Russia warns NATO that it repeats the same mistakes the USSR did in Afghanistan

[Skybird]

Which I think - and said many times - is true.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7888566.stm

As they have an old word of wisdom about Afghanistan: "History shows that it's easy for any foreign power to get into Afghanistan - but it is incredibly hard to get out of that place again."

[OneToughHerring]

Yes and before the Soviets it was the British. Rudyard Kipling wrote:

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains and go to your gawd like a soldier."

The war between the Soviets and Afghanis is one the most cruel ever. Soviets executed a large part of the P.O.W.'s on the spot, the Afghanis did the same but also used some pretty nasty torture, like cutting off limbs etc. Really nasty stuff.

[SUBMAN1]

Yes and before the Soviets it was the British. Rudyard Kipling wrote:

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains and go to your gawd like a soldier."

The war between the Soviets and Afghanis is one the most cruel ever. Soviets executed a large part of the P.O.W.'s on the spot, the Afghanis did the same but also used some pretty nasty torture, like cutting off limbs etc. Really nasty stuff.You misspelled god.

[Tchocky]

http://www.everypoet.com/archive/poetry/Rudyard_Kipling/kipling_the_young_british_soldier.htm

[OneToughHerring]

Yes and before the Soviets it was the British. Rudyard Kipling wrote:

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains and go to your gawd like a soldier."

The war between the Soviets and Afghanis is one the most cruel ever. Soviets executed a large part of the P.O.W.'s on the spot, the Afghanis did the same but also used some pretty nasty torture, like cutting off limbs etc. Really nasty stuff.You misspelled god.

No. Kipling did.

http://www.poemhunter.com/poem/the-young-british-soldier/

[SUBMAN1]

By yes he did!

On the subject of the post:

Afganistan however - much much different than when the Soviets were there, so I'm having a hard time fathoming how they see it as the same? Crap, when the Soviets rolled into town, there was no choice, no government for the people by the people, it was the Soviets way or the highway (to the grave that is). Period.

Much much different. While I don't think they will achieve a pure republic over there, i think they can at least get them on the path to a normal stable government where democracy may take the to a state of being a republic in the future. So they may have to deal with an oligarchy for some period of time, though I hope they can break it and transition to a republic at some point.

The biggest difference between the war now and the Soviets war - This war is for the people, not against the people. So where everyone wanted to be a mahjadeen during the Soivets war, this time around, only the Taliban and Al Qeida are the only ones really fighting. This is why success in some form or fashion is a guarantee this time around.

-S

[Tribesman]

This war is for the people, not against the people.
Is it ?
Perhaps you had better tell the locals as before the invasion the Taliban were in terminal decline due to lack of support by the people but now they are back on the ascendancy with local support .
The main reasons for this could be put down to the simple fact that the department of defense did some very comprehensive papers on how to do afghanistan and what definately not to do ....but the people running the show didn't do hardly any of the "how to do Afghanistan" stuff and did nearly all of the "what not to do" things instead .
They studies even went to great lengths do describe why working with the United Front(northern alliance) as allies wouldn't be a good idea . I think the summary term they used was that it would result in the "lebanonization" of Afghanistan .

[Skybird]

before the invasion the Taliban were in terminal decline
:stare:
That is against every info on the status quo in summer 2001 that I ever have read, heared, and been told.

[Tribesman]

That is against every info on the status quo in summer 2001 that I ever have read, heared, and been told.
Perhaps you should visit Americas National Security Archive website then and read the Afghan and Pakistan papers .
You see because the conern was that as the Taliban had already reached the final stages of traditional Pashtun cycle of welcome and hostility while Al-qaida were still in the early stages the Talibans upcoming demise might create a bigger window for Bin-Laden to exploit .
Then you might understand why the neither the Northern alliance or the northwestern drug barons were ever going to get a real look in . And also how the coilition is reaching the final stages of the local welcome cycle .

BTW wasn't it someone of Kiplings era who said you can always rent an Afghan for a while but you can never buy one .

[OneToughHerring]

The biggest difference between the war now and the Soviets war - This war is for the people, not against the people. So where everyone wanted to be a mahjadeen during the Soivets war, this time around, only the Taliban and Al Qeida are the only ones really fighting. This is why success in some form or fashion is a guarantee this time around.

-S

From what I've heard and read it doesn't seem like the average Afghani people are that friendly toward Nato there. Increasingly the body count is going up on both sides with no end in sight.

It could be said that the Taliban has gained from the half-assed US war there and in Iraq. And I see no exit strategy for the US. Hell, they're even still in Iraq, sort of.

[SUBMAN1]

From what I've heard and read it doesn't seem like the average Afghani people are that friendly toward Nato there. Increasingly the body count is going up on both sides with no end in sight.

It could be said that the Taliban has gained from the half-assed US war there and in Iraq. And I see no exit strategy for the US. Hell, they're even still in Iraq, sort of.
What body count? Its even a tiny fraction as compared to Iraq, regardless that Iraq has one of the lowest body counts in history!

-S

[OneToughHerring]

From what I've heard and read it doesn't seem like the average Afghani people are that friendly toward Nato there. Increasingly the body count is going up on both sides with no end in sight.

It could be said that the Taliban has gained from the half-assed US war there and in Iraq. And I see no exit strategy for the US. Hell, they're even still in Iraq, sort of.
What body count? Its even a tiny fraction as compared to Iraq, regardless that Iraq has one of the lowest body counts in history!

-S

Excuse me, whUt? How does the bodycount in Iraq somehow make the past, present and future dead of Afghanistan somehow better? And what is the bodycount number, say per month, that you would see as high and what number as low?

[A Very Super Market]

I've never understood how people can expect a war to not have casualties. It just boggles me...

[Skybird]

That is against every info on the status quo in summer 2001 that I ever have read, heared, and been told.
Perhaps you should visit Americas National Security Archive website then and read the Afghan and Pakistan papers .
You see because the conern was that as the Taliban had already reached the final stages of traditional Pashtun cycle of welcome and hostility while Al-qaida were still in the early stages the Talibans upcoming demise might create a bigger window for Bin-Laden to exploit .
Then you might understand why the neither the Northern alliance or the northwestern drug barons were ever going to get a real look in . And also how the coilition is reaching the final stages of the local welcome cycle .

BTW wasn't it someone of Kiplings era who said you can always rent an Afghan for a while but you can never buy one .
Rest assured, I have read quite some material on it. It's just not true that the Taleban were loosing control in the way you try to paint it - they were lacking wide sympathic support with different ethnic identities and even with their hosting Pashtuns, but were in control of key processes and functions of the country nevertheless, and they were in total control of the most important economic resource of Afghanistan as well: drugs, on which they even raised taxes, and controlled the trafficking of them. The american intel services surely are the last source of information I would trust in assessements of the ME and FE. Even without the Bush years having distorted their conclusions even more, their reputation for reliability regarding ME matters is not really impressive, I would say. It payed off badly for them that before 2001 there was a long phase of a dogma that rated ELINT over HUMINT, and distibuted resources accordingly. They got plenty of satellites and electronics, but they thinned out their human networks on the ground until it was blind and ineffective. And that is a mistake for which we pay until today. Especially with regard to Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq, this probably was one of the greatest errors the US intel community ever conducted, and then suffered from, after WWII, starting with the lack of translators for languages of the ME, leading over lacking infiltration of potentially hostile organisations connected to that region, and ending with a totally insufficient network of human spies and informants on the ground. So, if there is info from those years, an American stamp under it is no sign of quality, but a good reason to check it twice and then a third time, then turn the paper and check the backside three times again.

[Biggles]

I've never understood how people can expect a war to not have casualties. It just boggles me...

Exactly. And for me, how anyone can see a true victory in war, since war is the final result of total failure of human compassion. I just don't understand...

[Skybird]

I've never understood how people can expect a war to not have casualties. It just boggles me...

Exactly. And for me, how anyone can see a true victory in war, since war is the final result of total failure of human compassion. I just don't understand...
Eventually, wars help to end total failures of human compassion as well. The war against the Nazi tyranny and the horrors it created is a prime example.

I avoid to think in terms of "just" wars. But I differ between wars of need, and wars of choice. The latter are always unacceptable. Avoiding the latter I tend to see as being always stupid.

War is the absence of a status of peace. But practically all our philosphical reasoning, morals and ethics only makes sense in the context of peace. Using them to describe a completely different condition of existence, that is chaos by definition, makes no sense. Like it also makes no sense to try to enoble peace by terms and thoughts owing their existence to the status of war. Peace is peace. War is war. Both are different worlds to live in. If one uses the standards and language of the one to defone, to understand and to describe the other, only confusion can be the result, and mismatching conceptions.

[Tribesman]

Rest assured, I have read quite some material on it
Then either your reading abilities are lacking or your mind is unable to process the information .
Take for example .... they were in total control of the most important economic resource of Afghanistan as well: drugs, on which they even raised taxes, and controlled the trafficking of them.
What was the Feb 2001 UN report on drug production in Afghanistan in relation to the Taliban?
I would ask what the US State dept. report on the same subject was too , but you seem to not like American government sources .

[SUBMAN1]

Excuse me, whUt? How does the bodycount in Iraq somehow make the past, present and future dead of Afghanistan somehow better? And what is the bodycount number, say per month, that you would see as high and what number as low?
I wasn't the one that brought it (being body count) up. You did! Duh!!! :doh:

-S

[Happy Times]

Rest assured, I have read quite some material on it
Then either your reading abilities are lacking or your mind is unable to process the information .
Take for example .... they were in total control of the most important economic resource of Afghanistan as well: drugs, on which they even raised taxes, and controlled the trafficking of them.
What was the Feb 2001 UN report on drug production in Afghanistan in relation to the Taliban?
I would ask what the US State dept. report on the same subject was too , but you seem to not like American government sources .

Lol, you cant possibly deny that virtually all of Afghanistans opium poppy
production and heroin base laboratories were located in Taliban controlled
territory. That they collected tax revenue from production and movement of the drugs.

And for Taliban being in terminal decline before the invasion is a bold statement.
After Ahmed Shah Massouds assasination they were in a strong position to take the whole country under their rule.

Welcome to the General Topics welcome cycle.

[Skybird]

Rest assured, I have read quite some material on it
Then either your reading abilities are lacking or your mind is unable to process the information .
Take for example .... they were in total control of the most important economic resource of Afghanistan as well: drugs, on which they even raised taxes, and controlled the trafficking of them.
What was the Feb 2001 UN report on drug production in Afghanistan in relation to the Taliban?
I would ask what the US State dept. report on the same subject was too , but you seem to not like American government sources .

Please understand that I quote myself instead of typing long, since I already have done the work needed to answer in the past. First oin the rise of the Taleban, and second about drugs. All written and assessed 2006.

How the Taleban emerged and settled in Afghanistan:

(...)
Instead of supporting the forming of a governmental structure and helping to rebuilt essential sectors of civilian life in Afghanistan, after the Russian’s drive out the American interest quickly shifted away from the country’s well-being and the Mujaheddin and towards rich natural resources in Kazachstan, Uzbekistan, and Azerbaijan, and to bring the flow of oil under American control, which meant to sign exclu-sive contracts with these countries as well as to redirect the oil traffic through pipelines under Rus-sian influence, and build a new giant pipeline to replace them. Many of the military assignments and much of the US base-building in the region more or less openly are strategically aiming at securing this oil transportation project. The new pipe was/is planned to lead from Turkmenistan and the Kaspian Sea to Harat, Kandahar and Belochistan and further to the Indian Ocean. Afghanistan was a territory of major importance for that project. The brilliant CIA-idea: let the ISI recruit and equip volunteers in the many Pashtun refugee camps (harbouring some 5 million Pashtuns) along the border between both countries, and from 1994 on sent them to Afghanistan to bring the country under control for the American corporations controlling the events from the hidden background. The militant faction known as the “Tali-ban” in today’s understanding was born. Their predecessors in fact had been raised and funded and trained by the Pakistani since the 70s, as a tactical option in their ongoing fight with the Indians for Kashmir. This history also explains the strong inter-nal ties between the Taliban and the ISI, which Musharaf today tries so hard – but in vain - to hide. What became of these Taliban is known by now. The American demands from the 90s very much took the existing predecessors of today’s Taliban as a funda-ment and encouraged the ISI to turn them into what they are today. American intentions and assessments may have changed since then – but the system still lives by the old rules - a classical case of the magi-cian-apprentice losing control of the ghosts that he conjured.

The Taliban turned out to be a barbaric catastrophe, although at first they were greeted by the civil popu-lation with much enthusiasm, because they brought order and stability and acted with moral authority, had a clear record concerning past warcrimes, and most Afghans simply were tired of war and the Mu-jaheddin’s endless fighting. The Taliban advanced mostly by buying their opponents, and not before they ran into Dostom’s and Massud’s forces in the north they needed to battle hard for their victory. Dostom was forced to flee into exile after having lost his HQ and was betrayed by one of his major gener-als (who short time later again changed sides and caused the Taliban losses from which they did not recover), but Massud held out.

It soon turned out that the Taliban implemented an order of mercilessness that not only exceeded the rules of the Sharia, but also was basing on traditional tribal laws of the Pashtuns (combined with the de-mand to establish Pashtun dominance in Afghanistan over all other tribes and people, for the Pashtuns form roughly 40% of the Afghan population) – which came as a great irritation to the other ethnicities liv-ing in the country. Moscow soon identified both the green legion during the years of the occupation, and later the Taliban as a primary threat for itself and Afghanistan as well, but the violent excesses and the stone-age barbarism of the Taliban was readily ac-cepted and ignored in Washington as long as they seemed to serve their intended purpose. Different to widespread public beliefs that somehow Al Quaeda, Iranian mullahs and Taliban all are on the same side, Iranian Shia clerics strictly opposed the excesses of the Taliban, and strongly condemned them during all the years to come. There never was friendship or sympathy between Teheran and the Taliban. In fact, they are natural enemies, like Saddam Hussein’s regime and Al Quaeda was as well.

The only successful military resistance to the Taliban was set up by Schah Massud, who turned out to be an invincible and tactically superior acting enemy for the Taliban and rejected roughly 10% of Afghani-stan’s ground in the North to the Taliban’s grip for power - like he already had turned out to be an invin-cible obstacle for the Soviets.

But it started so well with the Taliban! US oil com-pany UNOCAL, whose credibility ranks alongside that of Halliburton and the Carlyle Group, even had prepared agreements with Mullah Omar, promising payments of over 2 billion dollars, getting Omar’s agreement to build that giant pipeline and having it protected by him in return. At the same time, Bin Laden’s daughter was married to one of Omar’s sons, guaranteeing Bin Laden the right to hospitality, and protection. Not before the summer 1998 the Ameri-can sympathy for the Taliban all of a sudden crashed down to an all-time low: US embassies in Nairobi and Dar-es-Salam were blown up, and Bin Laden was identified to be the name behind the attacks. Clinton answered by striking against Al Quaeda training centres in Afghanistan (which basically are not more than a group of tents around a central village square, that’s why bombing such “installations” usually is so heartwarming ineffective), and a pharmaceutical (and harmless) plant in Sudan. After a long record of mis-judgements concerning the Middle East and the Islamic world, America again had to realize that with infallible instinct it had managed once again to com-pletely fail in the realistic assessment of the do’s and dont’s with regard to the region. Maybe the agents of the CIA and the British SAS visiting the Mujaheddin commands during the war against the Soviets should have listened more closely to that popular song they have over there: “Not Western, not Eastern we want to be - but Islamic!” Being hostile towards Moscow does not automatically make you a friend of the Af-ghans.

After 9-11, America’s stand changed even more dras-tically, polarizing the world to even biblical dimensions. The already war-experienced and tacti-cally well-skilled warriors of the Northern Uzbekian and Tajik tribes, many of them veterans of the Soviet war, were showered with weapons and ammunition – an army that in the long run the weak, poorly trained and poorly armed militias of Mullah Omar wouldn’t have been able to stop even without intervention by the US Air Force and it’s massive bombing raids. That one lined up with Mafia-like gangsters, drug barons and war criminals like Dostom was of as much concern in Washington like the former collabo-ration with Bin Laden and Mullah Omar had been. Later, Karzai tried to tame Dostom by bringing him into the government, but the man meanwhile has changed sides again (like so often in his life), and is one of the most influential “businessmen” of the country today. He cultivates poppy, and his field attendants are some of the most war-hardened fight-ers in the country and are armed up to the teeth. He is probably the most uncalculable, ruthless and danger-ous warlord (=bandit) in the country and beside the Taliban the biggest potential threat to all and every-thing that will ever happen in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan, btw, again is the world’s greatest ex-porter of opium again. And the majority of cabinet member’s family clans in Kabul, including Karzai’s brother, are making an attractive supplementary in-come by joining the business, additionally to their notorious corruptness. It is fair to say that NATO soldiers actively try to protect and die for one of the world’s leading drug cartels, at the same time not daring to take action against the blooming opium trade – the military capacities are already not suffi-cient to defend against the Taliban forever, how much more insufficient are they if anti-drug actions would cause major warlords taking on NATO in open hostility in order to defend their lucrative profits! Meanwhile, the CIA’s role in the drug trafficking still remains to be revealed and could be described as “shady” at best.
(...)
It probably is a mistake to think of the enemy as “Taliban” only. NATO troops in the south since longer while now already use different vocabulary to identify their foes, naming them as “counter-coalition forces” or “irregular resistance”. In fact, The Taliban seem to make up for only a small part of the resis-tance the Americans and NATO faces, the greater part of fighter seem to be formed by local Afghans, Mujaheddin and militias of the Warlords. This is a clear signal that the opposition inside Afghanistan is not only imported from outside, but is originating from inside the Afghan society – which makes mock-ery of any claims that the relations with the Afghans are improving. The opposite is the case, and chances are that for obvious reasons Washington and London try to hide that and intentionally distort reality like they did in Iraq for three years now. With each day passing, the allies make themselves more enemies in Afghanistan. This slow but steady raise in resistance is exactly the same way like it started for the Soviets, who also enjoyed a relatively easy and unopposed first year.


And on the drugs trafficking, which was under complete control by the Taleban who regulated it to a level that they could hanle and control, and that they taxed in all of Afghanistan:



Some say that under the Taliban the cultivation of poppy was prohibited, for drugs, the Taliban said, were unislamic, and a shame for Islam. This argu-ment usually also tries to point at that under the Taliban rule, the export of opium should have fallen since 1994 from 3200 tons per year to less than 180 tons per year, a reduction of roughly 95%. Consider-ing the religious fanaticism of the Taliban, the motivation of the Taliban to forbid drug cultivation sounds believable. On the other hand, they may have considered them to be legal if they help to fight and submit the infidels, in accordance with Quranic de-mands of submitting the people in the house of war, whom generally are not considered to be innocents - for they are not Islamic, but infidels.

But:

The other version of the same story goes like this: in his very last interview that was given by Schah Mas-sud to two French reporters from the Figaro and the Rolling Stone, shortly before he was assassinated in 2001, he said (my translation from German):

“The Taliban have sufficient stocks to export for another two or three years. And anyway, it was the major drug barons who installed the production stop, not Mullah Omar. They wanted the prices to climb. The Taliban are receiving 10% agricultural taxes for the opium fields. Then they get a fabrication tax: 180$ per 1 kg packet that gets their official stamp for export. Next comes sale taxes, and finally a transpor-tation tax when the opium gets flown to Kabul and then to Kunduz by plane. Without stamp and declara-tion from the Taliban not a single opium packet ever crosses the border.”

So, according to Schah Massud (the Taliban’s most bitter enemy), the Taliban did all they can to make a maximum profit from a flourishing opium export-trade.

Analysts agreeing with this version also point at that while - for whatever the reason was - poppy cultiva-tion really went back during the later nineties and exports took place by using stockpiled opium, drug laboratories were not destroyed, but came under con-trol and new management by the Pakistani ISI. It is suspected that many of them are run by Washington’s old “allies”, the Pakistani, until today, directly or indirectly.

It seems to be impossible to gain certainty over which version of the story is true. Doing research at places and institutions with some official credibility and recognition still delivers contradicting results and statistics that sometimes are lightyears apart. Even information given by western intel agencies are not consistent. In my not few books about history, poli-tics and Islam, the contradicting statements and data continue in those chapters that deal with this subject. What is needed is not so much more public debate, that we already had in literature - we need more re-search and data enforcement from concerned institutions. What we have now in insight, cannot be trusted, and is too obviously object of varying oppor-tunistic interests of the information sources. Perhaps what is the greatest surprise here is the immense willingness and lack of objection of Western media and the Western public by which they readily were all too willingly swallowing the obvious contradic-tions in data and argument. The question must be asked if this lacking clearance is intentional. Drug trade is a hydra. When the British East-India-Company effectively was waging war to defend their monopole on drug trading in China, this nevertheless did not stop them to publicly condemn opium trading at the same time. Unfortunately, the CIA has a repu-tation in drug trafficking that cannot be ignored.

By the end of 2006, the UN expects the Afghan share in worldwide opium production to be around 92%, with a gross export of opium in the range of exceed-ing 6.000 tons – more than ever before, and reaching those levels during the time of Western engagement and NATO troop presence in the country. Something goes totally wrong with the Western ambitions here.

This rise over the last five years is at least partially provoked by the failed Western policies in Afghani-stan, and not exclusively caused due to Afghan intention or Pakistani conspiracy. After the strike against the Taliban had ended in late 2001, it became apparent that the country was in danger to suffer huge losses in lives from the upcoming winter, and the low stocks of food and the extremely low level of agricul-tural activity, which had constantly deteriorated during the Soviet war and the civil war after that. In a moment of schizophrenic intellectual brilliance, it was decided to do two things: encourage and assist local farmers to start farming again and so to produce grain, and to feed the starving population immedi-ately by massive grain imports from the Western nations, and from the US in the main. What Western companies lost in profits due to the low price the UN aid program paid, they more than compensated by the huge amounts of grain that was delivered. They also saw the chance to establish a dominant position of theirs on the Afghan market. And this calculation came at a high cost to the Afghans. In the following months, the Afghan market was flooded with ex-tremely cheap grain imports from America, and Europe, labelled as UN goods – killing most chances of local farmers to compete with the unbeatable low and aggressive prices of foreign grain, and thus dis-abling their economical survival even before farming had a chance to establish itself as a trustworthy way of work for a man to secure the survivability of his family.

Consequently, the farmers turned towards farming the far more lucrative and competitive product again: poppy. This was not because they are evil and want to harm Western people (this may be a calculation of politically motivated Mohammedans on the com-manding and political levels), but because it was a question of most elemental survival. It turned out to be a fatal development, it was a starting shot to estab-lish Afghanistan as the world’s leading opium producer again, under the protection of foreign troops and by assistance of the foreigner’s badly thought-out helping efforts. Local warlords, that almost always double-function as drug barons as well, encouraged the villagers to stay with poppy, and the last three years already has seen a massive flaring up of local wars and violent rivalries between various warlords fighting for dominance and shares in the lucrative poppy cultivation. Again, this guy named Hekmatyar appeared as one of the major troublemakers, and although not all his fights he had to fight were victo-rious, he nevertheless is one of the leading figures in Afghan drug production and export.


You can have the whole essay if you want. It's 31 pages. the old download link from 2006 is invalid now.

[Tribesman]

Lol, you cant possibly deny that virtually all of Afghanistans opium poppy
production and heroin base laboratories were located in Taliban controlled
territory.
Do you mean that at the time when they banned opium production they had gained tentative military control over 90% of the territory , a time which resuted in a massive reduction of opium production ?

I already have done the work needed to answer in the past.
Really ? then if you work is done then why does your source say there are several versions and it is unable to say which is true ?
Another interesting bit ...although at first they were greeted by the civil popu-lation with much enthusiasm....although at first ? that needs more work doesn't it .
But still the article does provide some comic relief with poor old drug lord Dostum who has changed sides more often than a tumbling dice having to leave for a while because one of his buddies changed sides

[Skybird]

Whatever you say, Tribesman. Actually I have all reason to be sure of my information, and had access to direct first-hand feedback on the situation - as one amongst other sources. A payoff from the network of contacts I formed 10-15 years ago, when I did a lot of both private and professional off-tourism-travelling in the ME. So either you have HUMINT information by civilian and/or military insiders or experts knowing the country from having been there and being familiar with the culture, or you have not.

Anyhow, this seems to lead nowhere, so let's move on.

[Tribesman]

Such arroganance and self assuridy :rotfl:
Yes Skybird you make an assumption that you alone have information .
I can see why some people mention you in their signatures

[Happy Times]

Such arroganance and self assuridy :rotfl:
Yes Skybird you make an assumption that you alone have information .
I can see why some people mention you in their signatures

You know i have friends that did tours in Afganistan and they tell the same story.
You can get to the truth if you dont make up your mind before you look.
Its your arrogance based on nothing that boggles the mind.

[Skybird]

Like on several occasions before you cant help yourself but letting it degenerate onto the personal attack track.

It was you implicitly putting what I said into doubt for not agreeing with your sources - those sources that many people working in that area agree to accuse of extreme unreliability. So that I make a defense on my sources to counter that implicit mockery, only makes sense. From you all I have heared is a blind trust into references to government statements that heavily interfered with the - already poor in itself - intel assessments of that time, according to the mottot: it's an official document, so it must be saying the truth. That the production of intel information was heavily manipulated by Bush'S gang in those years, and suffered from the mislead reform of the service away from HUMINT and towards ELINT, you remain quiet about.

Such uncritical attitude I have learned to laugh about. That's the best thing one can do.

Et finis.

[OneToughHerring]

Excuse me, whUt? How does the bodycount in Iraq somehow make the past, present and future dead of Afghanistan somehow better? And what is the bodycount number, say per month, that you would see as high and what number as low?
I wasn't the one that brought it (being body count) up. You did! Duh!!! :doh:

-S

No answer huh? Thought as much.

[OneToughHerring]

...

Tell me HT, what is your problem with Jews in general? Why don't you want to Jewish people to live in Europe?

[Happy Times]

...

Tell me HT, what is your problem with Jews in general? Why don't you want to Jewish people to live in Europe?

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


I wish Avon was here to snipe you.:cry:

http://prodos.thinkertothinker.com/wp-content/photos/israel_defence_force.jpg

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w189/pro-israel/Stand-By-Israel-1.jpg

[OneToughHerring]

Well Zionism doesn't cover it. There is still Jewish property in Europe, houses etc. that were stolen from Jews. Why aren't you advocating the return of Jewish people to Europe? I mean, plenty of them were kinda like exterminated in WW 2 and stuff.

Oh wait, it's about that anti-multicultural-thing isn't it? You don't like, well, other cultures?

[Happy Times]

Well Zionism doesn't cover it. There is still Jewish property in Europe, houses etc. that were stolen from Jews. Why aren't you advocating the return of Jewish people to Europe? I mean, plenty of them were kinda like exterminated in WW 2 and stuff.

Oh wait, it's about that anti-multicultural-thing isn't it? You don't like, well, other cultures?

WTF? Are you serious? I hope you also emigrate to Saudi Arabia and continue your brains storms there, good luck.

[OneToughHerring]

Well Zionism doesn't cover it. There is still Jewish property in Europe, houses etc. that were stolen from Jews. Why aren't you advocating the return of Jewish people to Europe? I mean, plenty of them were kinda like exterminated in WW 2 and stuff.

Oh wait, it's about that anti-multicultural-thing isn't it? You don't like, well, other cultures?
WTF? Are you serious? I hope you also emigrate to Saudi Arabia and continue your brains storms there, good luck.
Well I might go to SA but I don't want to end up on a US 'special rendition' camp, if you know what I mean.

Just answer the question, do you want or do you not want Jewish people in Europe?

[Happy Times]

Well Zionism doesn't cover it. There is still Jewish property in Europe, houses etc. that were stolen from Jews. Why aren't you advocating the return of Jewish people to Europe? I mean, plenty of them were kinda like exterminated in WW 2 and stuff.

Oh wait, it's about that anti-multicultural-thing isn't it? You don't like, well, other cultures?
WTF? Are you serious? I hope you also emigrate to Saudi Arabia and continue your brains storms there, good luck.
Well I might go to SA but I don't want to end up on a US 'special rendition' camp, if you know what I mean.

Just answer the question, do you want or do you not want Jewish people in Europe?

I bet you were up all night mumbling "I know he is a Nazi, i know, he must be"..

Actually yes i want, but its unlikely many will come back. Why would they when they have places (Israel, USA) were they dont have to live in fear and they are protected.
If 100.000 Jews wanted to come to Finland that would be like winning a lottery.
http://www.jinfo.org/Nobel_Prizes.html

[OneToughHerring]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?

[Happy Times]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?

Hey dummy, its your wiews that keep them out!
And you better start proving these Nazi and racist allegations!
You try to repeat it to make it true, i can guess from who you learned that trick.
So what makes me an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?
Point and define please?

[OneToughHerring]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?
Hey dummy, its your wiews that keep them out!
And you better start proving these Nazi and racist allegations!
You try to repeat it to make it true, i can guess from who you learned that trick.
So what makes me an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?
Point and define please?

The Nazis also wanted the Jews to go to Israel/Palestine. In that way you are similar, you want the Jews to stay there but not to come to Europe. I mean, if the Jews would come to Europe they might want justice for what happened in the Holocaust.

[Happy Times]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?
Hey dummy, its your wiews that keep them out!
And you better start proving these Nazi and racist allegations!
You try to repeat it to make it true, i can guess from who you learned that trick.
So what makes me an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?
Point and define please?

The Nazis also wanted the Jews to go to Israel/Palestine. In that way you are similar, you want the Jews to stay there but not to come to Europe. I mean, if the Jews would come to Europe they might want justice for what happened in the Holocaust.

I tought you were just programmed and docmatized, but it turns out you are super dumb.

[OneToughHerring]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?
Hey dummy, its your wiews that keep them out!
And you better start proving these Nazi and racist allegations!
You try to repeat it to make it true, i can guess from who you learned that trick.
So what makes me an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?
Point and define please?
The Nazis also wanted the Jews to go to Israel/Palestine. In that way you are similar, you want the Jews to stay there but not to come to Europe. I mean, if the Jews would come to Europe they might want justice for what happened in the Holocaust.
I tought you were just programmed and docmatized, but it turns out you are super dumb.

Oh, ad hominem, didn't expect more from a racist like you.

[Happy Times]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?
Hey dummy, its your wiews that keep them out!
And you better start proving these Nazi and racist allegations!
You try to repeat it to make it true, i can guess from who you learned that trick.
So what makes me an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?
Point and define please?
The Nazis also wanted the Jews to go to Israel/Palestine. In that way you are similar, you want the Jews to stay there but not to come to Europe. I mean, if the Jews would come to Europe they might want justice for what happened in the Holocaust.
I tought you were just programmed and docmatized, but it turns out you are super dumb.

Oh, ad hominem, didn't expect more from a racist like you.

You have started the ad hominem attacks and accusations without nothing to back them up, i voiced my opinion of you based on that.

I ask you again you to explain your accusations that i am an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?

[OneToughHerring]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?
Hey dummy, its your wiews that keep them out!
And you better start proving these Nazi and racist allegations!
You try to repeat it to make it true, i can guess from who you learned that trick.
So what makes me an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?
Point and define please?
The Nazis also wanted the Jews to go to Israel/Palestine. In that way you are similar, you want the Jews to stay there but not to come to Europe. I mean, if the Jews would come to Europe they might want justice for what happened in the Holocaust.
I tought you were just programmed and docmatized, but it turns out you are super dumb.
Oh, ad hominem, didn't expect more from a racist like you.
You have started the ad hominem attacks and accusations without nothing to back them up, i voiced my opinion of you based on that.

I ask you again you to explain your accusations that i am an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?

I've already explained it, if you don't understand it then it is you who is "super dumb".

[Happy Times]

You think that racist crap you keep spouting will bring Jews to Europe or Finland?
Hey dummy, its your wiews that keep them out!
And you better start proving these Nazi and racist allegations!
You try to repeat it to make it true, i can guess from who you learned that trick.
So what makes me an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?
Point and define please?
The Nazis also wanted the Jews to go to Israel/Palestine. In that way you are similar, you want the Jews to stay there but not to come to Europe. I mean, if the Jews would come to Europe they might want justice for what happened in the Holocaust.
I tought you were just programmed and docmatized, but it turns out you are super dumb.
Oh, ad hominem, didn't expect more from a racist like you.
You have started the ad hominem attacks and accusations without nothing to back them up, i voiced my opinion of you based on that.

I ask you again you to explain your accusations that i am an anti-semite, Nazi and racist?

I've already explained it, if you don't understand it then it is you who is "super dumb".

No you havent and you cant, its because your accusations are false. :stare:

[Kapt Z]

By yes he did!

On the subject of the post:

Afganistan however - much much different than when the Soviets were there, so I'm having a hard time fathoming how they see it as the same? Crap, when the Soviets rolled into town, there was no choice, no government for the people by the people, it was the Soviets way or the highway (to the grave that is). Period.

Much much different. While I don't think they will achieve a pure republic over there, i think they can at least get them on the path to a normal stable government where democracy may take the to a state of being a republic in the future. So they may have to deal with an oligarchy for some period of time, though I hope they can break it and transition to a republic at some point.

The biggest difference between the war now and the Soviets war - This war is for the people, not against the people. So where everyone wanted to be a mahjadeen during the Soivets war, this time around, only the Taliban and Al Qeida are the only ones really fighting. This is why success in some form or fashion is a guarantee this time around.

-S

I want to believe you're right. I really do. But.....:nope:

[OneToughHerring]

No you havent and you cant, its because your accusations are false. :stare:

No they're not. I want Jews to actually live in Europe, you don't. Why not? And don't give me any links about Jewish Nobel prize winners, that's not what I asked. Wasn't one of the reasons the 'old' Nazis tried to destroy the Jews because of they thought the Jews are very intellectual and therefore a threat? Is this positive racism what you are still adhering to?

[Thomen]

No you havent and you cant, its because your accusations are false. :stare:
No they're not. I want Jews to actually live in Europe, you don't. Why not? And don't give me any links about Jewish Nobel prize winners, that's not what I asked. Wasn't one of the reasons the 'old' Nazis tried to destroy the Jews because of they thought the Jews are very intellectual and therefore a threat? Is this positive racism what you are still adhering to?

Where did HT say that he has something against Jews? I keep looking all over this thread, but only see that you mentioned them first. :hmmm:

[Happy Times]

No you havent and you cant, its because your accusations are false. :stare:
No they're not. I want Jews to actually live in Europe, you don't. Why not? And don't give me any links about Jewish Nobel prize winners, that's not what I asked. Wasn't one of the reasons the 'old' Nazis tried to destroy the Jews because of they thought the Jews are very intellectual and therefore a threat? Is this positive racism what you are still adhering to?

Where did HT say that he has something against Jews? I keep looking all over this thread, but only see that you mentioned them first. :hmmm:

Thank you.
The Nazi/racist card comes allways as the last resort when someone speaks about the threats Multiculturalism and Islam as ideologies pose to the Western societies.

[OneToughHerring]

No you havent and you cant, its because your accusations are false. :stare:
No they're not. I want Jews to actually live in Europe, you don't. Why not? And don't give me any links about Jewish Nobel prize winners, that's not what I asked. Wasn't one of the reasons the 'old' Nazis tried to destroy the Jews because of they thought the Jews are very intellectual and therefore a threat? Is this positive racism what you are still adhering to?
Where did HT say that he has something against Jews? I keep looking all over this thread, but only see that you mentioned them first. :hmmm:
All the answers he gives to my questions point to that direction. If one is silent about something, say, racism, does that mean he is not a racist? What I think is the most dangerous form of racism is the quiet racism. The type that isn't openly talked about that lies with large groups of people. I'm not really worried about baldheaded boneheads (as opposed to SHARP skinheads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinheads_Against_Racial_Prejudice)) who go around beating people, although that's not nice either, I'm more worried about the racist attitudes among the masses.

But what I remember from your previous 'input' into the discussion I gather your 'loyalties' reside on HT's side of the fence so I'm afraid that you probably wholeheartedly subscribe to all that racist ideology.

[Happy Times]

No you havent and you cant, its because your accusations are false. :stare:
No they're not. I want Jews to actually live in Europe, you don't. Why not? And don't give me any links about Jewish Nobel prize winners, that's not what I asked. Wasn't one of the reasons the 'old' Nazis tried to destroy the Jews because of they thought the Jews are very intellectual and therefore a threat? Is this positive racism what you are still adhering to?
Where did HT say that he has something against Jews? I keep looking all over this thread, but only see that you mentioned them first. :hmmm:

All the answers he gives to my questions point to that direction. If one is silent about something, say, racism, does that mean he is not a racist? What I think is the most dangerous form of racism is the quiet racism. The type that isn't openly talked about that lies with large groups of people. I'm not really worried about baldheaded boneheads (as opposed to SHARP skinheads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinheads_Against_Racial_Prejudice)) who go around beating people, although that's not nice either, I'm more worried about the racist attitudes among the masses.

What fackin questions, im furious!
You really cant talk about facts, issues, wiews and ideas.
Youre the one with religious like dogmas!
Fackin thought police, if im not repeating your dogmas or just stay silent im the enemy.
Now you are worried about the masses, you are ofcourse part of the elite!
The masses must be re-educated!
You really are dangerous!

[Happy Times]

But what I remember from your previous 'input' into the discussion I gather your 'loyalties' reside on HT's side of the fence so I'm afraid that you probably wholeheartedly subscribe to all that racist ideology.

Want to share a train with me Thomen?

[OneToughHerring]

No you havent and you cant, its because your accusations are false. :stare:
No they're not. I want Jews to actually live in Europe, you don't. Why not? And don't give me any links about Jewish Nobel prize winners, that's not what I asked. Wasn't one of the reasons the 'old' Nazis tried to destroy the Jews because of they thought the Jews are very intellectual and therefore a threat? Is this positive racism what you are still adhering to?
Where did HT say that he has something against Jews? I keep looking all over this thread, but only see that you mentioned them first. :hmmm:
All the answers he gives to my questions point to that direction. If one is silent about something, say, racism, does that mean he is not a racist? What I think is the most dangerous form of racism is the quiet racism. The type that isn't openly talked about that lies with large groups of people. I'm not really worried about baldheaded boneheads (as opposed to SHARP skinheads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinheads_Against_Racial_Prejudice)) who go around beating people, although that's not nice either, I'm more worried about the racist attitudes among the masses.
What fackin questions, im furious!
You really cant talk about facts, issues, wiews and ideas.
Youre the one with religious like dogmas!
Fackin thought police, if im not repeating your dogmas or just stay silent im the enemy.
Now you are worried about the masses, you are ofcourse part of the elite!
The masses must be re-educated!
You really are dangerous!

Oh you're a real sweetheart. :rotfl:

[Thomen]

All the answers he gives to my questions point to that direction. If one is silent about something, say, racism, does that mean he is not a racist? What I think is the most dangerous form of racism is the quiet racism. The type that isn't openly talked about that lies with large groups of people. I'm not really worried about baldheaded boneheads (as opposed to SHARP skinheads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinheads_Against_Racial_Prejudice)) who go around beating people, although that's not nice either, I'm more worried about the racist attitudes among the masses.

It does not really matter how he answers your question, as long as he does not admits to be a racist, makes openly racist comments or whatever falls into that category. Criticizing does not equals racism, imo.

What I am getting out of your 'questions' or rather accusations is, that as soon as someone does not agree with your view, you start and try to trap them on some (perceived) controversial argument so you can brand and ostracize them as Nazis and racists. Which, interestingly, was one of the tactics the Nazis used to keep their opponents quite, they just used a different range of 'names' to mark them.

Furthermore, following your argument, 99% of the board members must be Nazis or racist in one way or another, because they fail to participate in this particular thread and therefore fail to respond to the racism that you to seem to see here.

[Thomen]

But what I remember from your previous 'input' into the discussion I gather your 'loyalties' reside on HT's side of the fence so I'm afraid that you probably wholeheartedly subscribe to all that racist ideology.

Haha.. that is just to funny. :03:

See my post above.

[OneToughHerring]

All the answers he gives to my questions point to that direction. If one is silent about something, say, racism, does that mean he is not a racist? What I think is the most dangerous form of racism is the quiet racism. The type that isn't openly talked about that lies with large groups of people. I'm not really worried about baldheaded boneheads (as opposed to SHARP skinheads (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skinheads_Against_Racial_Prejudice)) who go around beating people, although that's not nice either, I'm more worried about the racist attitudes among the masses.
It does not really matter how he answers your question, as long as he does not admits to be a racist, makes openly racist comments or whatever falls into that category. Criticizing does not equals racism, imo.

What I am getting out of your 'questions' or rather accusations is, that as soon as someone does not agree with your view, you start and try to trap them on some (perceived) controversial argument so you can brand and ostracize them as Nazis and racists. Which, interestingly, was one of the tactics the Nazis used to keep their opponents quite, they just used a different range of 'names' to mark them.

Furthermore, following your argument, 99% of the board members must be Nazis or racist in one way or another, because they fail to participate in this particular thread and therefore fail to respond to the racism that you to seem to see here.
Why should participating in this thread be seen as accepting one or the other view?

Personally I don't think all Germans are neo-nazis or racists, I know for a fact that many are not. Germany has done a lot of legislative work to combat racism, perhaps more then any other nation in Europe. So no, I don't have prejudice about Germans.

However, when someone starts threads pretty much about one subject and one subject only, it kinda makes me wonder. And so far HT hasn't said anything to make me think he isn't a racist.

Although I have to say I find it positive that for example you consider racism to be a negative term. Maybe there is some hope left.

[Dowly]

Hey, OTH, how about you shut your mouth? :03:

[Happy Times]

Personally I don't think all Germans are neo-nazis or racists, I know for a fact that many are not. Germany has done a lot of legislative work to combat racism, perhaps more then any other nation in Europe. So no, I don't have prejudice about Germans.

:rotfl:

[OneToughHerring]

Personally I don't think all Germans are neo-nazis or racists, I know for a fact that many are not. Germany has done a lot of legislative work to combat racism, perhaps more then any other nation in Europe. So no, I don't have prejudice about Germans.
:rotfl:

Yes...? :DL

[Thomen]

Why should participating in this thread be seen as accepting one or the other view?

What was it what you said about being silent about something? It does not mean you are not a racist?

Personally I don't think all Germans are neo-nazis or racists, I know for a fact that many are not. Germany has done a lot of legislative work to combat racism, perhaps more then any other nation in Europe. So no, I don't have prejudice about Germans.
Well, you apparently do.. didn't you call Skybird a Nazi awhile ago, and didn't you just call me a racist?
But atleast it seems there is still hope for YOU. If you care to look a bid deeper, you will actually see that the number of Neo-Nazis in Germany is very very small. And whenever those few care to show their true colors, the police has to race to get to them before others do who want kick the **** out of them.

However, when someone starts threads pretty much about one subject and one subject only, it kinda makes me wonder. And so far HT hasn't said anything to make me think he isn't a racist.
So, what you are saying is: Discussing a single topic is inheritantly racist? Regardless of the discussion within and the counterpoints it may provide? So, if I make a thread discussing: Nationalism in Finnland; or Democratic Movement in the Gaza strip; or Bees and Flowers I am a racist?

Although I have to say I find it positive that for example you consider racism to be a negative term. Maybe there is some hope left.
Why thank you! I will make sure to led my Jewish wife and daughter know that there is apparently hope that I wont sent them to the chambers. :yeah:

[Thomen]

But what I remember from your previous 'input' into the discussion I gather your 'loyalties' reside on HT's side of the fence so I'm afraid that you probably wholeheartedly subscribe to all that racist ideology.
Want to share a train with me Thomen?

I heard Finnish Vodka is exceptional good.. I will bring some good German beer for the ride.

[A Very Super Market]

What the hell is this? What does this flame war have to do with the original post? When did this even start? I don't see any racist post, I don't see anything that could be misconstrued, all I see are two guys yelling at each other for no reason at all!

[OneToughHerring]

What was it what you said about being silent about something? It does not mean you are not a racist?

Que? I don't quite follow you.

When looking at racism as a phenomena, including positive racism, there is unfortunately a lot of it about. It's almost like a religion, a set of beliefs about various groups. None of these beliefs is 'innocent' and can lead to more and more serious misconceptions about various groups of people.

Well, you apparently do.. didn't you call Skybird a Nazi awhile ago, and didn't you just call me a racist?
But atleast it seems there is still hope for YOU. If you care to look a bid deeper, you will actually see that the number of Neo-Nazis in Germany is very very small. And whenever those few care to show their true colors, the police has to race to get to them before others do who want kick the **** out of them.

I'm tempted to quote that 'joke' that Skybird just made in that other thread about burning Lebanese but I'll pass. If Skybird is allowed to make statements that border on hate crimes, what stops the rest of us from making similar statements? Doesn't freedom of speech cover all of us?

Oh yea, number of neo-nazis in Germany is very small. The same 'few' neo-nazis just marched through Dresden to commemorate the date of it being bombed by the Allies. The marches led to riots etc. In Eastern Europe the situation is probably much worse and there is a lot of that stuff with Le Pen & co. in France etc. too.

So, what you are saying is: Discussing a single topic is inheritantly racist? Regardless of the discussion within and the counterpoints it may provide? So, if I make a thread discussing: Nationalism in Finnland; or Democratic Movement in the Gaza strip; or Bees and Flowers I am a racist?

If the subject is racist, certainly.

Why thank you! I will make sure to led my Jewish wife and daughter know that there is apparently hope that I wont sent them to the chambers. :yeah:

So having a Jewish wife makes one 'immune' to racism. How convenient.

[heartc]

But what I remember from your previous 'input' into the discussion I gather your 'loyalties' reside on HT's side of the fence so I'm afraid that you probably wholeheartedly subscribe to all that racist ideology.
Want to share a train with me Thomen?
I heard Finnish Vodka is exceptional good.. I will bring some good German beer for the ride.
Count me in.
I'll take some Augustiner along.

Don't worry about OTH. He seems quite confused and doesn't even realize when he stumbles over his own feet, see post 54. It is pointless to discuss with such people. I hope he's still young. If he's a grown up, then I feel pity for him.

[OneToughHerring]

What the hell is this? What does this flame war have to do with the original post? When did this even start? I don't see any racist post, I don't see anything that could be misconstrued, all I see are two guys yelling at each other for no reason at all!

Well my guess is that HT and Thomen have a problem with both Russians and Afghans. They don't like it when USA is told by the Russians that it is getting into serious trouble with it's genocidal war against Afghans. Although the Russians are probably right about this.

[Thomen]

Que? I don't quite follow you. Yea.. I already figured as much awhile ago.

When looking at racism as a phenomena, including positive racism, there is unfortunately a lot of it about. It's almost like a religion, a set of beliefs about various groups. None of these beliefs is 'innocent' and can lead to more and more serious misconceptions about various groups of people. But apparently you are not willing to discuss those openly or in a single topic thread.. which, per your own definition, curiously makes you a racist.. :hmmm:


I'm tempted to quote that 'joke' that Skybird just made in that other thread about burning Lebanese but I'll pass. If Skybird is allowed to make statements that border on hate crimes, what stops the rest of us from making similar statements? Doesn't freedom of speech cover all of us? There is no freedom of speech in a private environment. We are all bound by the rules specified on this board. While I agree that SB overshot his target, two wrongs don't make a right.



If the subject is racist, certainly
What exactly do you consider racist? You are not making much sense at all.


So having a Jewish wife makes one 'immune' to racism. How convenient.
No, but it quite comfortably dismantles your assumptions that everyone who does not agree with your narrow minded view is a racist or hates Jews. :03:

Well my guess is that HT and Thomen have a problem with both Russians and Afghans. They don't like it when USA is told by the Russians that it is getting into serious trouble with it's genocidal war against Afghans. Although the Russians are probably right about this.
You know, you are really not helping yourself by jumping to conclusion and making unfounded accusations. But, hey.. whatever floats your boat.

[Thomen]

Count me in.
I'll take some Augustiner along.
Augustiner.. nice. haven't had some in years.


Don't worry about OTH. He seems quite confused and doesn't even realize when he stumbles over his own feet, see post 54. It is pointless to discuss with such people. I hope he's still young. If he's a grown up, then I feel pity for him.
Oh, I am not worried about him. His opinion is of no consequence whatsoever. But 'Pausenclown' comes to mind..

[OneToughHerring]

Yea.. I already figured as much awhile ago.

Well you don't have to clarify if you don't feel like it. :shifty:

But apparently you are not willing to discuss those openly or in a single topic thread.. which, per your own definition, curiously makes you a racist.. :hmmm:

What, you mean start a thread just about racism? Yea why not.

There is no freedom of speech in a private environment. We are all bound by the rules specified on this board. While I agree that SB overshot his target, two wrongs don't make a right.

Oh ok, Skybird & co. are allowed to break the rules, I don't. I get it now.

What exactly do you consider racist? You are not making much sense at all.

Yea, what is racism? Does it even exist? How do US organisations like NAACP and Anti-Defamation League define it? I guess racism in US differs from, say, racism in Germany. In Germany the laws are a bit more strict concerning nazi-stuff, although they do have a significant number of neo-nazis.

No, but it quite comfortably dismantles your assumptions that everyone who does not agree with your narrow minded view is a racist or hates Jews. :03:

Oh one can like the Jews very much and still be racist. One can even be Jewish and be racist, unfortunately. One can even be Jewish and be racist against other Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Burros

Same is true of other ethnicities as well.

You know, you are really not helping yourself by jumping to conclusion and making unfounded accusations. But, hey.. whatever floats your boat.

Well, it's just a bunch of US soldiers and Afghanis. I mean, do you really think their lives are particularily valuable?

[Thomen]

Yea.. I already figured as much awhile ago.
Well you don't have to clarify if you don't feel like it. :shifty:

But apparently you are not willing to discuss those openly or in a single topic thread.. which, per your own definition, curiously makes you a racist.. :hmmm:
What, you mean start a thread just about racism? Yea why not.

There is no freedom of speech in a private environment. We are all bound by the rules specified on this board. While I agree that SB overshot his target, two wrongs don't make a right.
Oh ok, Skybird & co. are allowed to break the rules, I don't. I get it now.

What exactly do you consider racist? You are not making much sense at all.
Yea, what is racism? Does it even exist? How do US organisations like NAACP and Anti-Defamation League define it? I guess racism in US differs from, say, racism in Germany. In Germany the laws are a bit more strict concerning nazi-stuff, although they do have a significant number of neo-nazis.

No, but it quite comfortably dismantles your assumptions that everyone who does not agree with your narrow minded view is a racist or hates Jews. :03:
Oh one can like the Jews very much and still be racist. One can even be Jewish and be racist, unfortunately. One can even be Jewish and be racist against other Jews.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Burros

Same is true of other ethnicities as well.

You know, you are really not helping yourself by jumping to conclusion and making unfounded accusations. But, hey.. whatever floats your boat.
Well, it's just a bunch of US soldiers and Afghanis. I mean, do you really think their lives are particularily valuable?

One can be also be a Finn and a bigot. ;) See your own post history for clarification. Or even a Neo Nazi, like Pekka Siitoin
No offense to Dowly, HT and the other Finnish members. :salute:

[OneToughHerring]

Absolutely. Although Siitoin has passed on and now there are new right wingers masquerading with an agenda that is 'critical of foreigners'.

I freely admit that Finland has problems with racism, during WW 2 we had our own 'black shirts with blue ties', right wing movements, even concentration camps (although smaller than elsewhere) and we also passed Jewish people to be killed in places like Auschwitz.

[baggygreen]

I dont know where or how anti-semitism comes from in the thread, OTH seems to have sprung it from nowhere.

Nevermind.

I do see similarities in the way the USSR fought and the way the coalition are fighting in affers though. Note that I'm only referring to the fighting, not to the treatment of prisoners/civvies etc

The reliance on technology in a land that for centuries has been a land of tribal, hand-to-hand fighting, raids launched from caves and tunnels built over hundreds of years. The only way to find them and root out the fighters is to go in on foot, and fight one cavern and one tunnel at a time. This won't happen, the west, moreso than the sovs, are squeamish about doing that kind of fighting these days. Doing it from the safety of 25000 feet might look good on gun cameras, with big kabooms and so on, but thats only clearing out the entrance of any one tunnel. There are countless entrances, caverns, etc which remain untouched.

Until this happens, the effort there is doomed to ultimate failure unfortunately.

[Tribesman]

It was you implicitly putting what I said into doubt for not agreeing with your sources -
No Skybird , it was the source you posted that didn't agree with what you said .

You know i have friends that did tours in Afganistan and they tell the same story.

And I have friends and relatives that did stints in Afghanistan and they tell different stories , often contradicting each other .
You can get to the truth if you dont make up your mind before you look.

I am afraid it appears that it is you who hasn't looked before making up your mind .
Its your arrogance based on nothing that boggles the mind.:rotfl:

[Skybird]

Sort your quotes, Tribesman. It's two or three people you mix up.

+++++++++++++++++++

This has effects for Afghanistan as well:

Pakistan army capitulates to Taliban and accepts arch-Sharia law in province, overruling all courts sentences based on state's laws:

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/idUSTRE51F1Y620090216?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

The truth also includes that major parts of the military and the intel community more or less openly sympathises with the Taliban, which has been their own creation.

The road to success in Afghanistan leads over completely neutralising Pakistan and taking it out of the formula. If you are serious about wanting to "win" Afghanistan, every procedure to neutralise Pakistant must be considered as acceptable. Else all talking about success in Afghanistan will forever remain to be right this: just talking.

[Tribesman]

If you are serious about wanting to "win" Afghanistan, every procedure to neutralise Pakistant must be considered as acceptable.
So Pakistan has lost control of the tribal belt , then again it has never controlled it since Pakistan was created , come to think of it the British Empire at its peak couldn't do anything to control that area either .
Neutralise Pakistan eh ?
Is that kinda like you have to destroy Pakistan to save Pakistan so you can save Afghanistan which might have to be destroyed too just to give a "win" ?

Sort your quotes, Tribesman. It's two or three people you mix up.
No mix up at all , its the two muppets .

[baggygreen]

Tribesman,

It is true, that Pakistan's tribal areas were largely autonomous. However, officially they accepted the rule of law from Islamabad.

This new agreement means that Islamabad has caved into pressure from the Islamic groups, given in to violence, and said ok, you win, you can rule your region with no interference from us. What sort of message does that send to the militants elsewhere??:down:

On the other hand, Islamabad has all but wiped its hands of the region now, we may see the US making their presence felt amongst the militants moreso. Could it be a ploy by the US/Pakistan? possibly.

[Happy Times]

Tribesman,

It is true, that Pakistan's tribal areas were largely autonomous. However, officially they accepted the rule of law from Islamabad.

This new agreement means that Islamabad has caved into pressure from the Islamic groups, given in to violence, and said ok, you win, you can rule your region with no interference from us. What sort of message does that send to the militants elsewhere??:down:

On the other hand, Islamabad has all but wiped its hands of the region now, we may see the US making their presence felt amongst the militants moreso. Could it be a ploy by the US/Pakistan? possibly.

We can wish but i think its unlikely.
Actually Pakistan as a whole does have Sharia practised allready but the Taliban now got rid of the state laws all together.
Pakistan continues its decent to a true Islamic state, one with nuclear weapons.