Where is bin Laden? (good stuff here)

[Missouri Mule]

Huh? In your world does 2+2 = 5? I ask because what you just wrote does not add up, it makes zero sense. nkgupta80 was not comparing the US to Nazi Germany. You're totally off the mark! Where do you come up with your logic?


You were wrong the last time you wrote this, and IMHO you're wrong again, and will be whenever you write it again..."Real Americans" know that our country is plenty strong enough and plenty free enough to accept criticism, especially from other Americans.

IMHO Americans who tell other Americans "America right or wrong" are not true Americans for they are promoting nationalism over truth and "Real Americans" always want the truth to be told. Telling the truth and exposing our warts makes us stronger.

You can believe what you want to believe. I'll believe that real Americans don't air our dirty linen in public before the world. We don't do this in wartime and we are certainly at war. If someone does this, I question his allegience and invite him to emmigrate to some socialist paradise like Cuba or North Korea to get reeducated on the realities of the world we live in.

 

[nkgupta80]

IMHO Americans who tell other Americans "America right or wrong" are not true Americans for they are promoting nationalism over truth and "Real Americans" always want the truth to be told. Telling the truth and exposing our warts makes us stronger.

and you don't believe in this? this is one of the ideals we should stand by. We live up to the truth regardless of how much it may hurt. Real Americans would do that. Bad Americans regardless of there alleigance would follow thier beliefs blindly.

 

[nkgupta80]

IMHO Americans who tell other Americans "America right or wrong" are not true Americans for they are promoting nationalism over truth and "Real Americans" always want the truth to be told. Telling the truth and exposing our warts makes us stronger.

btw your signature seems to be in agreement, why aren't you.

The Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Whats the use of just praising government policies in this forum. We're hear to criticize and understand. I disagree with this administrations handlings, so I tend to cite historical examples of our mistakes in the past and the consequences of them. Then I try to analyze what are the possible consequences of what the government is doing today.

Heres an example. We used Pakistan to bring a fundementalist oppressive regime called the taliban into power. The result, the afghani people were not only oppressed as they would have been under soviet control, but all the progress ever made in that nation was destroyed. Of course US hatred would spread, and eventually the taliban spawned people who led to attacks such as 911.

Is it wrong for me to say that the US government did a terrible thing, and a result, the American people were put at greater risk? Is it then wrong for me to point out that we are still supporting Pakistan, a country that harbors the many top officials who once gave the taliban its power?

In times of war, criticism is healthy in keeping us from loosing our senses and succumbing to paranoia.

I'm not saying that all of our government policies are perfect; far from it. But on balance we have been a tremendous positive influence for the rest of the world. Check out the recepients of the Nobel Peace prize and other advances made in this world. If we are so horrible why do people want to come here? Why don't they go to Cuba or North Korea, Iran or some other wonderful place where everything is peachy keen? When the rubber meets the road they stay right here to bitch and moan, bellyaching about everything like they actually expect us to be perfect in every way. It is unrealistic and stupid. Real Americans, mature Americans in any event, know that life has its imperfections. They don't go around looking to trash America every chance they get. You don't do it in your own family. America is your family. Respect it. Respect the sacrifices of the men and women that made it possible through their ultimate sacrifice to speak your mind freely without a bayonet held to your throat. That's the America I know. That's the America I love and I reserve the right to tell it like it is.

 

[Missouri Mule]

btw your signature seems to be in agreement, why aren't you.

I think you are confused who you are replying to.

 

[nkgupta80]

when did i ever say we are horrible. We are not a tyrant. But we are far from perfect. It is these imperfections that may eventually bite us in the ass. That is why its good to constantly criticize and analyze our government policies both domestic and foreign, both during war and peace.

 

[Missouri Mule]

when did i ever say we are horrible. We are not a tyrant. But we are far from perfect. It is these imperfections that may eventually bite us in the ass. That is why its good to constantly criticize and analyze our government policies both domestic and foreign, both during war and peace.

Why are you so certain that our policies are so wrong? What facts are you dealing from? Who are you listening to? What expertise do you have? Just because Michael Moore says something doesn't make it so.

 

[nkgupta80]

you don't agree with the example I gave you? That we put the taliban into power. It is pretty undeniable. I could search for facts if you want them...

Hmm we've supported a lot of crazed tyrants in face of a communist threat. IRaq-Iran war, although the Europeans were as guilty of this, we would deliberatly foment certain sides and reap the profits. We support the Sauds which angers the oppressed Arabs which furthers terrorism, which again hurts us. I could go on, but you can understand why these are so important (the consequences later in time can turn out to be real bad).

In terms of today, I really don't think the war in Iraq is worth it. I don't like how we are supportin Pakistan, I don't like some of our economic policies. These are all for other threads and debates. There is always criticism, no side is 100% right, but in the end we're trying to debate what is the better path to choose.

 

[Missouri Mule]

you don't agree with the example I gave you? That we put the taliban into power. It is pretty undeniable. I could search for facts if you want them...

Hmm we've supported a lot of crazed tyrants in face of a communist threat. IRaq-Iran war, although the Europeans were as guilty of this, we would deliberatly foment certain sides and reap the profits. We support the Sauds which angers the oppressed Arabs which furthers terrorism, which again hurts us. I could go on, but you can understand why these are so important (the consequences later in time can turn out to be real bad).

In terms of today, I really don't think the war in Iraq is worth it. I don't like how we are supportin Pakistan, I don't like some of our economic policies. These are all for other threads and debates. There is always criticism, no side is 100% right, but in the end we're trying to debate what is the better path to choose.

"We" put the Taliban in power? Prove it. That is some of the most convoluted reasoning I have ever seen.

 

[nkgupta80]

The taliban was never there before the soviet aggression. Afghanistan was actually a much more modern place. Yes it still had a long ways to go, but it wasn't a fundementalist stone-age shiithole that the taliban made it. My dad had visited Kabul a few times, and recalled that it was a friendly country to visit. During the Soviet Aggression, Afghanistan became yet another proxy war. US through its ally pakistan, funded and trained the Islamic rebels to fight against the Soviets. These very people that we trained formed the groundwork for the taliban. The fundementalists were always there in pakistan, we gave those troops training and weapons to ward off the soviet aggression. In doing so, we gave these fundementalists the power to eventually take over Afghanistan.

The US, during the cold war, had a bad habit of supporting the most crazed individuals in the fight against Communism. The later taliban fundementalist groups were one of them.

 

[Surenderer]

Why are you so certain that our policies are so wrong?

Because at one time those policies supported:



Saddam

Osama

Saudi Royal Family

Iran

Taliban

etc........


nothing in the Constitution nor in logic grants to the President of the United States or to Congress the power to influence the political life of other countries, to "uplift" their cultures, to bolster their economies, to feed their peoples or even to defend them against their enemies. This point was made clear by the "Father" of our country George Washington:


I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation has a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one had a right to form and adopt whatever government they liked best to live under them selves; and that if this country could, consistent with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest, and every other consideration. -- George Washington (1732-1799) Letter to James Monroe (25 Aug. 1796)


nobody increases his chances of survival by entering into alliances with potential attackers yet the U.S. does it again and again and wonders why it's enemies increases instead of decreases



peace

 

[nkgupta80]

read on the afghani mujahideen. they were the US backed opposition to the Soviets and the foreruunners to the taliban.

 

[dragonslayer]

maybe Bush is hiding him out and protecting him since the Bush family is such good friends with the Bin Laden family. Don't forget that the Osama's brothers and other family were actually vacationing on the Bush ranch when 911 happened. 2 days after 911, the US Air force escorted their private 707 out of US air space. and across the Atlantic.

:roll:

 

[Crispy]

Because at one time those policies supported:



Saddam

Osama

Saudi Royal Family

Iran

Taliban

etc........


nothing in the Constitution nor in logic grants to the President of the United States or to Congress the power to influence the political life of other countries, to "uplift" their cultures, to bolster their economies, to feed their peoples or even to defend them against their enemies. This point was made clear by the "Father" of our country George Washington:


I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation has a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one had a right to form and adopt whatever government they liked best to live under them selves; and that if this country could, consistent with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest, and every other consideration. -- George Washington (1732-1799) Letter to James Monroe (25 Aug. 1796)


nobody increases his chances of survival by entering into alliances with potential attackers yet the U.S. does it again and again and wonders why it's enemies increases instead of decreases



peace

Yep there is definitely truth in this, but, to be fair the United States from its beginnings was tied up in international alliances be them military or economic. The South states survived and fought to keep slavery in the American Civil War primarily because of their economic ties with foriegn powers and its agricultural industry. Our Revolution was won through allying with France. And even when we tried isolationism prior to WWI we were largly brought into the world community anyway through a globalizing economy, WWI, WWII and the Cold War, none of which we could stay isolated from.

I think its true our foriegn relations, for whatever motivations may have created them, may have been horrible alliances but I think its an oversimplification of our place in the world to say we could've chosen to avoid international alliances or avoid international alliances with States who's values conflicted with ours. Its a great notion and certainly worth striving for but ultimately impractical.

To be honest I wouldn't have wanted to be the decision maker choosing between supporting a scumbag like Sadaam Hussein because we had a beef with Iran and we needed Sadaams oil at the time (Oil crisis of the 70s and 80s)

-or-

allowing our economy to flounder worse than it already had been at the end of the 70s and early 80s.

I'm not making excuses mind you but I can't reasonably say our relations are black and white either. The 20th century, especially for us was an extremely gray century.

 

[Missouri Mule]

The taliban was never there before the soviet aggression. Afghanistan was actually a much more modern place. Yes it still had a long ways to go, but it wasn't a fundementalist stone-age shiithole that the taliban made it. My dad had visited Kabul a few times, and recalled that it was a friendly country to visit. During the Soviet Aggression, Afghanistan became yet another proxy war. US through its ally pakistan, funded and trained the Islamic rebels to fight against the Soviets. These very people that we trained formed the groundwork for the taliban. The fundementalists were always there in pakistan, we gave those troops training and weapons to ward off the soviet aggression. In doing so, we gave these fundementalists the power to eventually take over Afghanistan.

The US, during the cold war, had a bad habit of supporting the most crazed individuals in the fight against Communism. The later taliban fundementalist groups were one of them.

You claimed that we founded the Taliban. I do not believe you have established this as fact. The Taliban was created essentially from another terrorist harbor - Pakistan. But to say that we created the Taliban is absurd.

 

[Missouri Mule]

Because at one time those policies supported:


Saddam

Osama

Saudi Royal Family

Iran

Taliban

etc........

nothing in the Constitution nor in logic grants to the President of the United States or to Congress the power to influence the political life of other countries, to "uplift" their cultures, to bolster their economies, to feed their peoples or even to defend them against their enemies. This point was made clear by the "Father" of our country George Washington:

I have always given it as my decided opinion that no nation has a right to intermeddle in the internal concerns of another; that every one had a right to form and adopt whatever government they liked best to live under them selves; and that if this country could, consistent with its engagements, maintain a strict neutrality and thereby preserve peace, it was bound to do so by motives of policy, interest, and every other consideration. -- George Washington (1732-1799) Letter to James Monroe (25 Aug. 1796)

nobody increases his chances of survival by entering into alliances with potential attackers yet the U.S. does it again and again and wonders why it's enemies increases instead of decreases

peace

We did what we did under the circumstances obtaining at the time. If you will recall, we also were allies with Stalin in WWII against Hitler. Would it have been preferable to have the Nazis rule the entire world because that is where it was heading?

As far as our alliance with the rebels in Afghanistan, we happened to be in a mortal fight to the death the Soviet Union. If not for the United States, the Soviet Union would today rule the world.

 

[Missouri Mule]

maybe Bush is hiding him out and protecting him since the Bush family is such good friends with the Bin Laden family. Don't forget that the Osama's brothers and other family were actually vacationing on the Bush ranch when 911 happened. 2 days after 911, the US Air force escorted their private 707 out of US air space. and across the Atlantic.

:roll:

You really need to get past this. This has been thoroughly thoroughly debunked and has nothing to do with anything. This is nonsense that charlatans like Michael Moore concoct for the gullible.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

As far as our alliance with the rebels in Afghanistan, we happened to be in a mortal fight to the death the Soviet Union. If not for the United States, the Soviet Union would today rule the world.

Mortal fight to the death?

Was it really a mortal fight when we trained bin Laden? If memory serves me right, we training/supplying him and the other Mujahedin(sp?) in about 1985(?). The USSR fell in 1991. Was it really a "mortal fight to the death?"

 

[Missouri Mule]

Mortal fight to the death?

Was it really a mortal fight when we trained bin Laden? If memory serves me right, we training/supplying him and the other Mujahedin(sp?) in about 1985(?). The USSR fell in 1991. Was it really a "mortal fight to the death?"

Between the Soviet Union and the Free World? Absolutely.

 

[Gandhi>Bush]

In the mid 1980's? I'm not so sure that is was.

 

[Missouri Mule]

In the mid 1980's? I'm not so sure that is was.

Reagan seemed to think so. He referred to the Soviet Union as the "Focus of Evil" and the touchy-feely crowd went nuts.

One of the less discussed aspects of the ME that is poorly understood is that we could have simply decided to opt out of the Iran/Iraq war entirely. Saddam would have been toppled by the Mad Mullahs of Iran. Saddam was the "devil that we knew." Iran is still ruled by a bunch of murdering psychopaths.

 

[Crispy]

In the mid 1980's? I'm not so sure that is was.

Well, keep in mind that the Afghan war was part of the nail in the Economic coffin for the Soviet Union. Also 10 years earlier the Soviets played that very same deadly game against us.

Soviets were in decline by 80s no doubt but not down for the count yet.

 

[nkgupta80]

yeah and the US giving training, money, and weapons to the Muhajideen was a big mistake.

 

[cnredd]

yeah and the US giving training, money, and weapons to the Muhajideen was a big mistake.

Was it?

Everyone complains about the money that was spent on Iraq in a war that is less than 2 1/2 years old. Can you imagine the amount lost for the Soviets in 10 years? How much ammunition and equipment were used by the Soviets as a direct result of US actions? Maybe if the US wasn't involved, Afghanistan might have become a Soviet satellite within 3 or 4 years, and its people and resources would be sucked up by, what Reagan called, "The Evil Empire".

Maybe giving aid to the muhajideen was the lesser of two evils, and we just didn't know what they would turn into at the time.

 

[Crispy]

yeah and the US giving training, money, and weapons to the Muhajideen was a big mistake.

Would we also consider the Soviet Union and China financially supporting North Korea and North Vietnam a mistake as well?