- Joined
- Mar 30, 2016
- Messages
- 81,814
- Reaction score
- 20,427
- Location
- Chicago
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
If the police kick the door of Jim's house in without a warrant (and even without proof that Joe was responsible for a crime) then the case is going to get kicked out of court pretty damn quickly.
What you appear to forget is that when the US government originally asked the Afghans to turn Osama bin Laden over to the US, the US government DID NOT have actual evidence that Osama bin Laden was actually responsible for the WTC/Pentagon Mass Murders. True, the US government THOUGHT that he was PROBABLY involved but it had no actual evidence that he was actually involved - that evidence emerged AFTER the US invaded Afghanistan.
Yeahright.
The US contribution to WW1-
1- Show up when it's nearly over.
2- Spend 8 or 9 months making the same mistakes everyone else made 4 years before.
3- Join the parade.
They signed the treaty of Versailles where they accepted responsablity for the war and agreed to pay reparations.They didn't surrender.
You mean when the French were on the verge of shooting their own generals for continually hurling them into the meat grinder and the British weren't much better off.
If nothing else, the prospect of a flood of fresh manpower shored up the Entente and forced the Germans into a last desperate roll of the dice.
The western frony was static for 3 years when we got there...lol. We saved yall's asses.
They signed the treaty of Versailles where they accepted responsablity for the war and agreed to pay reparations.
Unconditonal surrender is not the only way to lose a war
Where do you get this stuff from? You just make it up?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada's_Hundred_Days
Canada’s Hundred Days is the name given to the series of attacks made by the Canadian Corps between 8 August and 11 November 1918, during the Hundred Days Offensive of World War I. Reference to this period as Canada's Hundred Days is due to the substantial role the Canadian Corps of the British First Army played during the offensive.
During this time, the Canadian Corps fought in the Battle of Amiens, Second Battle of the Somme, Battle of the Scarpe, Battle of the Canal du Nord, Battle of Cambrai, Battle of the Selle, Battle of Valenciennes and finally at Mons, on the final day of combat before the Armistice of 11 November 1918. In terms of numbers, during those 96 days the Canadian Corps' four over-strength or 'heavy' divisions of roughly 100,000 men, engaged and defeated or put to flight elements of forty seven German divisions, which represented one quarter of the German forces faced by the Allied Powers fighting on the Western Front.[1] However, their successes came at a heavy cost; Canadians suffered 20% of their battle-sustained casualties of the war during the same period.[2] The Canadian Corps suffered 45,835 casualties during this offensive.
Germany was not defeated on the battlefield in WW1.
The western frony was static for 3 years when we got there...lol. We saved yall's asses.
Where do you get this stuff from? You just make it up?
Without The United States, it would have never happened.
Germany was not defeated on the battlefield in WW1.
Good heavens NO!
He doesn't make it up - he actually paid attention in the history classes taught in American schools.
Except that's not how it happened.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canada's_Hundred_Days
"Canada’s Hundred Days is the name given to the series of attacks made by the Canadian Corps between 8 August and 11 November 1918, during the Hundred Days Offensive of World War I. Reference to this period as Canada's Hundred Days is due to the substantial role the Canadian Corps of the British First Army played during the offensive."
"During this time, the Canadian Corps fought in the Battle of Amiens, Second Battle of the Somme, Battle of the Scarpe, Battle of the Canal du Nord, Battle of Cambrai, Battle of the Selle, Battle of Valenciennes and finally at Mons, on the final day of combat before the Armistice of 11 November 1918. In terms of numbers, during those 96 days the Canadian Corps' four over-strength or 'heavy' divisions of roughly 100,000 men, engaged and defeated or put to flight elements of forty seven German divisions, which represented one quarter of the German forces faced by the Allied Powers fighting on the Western Front.[1] However, their successes came at a heavy cost; Canadians suffered 20% of their battle-sustained casualties of the war during the same period.[2] The Canadian Corps suffered 45,835 casualties during this offensive."
After a series of battles in which the Canadian Corps was used as 'shock troops', the spear-head, came the last decisive battle...
"The Canadians then broke the Hindenburg line a second time, this time during the Battle of Cambrai, which (along with the Australian, British and American break further south at the Battle of St. Quentin Canal) resulted in a collapse of German morale."
"This collapse forced the German High Command to accept that the war had to be ended. The evidence of failing German morale also convinced many Allied commanders and political leaders that the war could be ended in 1918. (Previously, all efforts had been concentrated on building up forces to mount a decisive attack in 1919.)"
From Reuters
'Unacceptable' for Taliban to refuse peace talks, U.S. official says
KABUL (Reuters) - Pressure is building on the Taliban to respond to President Ashraf Ghani’s offer for peace talks, in the face of growing demands for an end to the 17-year-long war in Afghanistan, a senior U.S. official said.
“Increasingly, I think it’s becoming unacceptable for the Taliban not to negotiate,” Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for South and Central Asia Alice Wells told reporters during a visit to Kabul.
“Right now it’s the Taliban leaders, and frankly it’s Taliban leaders who aren’t residing in Afghanistan, who are the obstacle to a negotiated political settlement,” said Wells, one of the State Department’s top officials dealing with Afghanistan.
Her remarks were made on Saturday but embargoed for release on Sunday.
COMMENT:-
Generally speaking, the side that thinks that it is winning doesn't call for "negotiations".
On the other hand, exactly how does Mr. Trump's administration think that it is going to "negotiate" a solution which leaves the Taliban with some significant political say in Afghanistan when it is the position of the US government that the Taliban is a terrorist organization that has to be wiped out? And, why would the Taliban believe the US government when it says that it is prepared to allow the Taliban to have some significant political say in Afghanistan after the US government invaded Afghanistan in order to ensure that the Taliban had no significant political say in Afghanistan?
Thing is, they know that they will be back in control of the country within a year of our exit, so why talk.
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?