US strike kills 11 Pakistani soldiers

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Original post updated. This is getting ridiculous. More intrusions from America and now a threat from Karzai. I don't see this going too well...
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,158
6
81
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Original post updated. This is getting ridiculous. More intrusions from America and now a threat from Karzai. I don't see this going too well for Pakistan

fixed
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
Since I hardly think palehorse or Nick1985 are either credible or have any vision past the end of their nose, I do address this question to only The Green Bean and other fellow
Pakistani citizens.

And that question is, given the present political mood in Pakistan, if the USA and Nato do not respect the territory of Pakistan, how probable is it that Pakistan will terminate the permission for Nato to supply its Afghani occupation using land routes through Pakistan. And if Nato then tries to use force to keep those land based Pakistani supply routes open,
how likely would it be for the Pakistani army to enforce ifs right and what countries do you think would give you support in either the UN or by military means?
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Original post updated. This is getting ridiculous. More intrusions from America and now a threat from Karzai. I don't see this going too well...
Are you more worried about your Taliban friends, or your pride?

There is no excuse for giving them refuge... none.

We will long remember all of those who help or hinder our efforts against the Taliban... which of those will you be remembered for?

 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Lemon Law,
Read up the history of the mighty Pakistani Army:

1965 war: Crossed into Indian Kashmir thinking that India would not cross into Pakistan proper. Ran to the international community for a cease-fire when it's bluff was called and Lahore was about to fall.

1971 war: Lost East-Pakistan in two weeks.

1980's: Lost Siachin Glacier to the Indians and has not been able to get it back since.

1999: Sent Pakistani Army regulars disguised as Kashmiri "rebels" to occupy the Kargil heights. Pakistani army thinking was that their newly acquired nuclear weapons would insulate them from an Indian response. Nuclear weapons or not, India threatened to cross into Pakistan and Nawaz Sharif rushed to Washington to get a face-saving cease-fire and humiliating withdrawal.

Afghanistan: Tried to install a puppet Taliban government to do their bidding while they played their "strategic-depth" games with India. The Taliban are now using Pakistan for strategic depth.

They remind me of Ralph the wolf trying to pilfer a sheep from under the nose of Sam the Sheepdog in the cartoon series. And, like Ralph, they're still trying even after being slapped around silly for decades.

The stories about the Army invading and occupying Pakistan are part of folklore. In coup after coup, they've ridden in like knights in shining armor only to have made even more of a mess than the civilian governments and returned to their barracks in humiliation. You're paying more respect for the Pakistani army than their own people have over the years.

The current anger of the Pakistani people is not so much against the United States but against the Army acting as it's local poodle. The Pakistani people are least interested in it's Army's games and would like as much to see their territory not to be used as a sanctuary by medieval savages. They're realists and know that they are the ones who will be facing the consequences. It is in Pakistan's interests that the Taliban are comprehensively defeated. But there are holdouts in the Army longing for the good old days which are never going to come back who are still playing their "pilfer the sheep" games. Matters are coming to a head and the West will not walk away from Afghanistan, supply routes or not.
 

Lemon law

Lifer
Nov 6, 2005
20,984
3
0
To Tvarad,

Even if I agree that the Pakistani army is not all its cracked up to be, you somewhat miss the point. Any Pakistani decision to change its mind on allowing Nato to use a supply line
through Pakistan as its supply route would be made by its civilian government and likely be largely fueled by Pakistani Public opinion.

After all, that was the initial arrangement made with Pakistan, Nato could use Pakistani soil for a supply line, but no US boots on the ground conducting military action in Pakistan.

And if the Pakistani government were to say, you violated our deal so yankee go home, and the US did not comply, the US would probably never get any basing rights in any
country in the world thereafter. And the enforcement would be in the political rather than the military area.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Originally posted by: Lemon law
No Palehorse, you are not to be believed. If you were successful in winning hearts and minds inside of Afghanistan, the taliban would be totally unable to operate inside of Afghanistan no matter how rested and resupplied they were.

Yet after six years of proven failure in which you make negative progress each and every year, Nato is further from success than when they started six years ago. And rather than accept the political limitations of not being allowed to operate inside of Pakistan, you embrace the excuse as the sole reason for your failure. Which totally fails any logic sniff test, because if your contention were true, one could expect taliban mischief at only the Pakistani Afghani border, when in fact, the taliban is now freely operating all over Afghanistan. Which can only mean the taliban has better popular support than Nato.

But finally, you say something I can partially agree with in-------For years, in this very forum, I have called for a solution in Afghanistan that combines diplomacy, infrastructure and economic development, AND military actions against the Taliban wherever they take refuge. I have ALWAYS stated that it will take a very coordinated effort in all three areas for our mission to be successful.

Funny palehorse, I totally agree that its going to take diplomacy, infrastructure, and economic development to have have any success in Afghanistan. I just take exception with your contention that you have been saying it for years or saying it all. Every once in a blue moon you dredge this contention up when you are 99.99% unwilling to state they are the most important reasons why Nato is failing. And 99.99% of the time you have a one track mind that you must kill anything taliban when you are trying to kill an idea that has positive and negative parts to its appeal. And many of teh sons of the Afghani people are the very taliban you would shoot on sight.

Maybe you and the Nato command structure would be better advised to start demanding the economic development that would bring the very modern ideals that will cause even the taliban to abandon its negative ideas. But no, you are long on self righteousness and pitifully short on results. So instead of rethinking what you can do, you make excuses that can't stand logical examinations. And then basically say, if pigs could fly, what a wonderful world it would be.

The fact is and remains, when you start to win the hearts and minds of the Afghani people, Nato will prevail, you are not, and therefore you continue to fail.

If Nato needs more economic development assistance, say so, if they need better roads, say so in your posts, if they need better diplomacy, say so and where, if you need more troops say so, but just don't keep harping on this failed we can't stop them from crossing the border stuff when your attitudes quite clearly can't even out appeal the taliban who therefore get free run of the country.

But when I suggest that the failures are in any other areas, you are there saying nothing matters except killing the taliban. What part of being a failure are you so proud of palehorse? Because so far Nato is accomplishing nothing and it has very little to do with the taliban having a place to run to.

You're an idiot and a wind bag to boot. Taliban doesn't win hearts and minds they kill you and your children - usually as gruesome as possible like castration and decapitation in public which makes the civi population more fearful and cooperative with the Taliban than US/Nato troops who don't. Hard to win hearts and minds when they fear their own more than you.

All this shit about economic development and Kum Ba Yah campfires is totally irrelevant to villages caught in the crossfire. They side with those they fear.
 

ranmaniac

Golden Member
May 14, 2001
1,939
0
76
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Original post updated. This is getting ridiculous. More intrusions from America and now a threat from Karzai. I don't see this going too well...
Are you more worried about your Taliban friends, or your pride?

There is no excuse for giving them refuge... none.

We will long remember all of those who help or hinder our efforts against the Taliban... which of those will you be remembered for?

George W. Bush's friends did enough to help the Taliban up until September 11th, trying to secure an oil pipeline deal, including his buddy Ken Lay and Enron paying millions in bribes to the Taliban. You can thank the CIA for printing those textbooks used to help train militants which the Taliban still use today. At least the poppy field crop is up, and Chevron/Unocal (Karzai's employer) stock is doing well.

http://cooperativeresearch.org...isit#a120497texasvisit

 

Grunt03

Diamond Member
Jun 24, 2000
3,131
0
0
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
11 Pakistan soldiers killed in border missile strike: officials PESHAWAR, June 11 (

Green Bean - I have been sitting here thinking of how to address your post. I think that the correct way to describe the incident would be: " Casualties of War" or better yet "Collateral Damage".

I noticed how you pick and choose the information you post. Let's feel bad for the Pakistan Soldiers. The truth of the matter is they are very disloyal, cannot be trusted and will sell out to the highest bidder. Oh yeah lets not mention the facts that many of them are largely influenced by the Taliban. You bitch, moan and complain about things but do not have first hand experence!!! I have been deployed to each location!!! I notice that you do not mention all of those service members who have died fighting for others that dont give a shit about them. I my opinion we have lost to many service members trying to unf#ck countries that do not give a shit about their own people. But wait, that's what a military force is susposed to do, fight for those to weak or frail to fight. If your military force was worth a shit they would be doing more to resolve the conflict.

So what if 11 soldiers were killed, it's all part of war and in war there are no winners.
 

tvarad

Golden Member
Jun 25, 2001
1,130
0
0
Lemon Law,
It's you who's missing the point. The West is not going to let Afghanistan relapse into a failed state again. With or without Pakistani supply routes.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Original post updated. This is getting ridiculous. More intrusions from America and now a threat from Karzai. I don't see this going too well...
Are you more worried about your Taliban friends, or your pride?

There is no excuse for giving them refuge... none.

We will long remember all of those who help or hinder our efforts against the Taliban... which of those will you be remembered for?

Why should any of our citizens die for your illegal wars? The Taliban were not responsible 9/11. Period. Even if they were you only get to kill 3000 of theirs and then you can f*** off. If you want to come into our part of the world then you have to deal with our rules not some barbaric ones made by rich white old men thousands of miles away hundreds of years ago!
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: tvarad
Lemon Law,
Read up the history of the mighty Pakistani Army:

1965 war: Crossed into Indian Kashmir thinking that India would not cross into Pakistan proper. Ran to the international community for a cease-fire when it's bluff was called and Lahore was about to fall.

1971 war: Lost East-Pakistan in two weeks.

1980's: Lost Siachin Glacier to the Indians and has not been able to get it back since.

1999: Sent Pakistani Army regulars disguised as Kashmiri "rebels" to occupy the Kargil heights. Pakistani army thinking was that their newly acquired nuclear weapons would insulate them from an Indian response. Nuclear weapons or not, India threatened to cross into Pakistan and Nawaz Sharif rushed to Washington to get a face-saving cease-fire and humiliating withdrawal.

Afghanistan: Tried to install a puppet Taliban government to do their bidding while they played their "strategic-depth" games with India. The Taliban are now using Pakistan for strategic depth.

They remind me of Ralph the wolf trying to pilfer a sheep from under the nose of Sam the Sheepdog in the cartoon series. And, like Ralph, they're still trying even after being slapped around silly for decades.

The stories about the Army invading and occupying Pakistan are part of folklore. In coup after coup, they've ridden in like knights in shining armor only to have made even more of a mess than the civilian governments and returned to their barracks in humiliation. You're paying more respect for the Pakistani army than their own people have over the years.

The current anger of the Pakistani people is not so much against the United States but against the Army acting as it's local poodle. The Pakistani people are least interested in it's Army's games and would like as much to see their territory not to be used as a sanctuary by medieval savages. They're realists and know that they are the ones who will be facing the consequences. It is in Pakistan's interests that the Taliban are comprehensively defeated. But there are holdouts in the Army longing for the good old days which are never going to come back who are still playing their "pilfer the sheep" games. Matters are coming to a head and the West will not walk away from Afghanistan, supply routes or not.

I agree most of our wars against India were blunders and should never have happened; especially Kargil. However that does not mean we should let some white idiot sitting in a white office do whatever he wants with our country and our people. I seriously believe that the major threat to us now is not India but the Western White world. We seriously need to build up a military that can effectively defend us against that threat as soon as possible. ZA Bhutto once said we will eat grass but develop nuclear weapons. We need the the same resolve if we are to survive western terrorism and aggression.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Why should any of our citizens die for your illegal wars? The Taliban were not responsible 9/11. Period. Even if they were you only get to kill 3000 of theirs and then you can f*** off. If you want to come into our part of the world then you have to deal with our rules not some barbaric ones made by rich white old men thousands of miles away hundreds of years ago!
The bold portion may be one of the most ironic sentences ever written.... wow.

And what's this bullshit about only being allowed to kill 3000 of them as some sort of 1-for-1 resolution for 9/11?! I've got news for you... we're going to kill every last one of your Taliban friends that we can find, and we're not stopping until the Taliban is entirely impotent.

So, I ask you again, which action will Pakistan be remembered for -- helping, or hindering, our efforts to destroy the Taliban?

That choice is still yours to make...

Originally posted by: The Green Bean
I agree most of our wars against India were blunders and should never have happened; especially Kargil. However that does not mean we should let some white idiot sitting in a white office do whatever he wants with our country and our people. I seriously believe that the major threat to us now is not India but the Western White world. We seriously need to build up a military that can effectively defend us against that threat as soon as possible. ZA Bhutto once said we will eat grass but develop nuclear weapons. We need the the same resolve if we are to survive western terrorism and aggression.
or, you could simply continue to drink the anti-West koolaid served at your local Madrassa...

shame that.
 

nick1985

Lifer
Dec 29, 2002
27,158
6
81
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
If you want to come into our part of the world then you have to deal with our rules not some barbaric ones made by rich white old men thousands of miles away hundreds of years ago!

Thanks for the laugh.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: palehorse
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Why should any of our citizens die for your illegal wars? The Taliban were not responsible 9/11. Period. Even if they were you only get to kill 3000 of theirs and then you can f*** off. If you want to come into our part of the world then you have to deal with our rules not some barbaric ones made by rich white old men thousands of miles away hundreds of years ago!
The bold portion may be one of the most ironic sentences ever written.... wow.

And what's this bullshit about only being allowed to kill 3000 of them as some sort of 1-for-1 resolution for 9/11?! I've got news for you... we're going to kill every last one of your Taliban friends that we can find, and we're not stopping until the Taliban is entirely impotent.

So, I ask you again, which action will Pakistan be remembered for -- helping, or hindering, our efforts to destroy the Taliban?

That choice is still yours to make...

1. The taliban is an ideology. You can NEVER destroy it. You still haven't managed to kill nazism after millions of deaths and 70 years.

2. The Quran says that one life will only be avenged by 1. Therefore, 3000 American deaths mean you only have the right to take 3000. Anymore deaths will be counted as innocent an illegal actions of aggression. And now you wonder why the Islamic world sees YOU as the aggressors and not the taliban.

3. Not everything is simple black and white as you American kids have been made to believe. The taliban may not be a friend of ours but people like you are certainly enemies who think they have the right to do anything to achieve their goals and have no viable plan except senseless death and destruction.

4. It's always people like you that advocate death and destruction then blame others when they do not get their way with their violent strategies. It's like the school bully who gets beaten and blames someone else for his problems.

We have lost more men fighting the taliban than you have but if the "fight" means an intrusion of our sovereignty then the answer is no. I don't know what my government is waiting for! They should issue a notice to NATO that Pakistan is out of bounds and that means no resupplying and no use of airspace. Perhaps they should move a step further and confiscate all US equipment on Pakistani land. That's ought to shut up warmongers like Palehorse.

Perhaps it is time for the Muslims to take the example of the Prophet's grandson Husain bin Ali who sacrificed himself, his family and his friends for the cause of right against the tyrant of the time.
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: palehorse

or, you could simply continue to drink the anti-West koolaid served at your local Madrassa...

shame that.

You'll be surprised how many mainstream Pakistanis agree with me. The only political media I listen to or read is Dawn, CNN, BBC, Aljazeera, Geo. I don't even listen to the self-proclaimed mullahs who create unnecessary drama for money and power. It's fairly simple to point out provided your brain is not cloaked with propaganda and BS how biased western media is against Islam and Islamic culture. It's even easier when you read this forum and see how brainwashed people are to believe it.


 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
1. The taliban is an ideology. You can NEVER destroy it. You still haven't managed to kill nazism after millions of deaths and 70 years.
Well, until their "ideology" becomes non-violent, and stops terrorizing the citizens of Afghanistan, they will be hunted. period.

The Quran says...
I know what your Quran says -- I've read it. And, while I respect your right to believe whatever fairytales you wish, as Nick said, they will not be the basis of our foreign policy decisions or military strategies.

We will capture or kill every Taliban we find. period.

The taliban may not be a friend of ours...
Your government actually struck down the peace agreement with the Taliban six days ago.. that's a great first step. But, you must do much more if you want us to stay out of it.

but people like you are certainly enemies who think they have the right to do anything to achieve their goals and have no viable plan except senseless death and destruction.
It's the Taliban who bring death and destruction in their wake, so you're anger is misdirected. We want nothing more than to destroy the Taliban and thus protect the people of Afghanistan. If you wish to see us leave, the best thing you could do would be to mount a large enough force to destroy the Taliban yourselves.

4. It's always people like you that advocate death and destruction then blame others when they do not get their way with their violent strategies. It's like the school bully who gets beaten and blames someone else for his problems.
That's funny.. if you can think of a way to be rid of the Taliban without violence, I'm all ears. However, that requirement is non-negotiable -- the Taliban must be destroyed one way or another. By pen, or by sword, their reign of terror and evil must end.

We have lost more men fighting the taliban than you have
two words: training and equipment.

but if the "fight" means an intrusion of our sovereignty then the answer is no.
"The fight" simply means that the Taliban must be destroyed, one way or another. The choice of who makes that happen is entirely yours... but, the clock is ticking.

I don't know what my government is waiting for! They should issue a notice to NATO that Pakistan is out of bounds and that means no resupplying and no use of airspace. Perhaps they should move a step further and confiscate all US equipment on Pakistani land. That's ought to shut up warmongers like Palehorse.
We've got more equipment; and, contrary to what Lemon Law and others might say, we have other routes that we can use for supplies. One way, or another, we will destroy the Taliban.

Perhaps it is time for the Muslims to take the example of the Prophet's grandson Husain bin Ali who sacrificed himself, his family and his friends for the cause of right against the tyrant of the time.
more Islamic Jihad kool-aid?

Your fight should be with those who are destroying your precious Islam from within... your fight should once again become focused on AQ and the Taliban. Once they, and all extremists, are destroyed, we won't have any reason to stay.
 

Vonkhan

Diamond Member
Feb 27, 2003
8,198
0
71
Originally posted by: Lemon law

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. If anything, having flat terrain greatly increase the options of those fleeing in small groups. Even low scrub brush provides enough cover.

BWAHAHAHAHAH !!!

:D

seriously, get a clue
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: palehorse
Well, until their "ideology" becomes non-violent, and stops terrorizing the citizens of Afghanistan, they will be hunted. period.

Going by your logic you should "hunt" your own ideology. It has been terrorizing the citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.

I know what your Quran says -- I've read it. And, while I respect your right to believe whatever fairytales you wish, as Nick said, they will not be the basis of our foreign policy decisions or military strategies.

We will capture or kill every Taliban we find. period.

Not if you find them in Pakistan. Not until every last Pakistani soldier has been killed, wounded or captured.

Your government actually struck down the peace agreement with the Taliban six days ago.. that's a great first step. But, you must do much more if you want us to stay out of it.

It's non of your business what happens in my country.

It's the Taliban who bring death and destruction in their wake, so you're anger is misdirected. We want nothing more than to destroy the Taliban and thus protect the people of Afghanistan. If you wish to see us leave, the best thing you could do would be to mount a large enough force to destroy the Taliban yourselves.

So suddenly it's the taliban dropping 500-ton bombs on civilians? If my people wish to see you leave they have to take to the streets and start peaceful protests and get our government to take a stronger stand against your tyranny.

That's funny.. if you can think of a way to be rid of the Taliban without violence, I'm all ears. However, that requirement is non-negotiable -- the Taliban must be destroyed one way or another. By pen, or by sword, their reign of terror and evil must end.

Defeating evil by evil? That's a first.

"The fight" simply means that the Taliban must be destroyed, one way or another. The choice of who makes that happen is entirely yours... but, the clock is ticking.

We will first make the choice if the taliban must be destroyed or not. We will take our own time for their decision. But with the current options on the table it's not worth fighting them so the likely answer is no.

We've got more equipment; and, contrary to what Lemon Law and others might say, we have other routes that we can use for supplies. One way, or another, we will destroy the Taliban.

So what are these other routes you talk about? China? Russia? Iran? ROFLMAO!

Your fight should be with those who are destroying your precious Islam from within... your fight should once again become focused on AQ and the Taliban. Once they, and all extremists, are destroyed, we won't have any reason to stay.

I agree with you but not all jihad is waged by violence. That's a thing you must learn before you take down your country picking on needless wars and causing senseless death and destruction. Having said that; we can't wage jihad against those within when there's a external threat. It was a mistake coming to Afghanistan. You should have lead the Taliban deal with AQ. They were ready to punish OBL if you were willing to provide proof. But you weren't willing or maybe don't have the proof at all.
 

palehorse

Lifer
Dec 21, 2005
11,521
0
76
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: palehorse
Well, until their "ideology" becomes non-violent, and stops terrorizing the citizens of Afghanistan, they will be hunted. period.

Going by your logic you should "hunt" your own ideology. It has been terrorizing the citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.
The U.S. has not brought terror to Afghanistan or Pakistan -- in those places, the terror and evil existed before we ever arrived.

I know what your Quran says -- I've read it. And, while I respect your right to believe whatever fairytales you wish, as Nick said, they will not be the basis of our foreign policy decisions or military strategies.

We will capture or kill every Taliban we find. period.

Not if you find them in Pakistan. Not until every last Pakistani soldier has been killed, wounded or captured.
You will die to defend the Taliban? So be it then...


Your government actually struck down the peace agreement with the Taliban six days ago.. that's a great first step. But, you must do much more if you want us to stay out of it.

It's none of your business what happens in my country.
If they stayed in your country, then you might have a point. Unfortunately, that's not the case. The Taliban are taking refuge in your lands and launching attacks into other sovereign nations -- including attacks against U.S and NATO forces located in other sovereign countries.

If the Taliban stayed in Pakistan, we wouldn't even be discussing this.

As it stands, right now, Pakistan is exporting terrorism.

It's the Taliban who bring death and destruction in their wake, so you're anger is misdirected. We want nothing more than to destroy the Taliban and thus protect the people of Afghanistan. If you wish to see us leave, the best thing you could do would be to mount a large enough force to destroy the Taliban yourselves.

So suddenly it's the taliban dropping 500-ton bombs on civilians? If my people wish to see you leave they have to take to the streets and start peaceful protests and get our government to take a stronger stand against your tyranny.
You're right, the Taliban doesn't drop bombs from the skies. Instead, they will enter your village, murder your elders, repeatedly rape your wives and daughters, force your boys to join them, burn your schools, and then move on into the hills when NATO comes looking for them.

Yet you still choose to side with them. :confused:

That's funny.. if you can think of a way to be rid of the Taliban without violence, I'm all ears. However, that requirement is non-negotiable -- the Taliban must be destroyed one way or another. By pen, or by sword, their reign of terror and evil must end.

Defeating evil by evil? That's a first.
What methods used by NATO are "evil"? Please be specific.

"The fight" simply means that the Taliban must be destroyed, one way or another. The choice of who makes that happen is entirely yours... but, the clock is ticking.

We will first make the choice if the taliban must be destroyed or not. We will take our own time for their decision. But with the current options on the table it's not worth fighting them so the likely answer is no.
As I said, the dismantling/destruction of the Taliban is non-negotiable. The only choice you have is whether or not you will help or hinder those efforts.

We've got more equipment; and, contrary to what Lemon Law and others might say, we have other routes that we can use for supplies. One way, or another, we will destroy the Taliban.

So what are these other routes you talk about? China? Russia? Iran? ROFLMAO!
Try to keep up.

Your fight should be with those who are destroying your precious Islam from within... your fight should once again become focused on AQ and the Taliban. Once they, and all extremists, are destroyed, we won't have any reason to stay.

I agree with you but not all jihad is waged by violence. That's a thing you must learn before you take down your country picking on needless wars and causing senseless death and destruction. Having said that; we can't wage jihad against those within when there's a external threat. It was a mistake coming to Afghanistan. You should have lead the Taliban deal with AQ. They were ready to punish OBL if you were willing to provide proof. But you weren't willing or maybe don't have the proof at all.
Don't believe everything your Taliban friends tell you. they were given a very clear choice between AQ and justice, and they chose to support OBL and AQ.

Then, once we arrived, and we saw their evil first-hand, the battle against the Taliban took on a humanitarian cause. There is no room in the modern world for barbarians who use brutal rape and murder as their method of governance.

The most important lesson you must learn from our little debate is this: If the Taliban stayed in Pakistan, this wouldn't be our problem. Unfortunately, your country is allowing the Taliban to use your lands as a base of operations to launch attacks against U.S. and NATO forces in other sovereign nations. So, all this talk from you about your own sovereignty must be read with that in mind.

How can you possibly expect anyone to respect your own sovereignty when you so willingly ignore the sovereignty of others?!
 

The Green Bean

Diamond Member
Jul 27, 2003
6,506
7
81
Originally posted by: palehorse
The U.S. has not brought terror to Afghanistan or Pakistan -- in those places, the terror and evil existed before we ever arrived.

Yet much fewer people were raped, tortured and murdered than in areas now under US control.

You will die to defend the Taliban? So be it then...

We will die to defend our sovereignty.


If they stayed in your country, then you might have a point. Unfortunately, that's not the case. The Taliban are taking refuge in your lands and launching attacks into other sovereign nations -- including attacks against U.S and NATO forces located in other sovereign countries.

If the Taliban stayed in Pakistan, we wouldn't even be discussing this.

And that's the reason we are doing what we can to limit those attacks. However we will not jeopardies our sovereignty to appease you.


You're right, the Taliban doesn't drop bombs from the skies. Instead, they will enter your village, murder your elders, repeatedly rape your wives and daughters, force your boys to join them, burn your schools, and then move on into the hills when NATO comes looking for them.

Yet you still choose to side with them. :confused:

That's funny.. if you can think of a way to be rid of the Taliban without violence, I'm all ears. However, that requirement is non-negotiable -- the Taliban must be destroyed one way or another. By pen, or by sword, their reign of terror and evil must end.

What methods used by NATO are "evil"? Please be specific.

Torture for one. Illegal aggression for another.

As I said, the dismantling/destruction of the Taliban is non-negotiable. The only choice you have is whether or not you will help or hinder those efforts.

I guess if defeating the taliban is so important to you that you invade another sovereign nation and effectively declare war then be it. Get your priorities right. A war will Pakistan will make your security situation 100x worst than the taliban could even dream of making. And if you don't respect our sovereign choices and continue bullying us it might as well happen.
Don't believe everything your Taliban friends tell you. they were given a very clear choice between AQ and justice, and they chose to support OBL and AQ.

Clear choice? Where's your proof OBL and AQ were involved in 9/11. Why should i believe everything your government tells me without proof? That's clearly NOT a clear choice bw AQ an justice. That was not justice. That was oppression and aggression.
Then, once we arrived, and we saw their evil first-hand, the battle against the Taliban took on a humanitarian cause. There is no room in the modern world for barbarians who use brutal rape and murder as their method of governance.

I must agree. But then again there is no place in the world for countries that use torture as a means of interrogation. There's no place in the world for countries that wage wars based on lies.

How can you possibly expect anyone to respect your own sovereignty when you so willingly ignore the sovereignty of others?!

That's a question I should be asking you; not the other way around.

 

EagleKeeper

Discussion Club Moderator<br>Elite Member
Staff member
Oct 30, 2000
42,591
5
0
Originally posted by: The Green Bean
Originally posted by: nick1985
Originally posted by: The Green Bean

2. The Quran says

You can stop right there. The Quran doesnt dictate US foreign policy. Sorry.

It should if it wants to have any say or respect in my region of the world.

Does the Quran also dictate how the Taliban should abuse villiagers?