R
It may be ballsy, but it's also futile. Like a suicide bomber could ever get the President or the VP. It would take planning and care beyond the capabilities of the terrorists to do, the best they could hope for is dumb luck.
From the liberals?Going after the Vice President of the United States... pretty ballsy...
Wonder what our response would have been if they had succeeded?
From the liberals?
Unbridled joy.
:roll:
Yes, but you have proven yourself to be a logical thinker, without the partisan hate and jealousy we see from most liberals in the forum.Not from this liberal. Even though I didn't vote for the man, I don't wish him any harm.
I wouldn't call this planned attack balsy. Infact contrarily it shows just how much control we've lost in Afghanistan and how much the taliban has regained.
The stop over in Bagram was unscheduled, yet the Taliban "knew" he was there.
How many years now have we been in Afghanistan? WHo were we supposed to have toppled and made obsolete? Yet this group now is staging attacks on us still? Show me anywhere I've said we need to "pack it". Show me anywhere I've said the enemy is too stupid. Bombs go off all the time is not a point that validates nor invalidates all the time. It'd be like my saying lightning goes off all the time.Why? Because the enemy is too stupid to have its own intelligence network watchiing airports and base entries? Unlike our enemy, we are pretty predictable. Because a bomb went off? Bombs go off all the time. When the next attack on American soil occurs (and it will) will it mean that despite all of our efforts and terrorist graves we have dug that we should just pack it in because we lost?
A bomb, directed at the VP, that goes off next to an American airbase on an spur of the moment stop over by the VP is hardly an imagined strength. It shows that the Taliban has good enough intel capacity which in turn shows how much control the taliban now has everywhere outside of Kabul. The taliban never left? Why not? Why are they still around?GySgt said:The Taliban never left. And their claim was meant to excite an imagined strength.
How many years now have we been in Afghanistan? WHo were we supposed to have toppled and made obsolete? Yet this group now is staging attacks on us still? Show me anywhere I've said we need to "pack it". Show me anywhere I've said the enemy is too stupid. Bombs go off all the time is not a point that validates nor invalidates all the time. It'd be like my saying lightning goes off all the time.
Don't make claims I clearly did not say into my mouth to suit your argument. Stick with what your opponent stated and debate those points.
A bomb, directed at the VP, that goes off next to an American airbase on an spur of the moment stop over by the VP is hardly an imagined strength. It shows that the Taliban has good enough intel capacity which in turn shows how much control the taliban now has everywhere outside of Kabul. The taliban never left? Why not? Why are they still around?
Where's the Baath party today? Gone. Gaining ground? Not even close. AQ was never a governmental entity. PLO we're not at war with, neither Fatah nor Hamas - thus no argument.You reflected on a supposition that we have lost ground and that the Tali-Ban has gained ground, because of a bomb detonation. However, the truth is that the Tali-Ban has never left and it will never leave. Muslims governments will always have to face off with their zealots in any form, because that is the byproduct of their culture. This means that Al-Queda, Tali-Ban, PLO, Baath Party, Fatah, Hamas, etc. will always linger and will always serve as a reminder that vicious men exist within the shadows of civilization.
You're arguing semantics here.GySgt said:"Obsolete" is a word we haven't even been able to use towards our own Radical base. Of course, we both understand the extreme degree of difference, but I only mean to illustrate determination. We do not face the German army or the Iraqi army in Kuwait. Toppled? Easy enough. slaughtering them when they poke their heads out from under their rocks? Easy enough. Making them obsolete? No time soon.
Yes but the presentation here is not over the long term aspects of this culture and it's ppl. It's the simple fact that the once toppled taliban has now regained much political control over Afghanistan.GySgt said:Once these organizations (Baathist Pary, Tali-Ban) are removed from power they do not simply lay down their weapons and go home to pick up where they left off. They are now reduced to what their fellow Muslims are - unemployed and bored. This civilization will always provide the victims to their organizations. If men and women of the 19 century committed the sin of romanticizing war, then we 21st century Americans are in danger of embracing a new sin, that of rejecting war's complex realities in favor of a reality-TV approach to combat and its aftermath.
This is on going. Only time and their will to face forward will win this war.
It's not that easy to sit next to an airport and tell who is there or not and then have the means to do so.GySgt said:I explained why they are around. They are civilians. They are the unemployed. They are the mercenaries. They are the zealots. They are the futureless youth who find purpose in a "holy" war. This civilization has quite a recruitment pool.
And it doesn't take much talent to sit next to an airport and our bases and make note of who is coming and going.
I am willing to bet most liberals would find little - if any - joy in the death of a fellow human. The left doesn't enjoy the killing of someone with differing political/religious ideologies, despite their past actions. I won't say the right does, but the deaths of innocent Iraqis doesn't seem to bother many of them.From the liberals?
Unbridled joy.
:roll:
I'm pretty angry that someone would try and take out the Vice President. If they had suceeded, we would have to have a military response. An attack on our leaders is an attack on all Americans. This cannot be allowed under any circumstances.Originally posted by reaganburch:
Going after the Vice President of the United States... pretty ballsy...
Wonder what our response would have been if they had succeeded?
I'm pretty angry that someone would try and take out the Vice President. If they had suceeded, we would have to have a military response. An attack on our leaders is an attack on all Americans. This cannot be allowed under any circumstances.
I have my issues with the VP, but the worst thing I would like to see for him is un-employment!
Where's the Baath party today? Gone. Gaining ground? Not even close. AQ was never a governmental entity. PLO we're not at war with, neither Fatah nor Hamas - thus no argument.
Taliban had been displaced into a near non-existence before, but now they are back.
So much that they have regained control that they launched a coordinated bombing on our AFB with intel of the VP there; these are the undeniable facts.
It's not that easy to sit next to an airport and tell who is there or not and then have the means to do so.
It may be ballsy, but it's also futile. Like a suicide bomber could ever get the President or the VP. It would take planning and care beyond the capabilities of the terrorists to do, the best they could hope for is dumb luck.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?