Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > British Columbia  > Mission in Afghanistan      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 Ticketoride
Joined: 6/3/2004
Msg: 4
Mission in AfghanistanPage 3 of 3    (1, 2, 3)
Might I remind everyone that a NATO member country was attacked and as part of our treaty agreements, when one is attacked, all come to their defence.

 SoLongThanksForAllTheFish
Joined: 6/14/2007
Msg: 5
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/1/2010 9:25:14 AM
The Chief knew, Keegstra, Chomski, McDougal and half the world. And not all of them are bad don't get me wrong.

Although the reference to Keegstra pretty much gives it away, please do us the favour of stating exactly who you mean by "them" so the unofficial forum police can get on with reporting you.


Looks like us Albertans and ex-pats (include me here) are the only ones complaining.

A curious thought... is not everybody complaining about the Afghanistan mission in one way or another?

I don't see there's anything new to say on the subject, nor has there been more than one new point come up in years. However, I'm annoyed at being lumped together with the above thinking under the umbrella label of "Albertans and ex-pats" and some here seem to have misread my views:

I am in favour of the mission in Afghanistan, in principle and (so far although not inevitably) in practice. The ethical issues were clear at the beginning, we addressed them then and I see no reason to second-guess that thinking now. We haven't learned anything new about the Taliban or Al-Qaeda since 2001 to suggest that we were wrong in seeing them as a danger that needed to be neutralized. We have learned lots about the Bush government and Iraq, but that's beside the point.

The one new point that has come up is the question "when we are done in Afghanistan?"

Are we done when the Taliban are absolutely neutralized? That'd be "never" so it's obviously not an option.

Are we done when they are convincingly neutralized? From that we get the major reason for our continued presence. There's obviously still work to do there since the Taliban keep bombing both our troops and civilians.

Are we done when we (meaning Canada, not NATO) have done as much as we can and our continued presence would be enabling inaction by the US rather than helping real action? Sound thinking in theory, hard to argue with, but difficult politics in practice. Some Americans object that Canada lets the US do all its dirty work, and they have a good point. We need to be sure, and to show, that any reason we have for leaving Afghanistan are real and sound, and not just an excuse to reap the benefits of NATO without paying the cost.

Are we done when it becomes clear that we're supporting a corrupt and repressive local government? Hell, no! This was never a humanitarian mission; we're there for our good and our ethical responsibility is to make sure our own troops behave, not to reform the country. If reform doesn't hurt the mission, fine, by all means do as much as we can, but don't lose perspective... Afghan governments at least as far back as the Soviet invasion have all been at least as corrupt and repressive. That they still are is absolutely not a reason to cut and run, just the reality on the ground.


the PM's reply was something like... ' It is the price we pay for INVADING Afganistan.'

Much as I am coming to loathe our pint-sized wannabe dictator, he has a point. Did anybody expect this war to be without pain?

On the other hand, this is the same asshat who said "well he shouldn't have been there" when one of our peacekeepers was killed by Israeli troops invading Lebanon, so obviously his claims to support the troops have a good portion of BS to them and should always be examined skeptically.
 WesternWildRose
Joined: 9/15/2008
Msg: 6
view profile
History
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/1/2010 11:36:18 AM
Dan... I do recall mentioning something in the past about the Tar Sands project...and in relation to this discussion...well I guess it can be seen as a connection as to our alliance with the United States.....their battles being our battles.

As for Alberta Oil and Gas...well...yes the oil pipline flows directly from Alberta to the coast of Texas. There is a proposal by the Chinese for a secondary pipe to connect to the BC coast... Prince Rupert...and the Chinese are ready to build it at their own expense so they too can tap into the oil.
This is not a popular notion with Alberta or the Americans.
Is being allied with the Chinese in tapping our oil any better or worse than being allied with the USA? talking oil exploration and production...not politics or human rights issues here.

The report I saw on the news was on CNN...and it spoke about the Canadians have a richer source of oil and gas for the US.....cheaper and untapped, closer and Canada is a friendly source, the US would not have to rely on Middle East oil becasue Canada has more than enough and is ready to be explored.

Back to the original topic...which I guess I have clarified now... .we went into Afganistan as part of a joint Invasion Force..... it was just a surprise to me as I thought we went in as a joint Peace-Keeping Force.

I've had some emails about this topic...and yes...I have to agree with most of the emails... Freedom aside...the arms manufacturers are the ones benefitting....and consider the unemployment figures if the majority of those military personnel were to return home and find themselves an unemployed stat. Yes...there are some economic benefits to participating in a mission overseas..... .many businesses do profit...and it keeps people employed.
 WesternWildRose
Joined: 9/15/2008
Msg: 7
view profile
History
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/2/2010 4:27:41 PM

in the meantime let's place some hope global warming will bring a solution.....


Good One darlin'...excellent sense of humour as always

ya...well that would happen if the 'Governing Body' would recognize that Global Warming exists....is happening.....and would be proactive.

I'm too tired to dig up quotes from the last few Environment Ministers.... post David Anderson. Shame as Canada was leading the charge with Kyoto....now we are like the ostrich.....digging our heads deep in the *tar* sand.

Oil revenue is motivating a lot of 1st World countries right now...including Canada...it dictates our actions on other fronts, such where we alliance ourselves or whether we stand alone.
 WesternWildRose
Joined: 9/15/2008
Msg: 8
view profile
History
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/11/2010 7:47:37 AM
POF Member: Outdoor2 posted this in another thread yesterday, and I think it is worth a good hard read as it hits hard to some questions how we value our brave and hard-w0rking military forces. The blurb also goes to point out that they are working to bring democracy to the Afgan people.

Read it please..it is worth the read, keep in mind Rick Mercer is an entertainer, some things said are tonge in cheek, but I think he hits the nail on the head with this commentary.
***************************************************************************

There's a very good reason why the word prorogue doesn't come up that often in our society. Why would it? The word has absolutely no resonance with anyone in Canada because the notion that you can shut down anything for months at a time is a total fantasy. That's the thing about life; it's relentless. If you are an adult and live in the real world, proroguing isn't on the agenda, in much the same way levitating isn't.

God knows I love the idea of proroguing. Everyone in Canada has lain in bed and prayed for the elusive snow day. The idea that while you slept, the heavens opened up and dumped so much snow on the ground that the front door can't open and the school bus just can't come. We all remember snow days and that glorious feeling that the deadlines, the tests, the irritating people, the routine and the responsibilities could be avoided for one entire magnificent day with no consequences whatsoever. And if you didn't do your homework, or you were heading into what you knew was going to be a world of hurt, a snow day meant you dodged the bullet.

But snow days happen to children. If you are an adult, it doesn't matter how much snow falls – you still have to get to work and you still have to shovel the walk. Snow days don't apply to adults unless you happen to be the Prime Minister of Canada, who with one phone call has the ability to give every member of Parliament two months off.

We elect these men and women to travel to Ottawa and represent us in the House of Commons. Well, forget that notion – it's old-fashioned and democratic. Welcome to Canada 2010 – we embark on a brand-new decade as a country that has taxation without representation.




It is ironic that while Parliament has been suspended, we remain a nation at war. On New Year's Eve, we greeted the news that five Canadians were killed in a single day with sadness but not surprise. We are at war because, ostensibly, we are helping bring democracy to Afghanistan. How the mission is progressing is open for debate but this much is certain – at present, there is a parliament in Afghanistan that it is very much open for business. Canada has no such institution.

In Afghanistan, President Hamid Karzai's government faces fierce opposition at every turn. Many of his cabinet choices have been rejected in a secret ballot by the more than 200 parliamentarians who sit in the legislature. Simply closing it down and operating without their consent is not an option; to do so would be blatantly undemocratic or at the very least downright Canadian. If Mr. Karzai suspended the legislature on a whim, we might be forced to ask the question why Canadians are dying to bring democracy to that country.

Stephen Harper doesn't have that problem. Our Parliament has been suspended for no other reason than the Prime Minister simply can't be bothered with the relentless checks and balances that democracy affords us. He doesn't want to have to stand in the House of Commons and hear anyone question him on any subject. I don't blame him. Parliament is filled with jackals, opportunists and boors. The problem is, like it or not, they were elected.

I also don't blame the Prime Minister for wanting to keep his ministers out of the spotlight. This is a man who could argue that he is Canada's greenest PM simply because he's the only one who has gone out of his way to give potted plants key portfolios.

The problem is, he is the one who appointed cabinet and like it or not, they are supposed to be accountable. A minister's job is not to hide in his or her riding; it is to be accountable in Ottawa – or at least that was the promise.

This Prime Minister has gone from the promise of an open, accessible and accountable government to a government that is simply closed.



It is too bad that prorogation isn't something that our soldiers had in their arsenal. When faced with the order to head out on a foot patrol in the Panjwai district of southern Afghanistan, to risk their lives to bring democracy to that place, wouldn't it be nice if they could simply prorogue and roll over and go back to sleep? Soldiers don't get that luxury. That is afforded only to the people who ultimately order them to walk down those dangerous dusty roads in the first place.


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/proroguing-is-for-children-and-stephen-harper/article1420026/
 mcalgary
Joined: 11/10/2009
Msg: 9
view profile
History
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/26/2010 1:05:21 PM
I love it when the same people that are against our Afghan mission but are the first ones that were putting up posts condeming the Taliban and it's anti-woman practises, saying we must do something about it.

The bottom line is the Taliban were harbouring a leader who brought about an attack on one of our NATO allies. This automatically brings us into it, that is how alliances work. Old news.

We will never be totally rid of the Taliban but must we must try and keep them in control at least.
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 10
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/26/2010 1:33:27 PM
First off, Karzia was seen as an ineffective leader since the Clinton era politiocs which went on in there. Even Mahmoud, the guy who got assassinated on Sept 10, 2001 thought him weak. Karzai is there for Unocal. Look in Ghost Wars for proof of that.

Sceondly, Our mission in Aft/Paki is to Balkanize the two nations to prevent the Chinese from getting a pipeline throught there. McCrystal is using counter gang techniques to great effect. They worked well in Iraq which is now split into several smaller states. Tough to get a pipeline through there. And it's odd how just after he showed up in Aft/Paki (aka Pipelinistan) the insurrency hit the fan.

Third, According to the Treaty of Westphalia 1628 (?) each country is a sovreign entity and has a right to self deterimination among other items. This means that we don't meddle in the affairs of ther countries. If they did drive some planes into our allies buildings, then logic dictates we figure out WHO did the act FIRST. This is not a closed subject. There is a growing body of eeidence and opinion that there are some serious questions which have yet to be resolved regarding those attacks.
Next we declare war formally on them. Unlike the wars in Korea, Vietnam, Iraq and Iraq redux, Afr/paki, and coming to an oilfield near you...Yemen. This process of allies and declaring war is best illustrated by the events of WW1, the War to end all Wars. Read The Guns of August for an excellent primer on it.

I feel that sticking our troops over there is not right. It serves no Afghani other than the ruling classes, Politicians and drug warlords, and I look forward to someone showing me how it serves our troops. The Afghans should sort themselves out or not.

As for the whole bankrupt democracy over there arguement: Name one government where it worked.

They do not hate us for our freedoms, they hate us for our foreign policies.

To illegally occupy another country is to meddle in affairs where in which we don't belong. It only opens us up to an attack here in Canada, either false flag or a real terrorist attack.

Bring my troops home.
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 11
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/26/2010 10:38:58 PM
Those nations were totally defeated militarily and then a Marshall plan implemented. Not the same. We did not go there to give them democracy. Another factor is that two of them were European and had values similar to ours. Japan was very industrialized. Now we're trying to rebuild Iraq after having destroyed their infrastructure by precision bombing. Luckily, we have Hallibutron to rebuild the whole country a bit at a time instead of the whole country at once. The nukes in Japan broke the will of the Japanese people to resist. The will of the Iraqis and Afghanis has yet to be broken by any invader. That said we haven't tried nukes there yet so I guess one could hold out hope there.

Look for China in Africa. They are huge over there. Sudan supplies 7% of their oil. Oh and Look! Those tankers go right past Yemen! How long until Americans are enjoying a special relationship with the Yemeni? Lots of African countries are being courted by the Chinese who are offereing a better deal for their resources. 50/50 versus the 20/80 which is normal. Guess who is getting pissed off at that? Do a bit more searching and you will find lots of reports of Chinese in Africa VER Y active.

"Jewish Illuminati Mason Skull and Bones Cult." I'm not familiar with them. Could you provide some references? As for believing things on the internet. Don't. Believe the authorietes when they say we're looking for WMD, it's not about oil, ect, ect.

We can't move forward into anothers country until we are sure that we have the culprits of the action. Like capturing Bin Laden. When is that going to happen? I think I saw him having breakfast with MJ and Elvis.
Quote a billion UN resolutions, It doesn't solve the intial arguement that there are too many questions left unanswered. This jeapordises our entire moral position as a former peace keeping nation. Remember the respect we used to have? Gone now.

Not sure who started a world war to protect us or what you're refering to here. I don't think an Imperial global crusade is anything that I want Canada to be part of. It didn't work well for the Romans but hey, they didn't have nukes either. Good luck with your mores.
 mcalgary
Joined: 11/10/2009
Msg: 12
view profile
History
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 1/27/2010 10:42:10 PM

Those nations were totally defeated militarily and then a Marshall plan implemented. Not the same. We did not go there to give them democracy. Another factor is that two of them were European and had values similar to ours. Japan was very industrialized. Now we're trying to rebuild Iraq after having destroyed their infrastructure by precision bombing. Luckily, we have Hallibutron to rebuild the whole country a bit at a time instead of the whole country at once. The nukes in Japan broke the will of the Japanese people to resist. The will of the Iraqis and Afghanis has yet to be broken by any invader. That said we haven't tried nukes there yet so I guess one could hold out hope there.


I will add 2 more. Italy and Turkey(turkey after ww1). Now are you going to try and say Turkey has our values and common beliefs).

What is this about Iraq. It seems to be in all your answers. They are 2 completly different wars and we are not even involved in Iraq.

How about a terrorist being harboured in New Guinea masterminds a plan to topple the CN tower right into the Skydome and kill thousands of Canadians. The plan is a complete success. The said mastermind then tells everyone he planned it and has many more plans coming up. What do you think we should do?????????? I think you would want us to just let him blow up more. Right?? And I guess you also think that NATO obligations should be blown off by all our allies since trying to capture this idiot is just not important enough.

They would help us in a pinch and therefore we must do the same if it is in reaction to an attack. Once again. The United States was attacked my Osama. He was being harboured in Afghanistan. Iraq has nothing to do with any of this. There is no reason for anyone to try and block a pipline from Russia or a fmr republic of russia to India and Pakistan. No one will use nukes except maybe Osama if we don't find him. Tehre is no such thing as the JIMSBC he was joking. Stop confusing Iraq with Afghanistan no one questioned anything about attacking them it was unanimous. It was obvious. Any President (even the most pacifist person in the entire US) would have done it. The difference may have been that they wouldn'g have gotten distracted with Iraq and probably would have caught him. Get better Reasons.
 WesternWildRose
Joined: 9/15/2008
Msg: 13
view profile
History
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/21/2010 11:02:39 AM
Does anyone know of the casuality count of the Canadian Mission right now?

I drove by the local Legion yesterday...the flags were back down to half mast....so I gather more of our Canadians have died.

oh... I just checked... 140 dead.

2 dead this year, the last was Feb 12th, Cpl. Joshua Caleb Baker, 24.
Baker was serving in Afghanistan as a member of The Loyal Regiment from Edmonton, as well as with the Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team.
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 14
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/22/2010 9:38:43 PM
I'm so glad we have a man of peace in here. Too bad he's wrong about the Clinton's Adminsitrations reaction to all those attacks. Ole Slick Willy was tossing off Cruise missiles like it was the fourth of July. Granted, not the same effect as a Marine Corp landing on your beach front real estate but a cruise missle is counted as a reaction. At least it was to the President of the United States.

Our mission is Afghanistan is morally bankrupt on several accounts.

Each nation has an intrinsic right to self-detrimination. Period. End of Paragraph.

Our occupation there is predicated on the fact that Osama Bin Laden (Tim Osman) sat in a cave with a laptop and compromised Sat phone and took out three buildings in New York with two planes and other spectacular feats, like having all of NORAD stand down. There are enough questions here to validate a fresh, objective look at what really happened on 9/11.
If it does appear that Tim didn't do it then why are we there?

Any excuses of bringing democracy or women's rights are sophistries. How about women's right's in Saudi Arabian? At least they have oil. All Afghanistan has is opium.

Should anything happen in Vancouver then any NATO member nation can be expected to review its policy regarding a continued deployment and um, nation (Empire) building in Afghanistan.

Personally, I think Sir John Keegan had the best idea. Just go in and flatten them then leave. The message would be clear. The really cool part of that strategy is it would be easily repeateable. Could we do it today? Nope. All our troops are busy in various corners of our burgeoning Empire. Had it been a punitive strike, the Boys would be itching to go. Hence the massive deterent in having them NOT deployed. Deployed troops have no deterent power. So if your troops are busy what do you have to rely on for deterent?

Nukes.
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 15
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/23/2010 1:10:02 PM
Um, I'm not really sick and rather not close to stupid at all. Thanks for your concern.

I pose the question that if your entire military is engaged holding down your Empire, then your conventional military deterant is compromised. The US Military is designed to fight in 2.5 wars. ( I never figured out the 0.5 thing.) So, count them up: Iraq, Afghanistan, and NorthComm. Opps that's three. Luckily, the mercenaries have come to the rescue with a Coallition of the Billing and they are now the SECOND largest contingent in Iraq. So there are more Mercs in Iraq than british soldiers. So. let's make that 2.5 after all. Nobel Peace Prize anyone?

How can you threaten any nation now? If they call the Pentagon the phone's busy. Sure they can bomb Iran into the Stone age but it is critical to get the troops into there to secure the oilfields. And bring Democracy to them and women's rights and humanitarian aid and all the rest of the excuses. So what troops would you use? None.

The US has no cards left other than the Nuclear card. This is the fear. They are painting themselves into a corner. We are one serious crisis away from it hitting the fan.

It is getting to the point now where bringing the troops out of Afghanistan is an option just to put them into Iran. CIA won't like that though as they won't have their Poppy fields secured anymore.

So, no not really stupid, just able to see a bit more geo-politically than some people by virtue of training and reading too many books about this and some other stuff.
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 16
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/24/2010 9:35:35 AM
@ Dan, I will let you figure out whether or not I want to stick our troops in any country we are told to occupy and then Nuke the rest of the planet into submission. I am not about to change my writing to the lowest common denmoninator.

@ Literally Dreaming. You live in a wonderful world and I envy you. I truly do.

You live in a world of Global Warming where the seas are rising and the polar bears drowning. Where your President just received a Nobel Peace prize for talking about peace and starting wars to have peace. Where there is no Depression and a Jobless Recovery, Mercury is good for kids as reported on CNN. This is a fantastic world for you and I envy the fact that you're comfortable in it. I do not wish to dissuade you from your reverie.

But you need to know that your life will not be mine. I have a different level of intellect, training, experiences, education and a natural skepicism.

My authorities are the Laws of The Universe. The Laws of Physics; of Chemistry; of Mathematics; of Logic and others. These are my Authorities and when they tell me that a 47 story building of glass, steel and concrete cannot be pulverized into rubble due to a few office fires, I have to listen just as you would listen to your authorites looking for WMD.

Understand that I don't want to remove you from that wonderful place where politicians don't lie. One of us should be happy, while one of us deals with reality.
 mcalgary
Joined: 11/10/2009
Msg: 17
view profile
History
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/24/2010 7:45:59 PM

So people like me that are anti-war and actually vocal have to keep hearing another debt-ridden battle or the rational for it. Aggression rarely if ever works. It tends to be a circular back and forth.


The only way that Pacifism works is if everyone is a pacifist. This has never been and will never be the case.

Sorry but there are times that war is warranted, like Afghanistan. Iraq was a stupid frivolous war but Afghanistan has it's purpose. Although I do agree with the beginnings of negotiations with the Taliban.

War does cost a lot of money and is a burden to our national finances but it is not even close to the burden that we would have if we continued to not try and stop Al Queda (no idea how to spell it sorry) and more attacks happen in our homelands.

And, once again, the US economy and our own are closely connected so no matter how anti US you want to be your job and mine are dependant, to some extent, to the health of the US economy. And as Litterally has said their military protects us also from foreign attacks.

How long do you think it would have taken the Soviets to take over Canada if we were not part of NATO??
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 18
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/27/2010 8:53:02 AM
Oddly enough, these posts are not off topic.

The Myth of what happened to us on 9/11 is used as a reason to start the War Without End: The War on Terror. If we question the Myth, as more and more people are doing, we question our governments ability to create a planetary war. What's wrong with a planetary war? From their point: Nothing. And we can trust them to keep it from going Nuclear, right? Our governments are good people.

If we want to bring our troops home and end this experiement in post-modern imperialism, question 9/11. If it turns out not to have been done as the government says, ie Osama and the boys, then who did it? But the REASON we go to war is BECAUSE Osama did it. If he didn't do it, Why are we sending our soldiers to die offshore?

If we want to bring our troops home and end this experiement in post-modren imperialism, question 9/11.
 Walts
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 19
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/27/2010 9:32:20 AM
I've always wondered why countries send their young to fight in "our" wars with others. Read recently the reasoning,,,which is that you couldn't get any of us old farts to believe the crap they feed the young ones to believe what they are doing is for "good" instead of what wars really are.

Think about that for a sec or two as they come home in body bags.
 Walts
Joined: 5/7/2005
Msg: 20
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/27/2010 11:37:11 AM
Yeah,,,,I knew the answer,,,just thru the question out there for those that haven't questioned it,,,,,especially for those young lost souls who think they are doing something "good" for a country willing to send them somewhere to die for "a cause". They usually have it figured out by the time they get back(if they get back) or shortly thereafter.

It was also pointing out the fact that some of our schooling(and parenting) isn't doing such a good job at teaching our young to be crititcal thinkers. Of course,,,if we reread some of the posts here,,,,we can see an example of that too,,,here and there.
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 21
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 2/28/2010 5:03:56 PM
Hmm not sure I find a lot of traction with brainwashing the troops line. Let me explain.

I have gone through both boot camp as a man (member) and Officer in the CF. in both cases, although more pronounced in the member or NCO boot camp. The made us all look alike with haircuts and uniforms and mannerisms of speech, and movements (Drill, marching ect.) So they took away our personal identity within a matter of weeks. Maybe days for some of the guys. They then overlay that with a new family which is that of the Unit. SLA Marshall (I beleive) found that men in WWII didn't fight so much for the US as for the man in the trench beside them. Ideologues die when the bullets start flying it seems.

So were we brainwashed in the boot camps? Somewhat.

But I do feel after a few decades of studying this kind of thing that it is necessary to create a well functioning military. Unit cohesiveness. When you loss that you get the Mother of all Routs.

I think the brainwashing occurs within our society at a much more subtle level. We are currently building a very nice little Police State within the West to keep us safe from Terrorists. Yet how many people die from terrorist attacks per year? 10? How many people die from cancer or heart disease? More than 10 I'll bet. So a rational society would put the majority of it's financial resourses towards that which is adversely affecting its citzenry, right? We would be spending billions on curing cancer and heart disease.

So why aren't we?

Please don't build a Police State on my account. I'll take my chances with the Terrorists.
 Nerdimus Maximus
Joined: 12/15/2008
Msg: 22
Mission in Afghanistan
Posted: 3/1/2010 9:36:55 AM
I no longer serve. I am very proud of what I accomplished and the troops I lead.

Through the years of education and reading and blahblah State Sponsored Terrorism has become a reality to me. I can see it. so can others. There is more than you think. So when they openly and blatantly pull off weedy crap like the Kinckerbomber then ADMIT it was a Government Op, one would naturally expect outrage.

Think of the implications of that one Op.

- They may have put a functioning bomb KNOWINGLY on board a passenger aircraft WITHOUT telling the passengers.

- Is this the only incident where in the unwitting public was placed in danger?

- Orders for the nekkid body scanners were placed long before this. Who placed the orders? Who had foreknowledge? Was it precise ie Abdul Umar Mutalab would be involved or was it generic: We have to place Nekkid body scanners in the streets but we start in the airports to acclimate people.

- Why were no images of the Amsterdam end of the flight shown? Protecting the CIA Agents who helped Umar by-pass security will be the reason. If this is the reason, Why is a civil servants life deemed to me more valuable than a plane full of cilvilians? And how much is his life worth? Two planes loads? Three? Who decides this?

I'm not the smartest guy, but I would like five minutes alone with the wanker who decided it was OK to let the bomb go through.

So is there State Sponsored Terrorism, oh yeah. The whole Myth of 9/11 allows for us to hit the old Imperialism trail with jingoisms at the ready. "Remember the Maine!" "A Day that will Live in Infamy" and Bush's weak "They hate us for our freedoms."

This War on Terror will have no end.
Show ALL Forums  > British Columbia  > Mission in Afghanistan