Taliban: Don't attack us!

[hungrypete]

<< it can't be just the free world vs. Afghanastan. It's not one country. It's a mind set. It's the free world vs. terrorism. Afghanastan chose to side with the terrorists, so they're getting pulled into it. If anyone else goes along with them, it's their demise as well. Don't just point out the Afghanastani people. We have to deal with all of them. >>



Which would seem to include Pakistan, Afghanistan, Libya, and Iraq.

edit: And those dancing fools in Palestine....

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

<< <<What makes you beleive that the Taliban is harboring Bin Laden?>>

They have been harboring him for years. We found that out after the last WTC bombing. The Taliban refused to hand him over. >>

Why the hell do you think the Anti-Taliban in Afghanastan were launching missiles against the Taliban yesterday!? What the hell do you think they're trying to do ... attack some innocents to prove their alliance with us????

 

[hungrypete]

<<

<< <<What makes you beleive that the Taliban is harboring Bin Laden?>>

They have been harboring him for years. We found that out after the last WTC bombing. The Taliban refused to hand him over. >>

Why the hell do you think the Anti-Taliban in Afghanastan were launching missiles against the Taliban yesterday!? What the hell do you think they're to do ... attack some innocents to prove their alliance with us???? >>



I was under the impression that attack was in retaliation of an attack by Bin Laden forces (in cooperation with the Taliban) against the anio-Taliban group. Right? Therefore, we shouldn't 'parking-lot-ify' Afghanistan, we have allies there that should be rewarded for attempting to overthrow a tyrannic government.

 

[DevilishEXFWer]

We actually do NEED more parking!

Afghanistan would make a lovely parking lot.

F*ckers, the lot of them.

 

[arod]

<<

<< The Taliban appealed to the U.S. not to attack Afghanistan because the Afghan people are already in a great deal of misery. >>




Dancing in the street is misery? >>


Thats was what I was going to say... kill em all

 

[PCResources]

<< What makes you beleive that the Taliban is harboring Bin Laden? >>



Maybe because the Taliban has said they MIGHT turn him over if the charges are justified???

Patrick

 

[PCResources]

<< Thats was what I was going to say... kill em all >>



Kill 'em all!

Make the place into a huge parking lot with a huge mall at the end of it, the american dream in afghanistan...

Patrick

 

[hungrypete]

<<

<< What makes you beleive that the Taliban is harboring Bin Laden? >>



Maybe because the Taliban has said they MIGHT turn him over if the charges are justified???

Patrick >>



That decision is going to be taken from them soon. They are saving as much face as possible, but it is apparent that they are very very frightened of the soon to be revealed consequences.

 

[Tauren]

FFMCobalt - Go here. and read the first couple of lines. They ADMIT it.

 

[ViperSSD]

oh crap, we may no win oh wait........their one tank would be a real match for our 3000 in germany

 

[rickn]

hmm, 18-20 million ppl live in Kabul alone, thats real smart, kill em all

Grow up people. Act your age, not your shoe size

 

[Fausto]

The northern alliance attack was, in my opinion, both retaliation for the recent bomb attack on their leader AND a big "hey! we hate these guys (the taliban) too!! Give us guns and money so we can overthrow them!!" Revenge and a opportunity to curry favor with the US.

Fausto

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

I'm saying that we have some friends there. We can't lay waste to the whole place.




<< KABUL, Afghanistan, Sept. 12 ? The rulers of Afghanistan, which has offered a safe haven to Osama bin Laden, said Wednesday that it was premature to talk about extraditing the Saudi militant, identified by U.S. officials as the prime suspect in the terror attacks on the United States. Meantime, a day after anti-Taliban forces rocked Kabul with an air and rocket assault, international aid groups scrambled to flee the threat of a U.S. retaliatory attack. >>

 

[shifrbv]

"The problem is going to be defining who exactly the enemy is. "

Right. Bin-Laden was also spending alot of time in Pakistan and has many connections there as well. Do we take them out? Remember, before you answer, they already have nuclear capabilities. They wouldn't be able to hit US, but they can do some damage to India which has been openly supporting US during this and is their mortal enemy. Besides, they're just waiting for an excuse to nuke India. Then India has nukes as well. Where will it stop once it's started?

 

[hungrypete]

<< "The problem is going to be defining who exactly the enemy is. "

Right. Bin-Laden was also spending alot of time in Pakistan and has many connections there as well. Do we take them out? Remember, before you answer, they already have nuclear capabilities. They wouldn't be able to hit US, but they can do some damage to India which has been openly supporting US during this and is their mortal enemy. Besides, they're just waiting for an excuse to nuke India. Then India has nukes as well. Where will it stop once it's started? >>



I believe that we have the capabilities to cripple them before they could launch any missiles, but it's impossible to predict something like that. A suitcase nuke is another story though.

We are very lucky that Russia and China are siding with us, that should help prevent any "WW3" scenarios.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

WW3 doesn't have to be an even spread between sides of the major world powers. Germany started WWI... the aliances came later.

 

[Looney]

Fvck them.

The fact that they've hid that bastard for all these years is the reason why this happened. Bin Laden should have been handed over the first time the WTC was bombed. Or the times the embassies were bombed. Or the time the US battleship was bombed.

Fvck them, they've had their chance... wipe out that government asap and let the rebels take over.

 

[b0mbrman]

Tell them to hand over Bin Laden then.....regardless of whether or not he's behind it this time, he's still responsible for previous terrorist attacks.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

Moralpanic,
You're pushing blame off of us. It's not their fault. True, their actions are there fault. But our lack of action is our fault. We should have been in there to smear his ass on the sand the first time -reguardless of damn political reasons.

 

[hungrypete]

<< WW3 doesn't have to be an even spread between sides of the major world powers. Germany started WWI... the aliances came later. >>



at worst, at THIS point, it would seem likely that NATO forces would have at most 4 opposing countries? As long as Pakistan doesn't launch all of thier nuclear arsenal, I think things will remain relatively 'controlled'.

 

[NikPreviousAcct]

ya know, I'm so surprised that governments like Pakastan take SH1TLOADS of money and spend it on nukes and research for nukes instead of taking care of their people who are in such a depressed nation.

 

[Stark]

Both China and Russia hate Afghanistan. They will help us wipe them out.

We should hold the worlds first multi-national nuclear warhead test: one from the US, one from Russia, and one from China. They need to be small nukes so the fallout doesn't spread too far.

The country is already in the stone age with barely any infrastructure or industry. We need to make that snakepit uninhabitable, then ask the rest of the arab world: who else wants some? :|

 

[StageLeft]

I am still shocked that people here think nuking is the answer.

 

[Aihyah]

You're pushing blame off of us. It's not their fault. True, their actions are there fault. But our lack of action is our fault. We should have been in there to smear his ass on the sand the first time -reguardless of damn political reasons.

true, western powers(including isreal) have been too weak in response to terrorists. we use rational small responses..and look what good its done isreal. good for public relations as they don't take many lives, but the terrorists win and lose little. If isreal extracted 10x-100x palestinian lives per isreali lost, the palestinians themselves would eventually not stand for terrorists amoung themselves.

 

[royaldank]

You know, there is a great likelyhood that there will be no retaliation in the form of attacks.

I'd say one or two nights of sending some cruise missles in will probably be the only form of attacks that we will do. I think our government would rather not kill civilians if they don't have to. They'd much rather grab the guys, try them, and then kill or imprison them legally so that we still stand as the world leader.

Alot of people calling for the mass destruction of Afghanistan should consider that we are defending a democracy, a land where we have rules, laws, and an orderly way of doing things. We can't just start killing everyone because we are pissed. We have to realize that we have to use the same process that we are defending. We have to use the legal system. Arms are only to carry out the legal decision.

I would like to see an American vote on whether public execution is warranted. I bet we'd get to see it.