boroda

[anonymous]

Originally posted by Count
Dago, pls, tell me of the great American victories in Afghanistan.

why does he need to tell you? plenty of accounts. atf and al qaeda killed to the man in heavily fortified position without inflicting any losses on coalition forces. atf and al qaeda assaulted at night in their own "backyard" and cut down before they knew what hit them. atf and al qaeda attempting to pin and overrun small coalition elements and being wiped out in attempt. do your own reading unless you paying dago to be a teacher.

[Count]

This is *great victories*?
Links please...

[anonymous]

Originally posted by Count
This is *great victories*?
Links please...

ill make it simple for you. where are the al qaeda and atf forces that were in afghanistan on 11SEP01? did they all hide in one big super secret cave and are there now waiting for the "big counterattack"? if you think im going to spend even two minutes of my free time to look up links for someone with your attitude my advice to you is to remove cranium from anus. i was there and saw the coalition hand veteran al qaeda and taliban fighters their bellybutton more than once. and considering the fact that the opposition was skilled and experienced id consider these to be great victories. tell me what experience do you base your judgemnt of "great victories" on? when a few hundred coalition special operators go into afghanistan and link up with the northern alliance a couple of weeks after their leader is assasinated by al qaeda and proceed to rout the atf and al qaeda out of most of afghanistan inflicting heavy losses on the enemy and taking very few casualties themselves especially considering how things have gone for foreign military in afghanistan before id consider it a great victory. you may not see it this way. explain to my why your opinion should matter at all?

[Thrawn]

Dago, passing strange that you have decided to totally ignore the most important SC resolution regarding Iraq, US sponsored resolution 1441.  Actually no, it's not strange at all.

[Dago]

Thrawn,

No, it isn't strange at all since it wasn't relevant.

But since you choose not to actually pay attention you wouldn't understand that.

dago

[Dago]

Count,

First, while I never claimed the US and it's allies enjoyed "great victories" in Afghanistan, they in fact have been very victorious in both goals and in battle. I will point out the following:

When the USA and it's allies went into Afghanistan, the country was ruled by the Taliban.  The Taliban oppressed the people, routinely raped the young women in the country and killed those who would speak against them.  The Taliban supported terrorism and allowed Al Qaeda to build, operate and train within Afghanistans borders.

Now, as a result of the military actions of the USA and it's allies in Afghanistan, the Taliban is defeated and barely exists hiding in small pockets like mice in caves.

The people are now enjoying the rebirth of freedom, will be participating in elections for representation, the women no longer have to wear complete coverings, the children are returning to school, and medical care is becoming available again to the citizens.   The soccer fields are no longer used as killing fields.

A national Army has been established, trained and equipped.

Warlords have agreed to disarm helping to bring peace to the people in the countryside.

Al Qaeda has been devestated and is living in hiding and on the run.  Al Qaeda training camps have been eliminated.

In every military engagement with the Taliban or Al Qaeda, the US and it's allies won the battles.  Too many to list, both large and small, but if your energy level matches your ignorance, you can do the research and read all about it.

dago

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Dago
(btw, i gave proof, challenged you to do same, you gave nothing.  hence, I can but accept your surrender)

What should I give? For what? For proof that your war against Iraq was agressive, not defencive? It's obvious. Noone should use force in international politics, and war with Iraq was an agression.

I love that white house site that justifies war by providing some UN resolutions that say nothing about forcing Iraq to follow them by starting hostilities.

Looks like a good American way of discussion. You switch topics arter I give you some information that you don't want to believe, but that is obviously true, that doesn't suit you. You argue with me about things I never said, avoiding the question I asked. You provide some documents that don't rely to the subject of discussion as arguments. You put words that I never said into my mouth. After a complete failure to proof whatever you thought was your point of view - you declare that your opponent surrenders.

Your education in American politics is exellent. Your participation in this discussion is a good example of how your government acts.

Now, please, give me a short answer: was a war against Iraq defencive or aggressive? If it wasn't aggressive, as you say, then - it must be defencive, is it clear? If it was defencive on your side, then it must be aggressive on Iraqi side, so, Iraq should be an agressor that attacked United States. Did they teach you logics where you got your education?

Asking you to provide any document that allows US to use military force against Iraq, invade it and overthrow it's government, issued after 1991, is useless, because such documents don't exist, and you know it.

I understand that this obvious facts and conclusions contradict your patriotic feelings, but being a patriot doesn't allow you to refrain from using common sence.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Dago
The Taliban oppressed the people, routinely raped the young women in the country and killed those who would speak against them.

Ignorance is strength!

Are you aquainted with Shariat laws?

Sorry, no time now for further comments on your hallucinations.

[Dago]

Are you aquainted with Shariat laws?  

LOL,  now you expose yourself as someone who really doesnt have a clue.

Someday maybe you will experience the real world, learn that those who preach are often the worst sinners.

I don't know if you have ever left Mother Russia to live elsewhere, but I have lived in an Islamic land, one that "adhered to Islamic law".   I have never seen so many hypocritic people as I have there.

As I have suggested in previous posts, you need to both come into the light of reality, and find a way to buy a clue.

Unless you are ready to stop acting like a completely uninformed propaganda regurgitating fool, you no longer are worthy of my time.  Do some research yourself and maybe you will find truth.

dago

[Boroda]

So - you keep posting your hallucinations that have no connection to reality and proud of it.

Primitive Moslim countries like Chechnya or Taliban followed Shariat exactly. Taliban means "Islamic students", and they were supposed to follow their laws. You should know it better, your country installed them in Afghanistan to "restore order" in form of Shariat laws.

Chechens lived on Shariat laws for 3 years, and this was one of the reasons to interfere.

Uncureable.

Look how fast you switched the topic to avoid my questions.

Asking again: was a war with Iraq aggressive or defencive?

With Taliban US looks like Uzbek Young Communists, who were famous for heroicaly overcoming problems they created themselves.

Again: what you call a "reality" is just a sick world of your TV propaganda.

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by Dago
Thrawn,

No, it isn't strange at all since it wasn't relevant.

But since you choose not to actually pay attention you wouldn't understand that.

dago

Oh, it's totally relevant.  You just chose to ignore it because it makes all your points regarding the previous resolutions invalid.

[Dago]

Thrawn, you obviously don't understand the word "relevant" as it applies to context.  Let me supplement your lack of comprehension.

Subject discussion:

Dago

Iraq was in violation of multiple UN resolutions

Boroda

Name them and tell me when and what parts did it violate.  

Dago

Saddam Hussein has repeatedly violated sixteen United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCRs) designed to ensure that Iraq does not pose a threat to international peace and security. etc etc

Boroda

Re: the list of UN resolutions that Iraq violated  etc

Now Thrawn, this was the discussion regarding broken UN resolutions. If you still fail to understand relevance,  let me know and I will paste in the dictionary definition.  What you submitted wasn't relevant to this discussion.

I can't but help wondering about the state of education in Canada if you fail to grasp such a simple concept.

dago

[Glas]

@ dago:

Afair Boroda's question was more to do with 'where did it state in the resolutions that the US could invade Iraq without the go-ahead from the UN SC or General Assembly'.

I think he was aware of the resolutions they are claimed to have violated, it was what action the US was allowed to take in respect of those violations that he was questioning.

Hope that makes it clearer

Glas
JG13 Lokis Kinder

[Dago]

Glas

Afair Boroda's question was more to do with 'where did it state in the resolutions that the US could invade Iraq without the go-ahead from the UN SC or General Assembly'.

I think he was aware of the resolutions they are claimed to have violated, it was what action the US was allowed to take in respect of those violations that he was questioning.

Here is what I am referring to.  For what it is worth, I think most of the citizens of the US, and probably our governemnt has now accepted the fact that the UN is irrelevant, and we certainly should not consider ourselves controlled by it.  Doing so would prevent us from ever defending ourselves as long as nations who would sell souls for money such as France, Germany and Russia have a vote.  I would be all for withdrawing from the UN today if I had a say in that matter.

   Originally posted by Dago
    Iraq was in violation of multiple UN resolutions.


Boroda:
Name them and tell me when and what parts did it violate. I ask because I want to educate myself, but I am afraid it's again "everyone knows" or "they told it on TV", and you just repeat it like a brainwashed parrot without bothering to develop an opinion of your own or merely check the facts.
 

I think this is pretty clear myself.  He asked what UN resolutions were violated, I named them.

Why do you have trouble with that?


dago

[Boroda]

Unfortunately, I have to state that I didn't change my opinioin regarding "parrot". Dago, you just gave me a link to a page on a white house site with the list of resolutions violated by Saddam in various years since 1990. It's exactly what a righteous Young Communist of the Soviet times was supposed to do: believe any "argument" published in Pravda or Party documents. Hint: Resolution 1441, that includes everything you provided and makes further conclusions. Your list of resolutions violated by Iraq is outdated. You simply contradict with common sence by bringing that list up as a reason for war.

BTW, thank you for that document, it was educating. I asked for it, you helped me, let's call it a sign of a good will

By admitting that UN is irrelevant in questions regarding use of military force in international politics you openly state that US is an aggressor, and, therefore, should be isolated and punished by international community according to UN Charter.

You still didn't answer my question. Maybe because there is no answer that suits you? Logics is an interesting thing. The last resort for you is only shouting with foam at your mouth and calling me names. Violence is the last resort of incompetence. "The last move in a chess game is made with a board".

Let me try to turn back to the original topic. Here is a link to a discussion started in October 2001, where I tried to share my opinion on Soviet "adventure" in Afghanistan: http://www.hitechcreations.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=18216 I have probably made some mistakes, but it can still be interesting for you...