckin arseholes. Why do people care? If we end up in a nuclear war it won't necessarily be their fault, same with economic meltdown, China will have a stronger economy than them and no cunt fusses over their election. Fuck them. I know fuck all about America, apart from they're mongrel race cunts, and before you say English people are, so fuck, not as much as them.

 

Possibly one of the most ignorant statements ever posted on this forum.

It was intended to be. I'm ignorant of everything yank, and those Irish yanks are worse than the real thing, collecting money for the IRA in Boston, and McDonalds chipping in. Cunts.

 

 

My favourite part was "China will have a stronger economy than them and no cunt fusses over their election".

[Guest alex]

That the fate of the world is in the hands of a bunch of obese inbred retards.

 

I'm scared.

 

John McCain would be a disaster for planet earth IMO. As for that daft wench with him...fuck me...Please let Obama win.

I must be the only cunt who's not interested, they're yank we are English, we've done more for the world than them, command more respect than them, and are more important than them. Fuckin arseholes. Why do people care? If we end up in a nuclear war it won't necessarily be their fault, same with economic meltdown, China will have a stronger economy than them and no cunt fusses over their election. Fuck them. I know fuck all about America, apart from they're mongrel race cunts, and before you say English people are, so fuck, not as much as them.

 

Possibly one of the most ignorant statements ever posted on this forum.

It was intended to be. I'm ignorant of everything yank, and those Irish yanks are worse than the real thing, collecting money for the IRA in Boston, and McDonalds chipping in. Cunts.

That is an urban legend man. Someone picked up on IRA on payslips which actually = Individual Retirement Account. There was a certain irony though about (pre-9/11) the NYPD and FDNY being big on collections for the IRA.

[ewerk 26348]

Why the media doesn't have the same sort of coverage of the Chinese elections is a mystery.

Edited November 4, 2008 by ewerk

[Park Life 70]

Why the media doesn't have the same sort of coverage of the Chinese elections is a mystery.

[Meenzer 14055]

Why the media doesn't have the same sort of coverage of the Chinese elections is a mystery.

Nobody cares; Hu wins.