Yup...we're in Afghanistan because of terrorism.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by weazel
If you can't put any meat on the table don't pull up a chair akiron.

Not sure what you mean Weazel. Are you saying that I haven't presented any facts? (meat)   I just thought it was obvious to everyone why the US is in Afghanistan. If not, let me recap.

OBL has been attacking the US since the WTC bombing in '93. OBL supports and is supported by the Taliban entrenched in Afghanistan. Taliban is asked to hand him over. They refuse, we invade.

Sinister as our attempts to help Afghanistan and Pakistan may seem to you there just might be some benevolence involved. And if a US company makes a buck in the process, so what?

[capt. apathy]

I expect no more from the 'war on terrorism' than the 'war on drugs'.

in other words there will be alot of publicity, alot of gov't spending, loss of civil libertys, and no real results in the end

[weazel]

Originally posted by K98k
This site is probably where weazel (a.k.a. Jihad) and Thrawn frequent to get the latest.

http://memri.org/cartoons/

after seeing some of these and hearing Thrawn and Jihad they sound awfully familiar.

Look ma, here's another dumb bellybutton who's swallowed the anti-intellectual bait of chimpys gang, hook...line...and sinker.

For the most part, chimpys supporters are content fanatically to tune out any aspect of reality that contradicts their vision of "the liberal establishment."

For reasons too complex for us to hazard here, the anti-intellectuals are finally on the side of power at its most unforgiving and voracious.

And so they give a pass to those people who are at the service of such power, while jeering anyone...who thinks to raise a fuss about how wrong it is.

For them, this isn't something to discuss, because discussion is itself suspicious, even dangerous...the sport of jerk-offs and prevaricators.

Thus there is no point in arguing with them...and yet no wisdom in attempting to ignore them.

And such is true not only of the Bush regime's most unrestrained supporters, but of the Bush regime itself...a fact that now requires a lot of careful thought, and something more.

And yet it's just such thinking that has all but disappeared since 9/11...as it always disappears in time of war.

Funked:

In bringing down the World Trade Center and ravaging the Pentagon, the terrorists not only murdered thousands, and left tens of thousands more bereft, and devastated lower Manhattan, and sparked the wreckage of the local and the national economy.

Through that spectacular atrocity, the killers also managed, at one blow, to knock the brains clean out of countless good Americans.

Although those citizens had started out that day with all their wits intact, by dinnertime they sounded more like Fred Flintstone, a consequence even more destructive in the long run.

For while we can and will no doubt rebuild beyond the shattered lives and property, the prospects aren't as upbeat for our frail democracy, which cannot function if too many people think like chimpy and his gang of thugs and criminals.

So now lets go back to chimpys quotes I addressed to grunherz, only six months after 9/11 bin laden was no longer a concern of George Bush...how do you explain that?

[AKIron]

Originally posted by capt. apathy
I expect no more from the 'war on terrorism' than the 'war on drugs'.

in other words there will be alot of publicity, alot of gov't spending, loss of civil libertys, and no real results in the end

I find it interesting that there are so many posters with handles to match their posting personality. Makes me wonder how many might be from the same person.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by weazel
Look ma, here's another dumb bellybutton who's swallowed the anti-intellectual bait of chimpys gang, hook...line...and sinker.

Talk about a diatribe sorely lacking in protein.

[funkedup]

Weazel I think you are asking me to defend every action of Bush or Republicans since 9/11.  I can't do that.  I am not Republican nor am I a big fan of Bush.  I dislike Bush slightly less than Algore.  But politicians are all slime.

I don't know why Bush said that about Bin Laden.  I think basically they are saying they don't care about Bin Laden because they don't want to lose face.  The fact is the wily old fart got away from them, and they either don't know where he is or it is politically inconvenient to go get him.

The more important thing is that Al Qaeda has been thoroughly disrupted and there is no longer a willing host government for them in Afghanistan.  In fact, I would say there is not a willing host government for them on the planet.  I think what happened in Afghanistan has "put the fear of God" in a lot of dictators around the world.  They know that by harboring terrorists they risk their power, their lives, and the lives of their countrymen.  Mission accomplished.

Of course that doesn't mean we can leave Afghanistan just yet.  To go in there and take out their government and then leave a power vacuum would be irresponsible.  We owe it to the Afghani people to help them rebuild and get back to at least where they were economically before the Russkies invaded, and hopefully with a functioning democracy.  And for now, with so many armed factions over there, it means that we have to keep a military force.

[weazel]

Talk about a diatribe sorely lacking in protein.

For helping me make my point akiron....as another fanatical supporter content  to tune out any aspect of reality that contradicts their vision of "the liberal establishment."

Weazel basically I'm 99% sure you are a mentally ill conspiracy nut so that's why I don't reply in earnest.

Oh...and for you funked, theres no "conspiracy theory" mentioned by me anywhere in this thread, only the cold hard truth.

By asking such questions now, I probably won't get the answers that I'm looking for, but it does demonstrate something quite important....that terror serves to sabotage democracy, by making thought itself seem like a crime against the state.

By asking these questions, I'm accused of siding with the enemy...or a "mentally ill conspiracy nut", just the sort of answer that Al Qaeda's goons would also give you, if you asked them certain tactless questions.

[AKIron]

Originally posted by weazel
For helping me make my point akiron....as another fanatical supporter content  to tune out any aspect of reality that contradicts their vision of "the liberal establishment."

Well Weazel, some have differing perceptions of reality.

I'll come clean here. I didn't vote in the last presidential election (first time in many elections). Why? I don't like George Bush. I think he's lousy speaker and I found it hard to listen to him. Anyhow, I knew Texas would go Republican or I would have voted. Not so much because I buy the party line but more because I detest the opposition so much.

So, I'm really not all that delusional, however, I think you are.

[funkedup]

Oh...and for you funked, theres no "conspiracy theory" mentioned by me anywhere in this thread, only the cold hard truth.

Your thread title implies a conspiracy.

...it does demonstrate something quite important....that terror serves to sabotage democracy, by making thought itself seem like a crime against the state.

You haven't demonstrated that.

By asking these questions, I'm accused of siding with the enemy...or a "mentally ill conspiracy nut"

Thinking that the US should not take economic advantage of the situation in Afghanistan, considering the considerable expense we have incurred there, would be anti-American, and pretty close to what our enemies would think.

As for the mentally ill part that goes way beyond this thread, to your obsession with Chimpler and the hundreds of posts on the subject.  I don't know you in real life so I can't say for sure that you are a nut, but it sure sounds like it.  Anyways lots of us are nuts so don't feel bad.  But don't be surprised when I give you a goofy answer.

[capt. apathy]

quote
___________________________
I find it interesting that there are so many posters with handles to match their posting personality.
___________________________

maybe it's because many of us pick handles that reflect who we are instead of who we wish we where.

what do you think, Iron?

[bounder]

Originally posted by Hortlund
It must really suck to get all worked up over stuff like this.

Forget it Weazel. There is nothing you can do to change the situation. War is coming to Iraq and North Korea, no matter how anxiously you are twisting your hands.

Relax, get a beer, put on some good music and try to stop being so angry/afraid.

I suggest The pearl fishers duet by Bizet, preferably the one with Jussi Bjorling and Robert Merill from 1940something (at least I think its from 1940something).

Things could be worse. Seriously.

Jeez Hortlund, I thought I knew some cold hearted SOBs but you take the prize banana.

[john9001]

yep, weazel wants afganistan to stay poor, weazel don't want afgans to build a pipeline, weazel don't want agfgans to make money transporting oil , weazel wants afgans to keep fighting so he can blame it on bush

[Mirge]

isnt this the forum for less serious off topic conversations? oh well dosent matter at this point....i have to agree with

<
in other words there will be alot of publicity, alot of gov't spending, loss of civil libertys, and no real results in the end>>

[weazel]

Originally posted by funkedup
Your thread title implies a conspiracy.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
...it does demonstrate something quite important....that terror serves to sabotage democracy, by making thought itself seem like a crime against the state.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You haven't demonstrated that.

The responses I have recieved on this subject demonstrate it quite well.

How many responses in this thread alone mention conspiracy theory...or mental illness?

You even hint in your last post at my being anti-American for having raised the subject.

I won't bother to try and count them all in other threads as I want to get some sleep tonight.  

"Thinking that the US should not take economic advantage of the situation in Afghanistan, considering the considerable expense we have incurred there, would be anti-American, and pretty close to what our enemies would think."

I only point out that it's unethical and demonstrates the lack of integrity of the current regime to line their pockets by the situation....at the expense of the people who serve our country in the armed forces.

[funkedup]

Guess what?  If you want our government to do things that are against the best interest of Americans, you are Anti-American.
Just calling a spade a spade here.

And how do you call this pipeline deal unethical again?  Did they show favoritism to any particular US firms?  That's the only possible unethical behavior I can see, and you haven't demonstrated that it has happened.  Making sure that a US firm gets the contract is not unethical.  Hell it's what he's supposed to do.  How can you expect him to do otherwise?