What are you going on about? Canada is one of the largest donors in food aid, why would we stop feeding people?
Afghanistan, Still losing the war, Part VIII
Thu, 2008-09-04 19:24
#52
Thu, 2008-09-04 19:32
#53
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]What are you going on about? Canada is one of the largest donors in food aid, why would we stop feeding people?[/b]
What do you think of Canada using its influence and armed might to destroy poppy cultivation in Kandahar?
Or do you favour the industry?
The Taliban wiped it out, the Canadians and their allies brought it back. Do you know the history, or do you only go back one year at a time?
Thu, 2008-09-04 19:37
#54
quote:
citing Islamic prohibitions against drugs
That and a lot of financial aide are problably the only way of humanely reducing its cultivation there.
One thing Webgear likely knows is that successful counterinsurgency requires a very honest, well respected, host government and its country services. This is lacking and may never appear. Operation medusa was ultimately a failure due to this very thing and likely all operations will fail for the very same reason. people have to trust the host government and its rep in the village. Instead, they are surrounded by thugs of all interests but their own.
Thu, 2008-09-04 19:40
#55
I hate to tell you, but there were lots of poppies growing around Kandahar and Zabol provinces in 2001.
Look at UNODC products from 1999 and 2000, you will see there was lots of poppies growing in Southern Afghanistan while the Taliban were in their glory.
I am not aware of Canada having any involved with any poppy reduction programs.
Thu, 2008-09-04 19:52
#56
quote:
Other soldiers, friends of the deceased, were unable to muster any coherent explanation of the sacrifice of their friends, beyond their friendship and camaraderie.
That's because soldiers' first loyalty is to the friends and comrades with whom they serve.
The abstract nonsense such as "freedom" and "building democracy" that politicians espouse means squat next the lives of your buddies.
Thu, 2008-09-04 20:13
#57
quote:
there was lots of poppies growing in Southern Afghanistan while the Taliban were in their glory
True, the Taliban did not eradicate the poppy as Jester and Webgear mention, but, they did a pretty good job of eradicating music cassette tapes. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
[ 04 September 2008: Message edited by: Stanley10 ]
Thu, 2008-09-04 20:19
#58
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
[b]So, if NATO passes an edict stating that anyone growing poppy will be beheaded and their families shot, will that work?[/b]
No, NATO loves the Afghan people too much to do that. So Afghanistan continues to produce most of the world's heroin.
quote:
[b]The Taliban didn't eradicate poppy, they merely restricted it to raise the price. [/b]
Right, and the Canadians and U.S. restored record crops in order to drive the price down and make it more affordable around the globe.
You know, besides the meaning of love, I learn so much from you about economics. How can I thank you (er, other than the tryst thingie I suggested before)?
quote:
[b]The Karzai government and Karzai himself,through his brother, are complicit in the drug scene and all profit from it.[/b]
Right, but those white people hate drugs and love Afghans, so they're so conflicted they have to call in air strikes on wedding parties just to clear their pretty little heads.
Thu, 2008-09-04 21:48
#59
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]I hate to tell you, but there were lots of poppies growing around Kandahar and Zabol provinces in 2001.[/b]
I've read that opium addiction was essentially flat in Afghanistan, and Lahore, Islamabad-Pakistan etc up to about 1980-85, approximately the same time the CIA, and using the Dept of Agriculture and University of Nebraska to hide the money trail "cough", began funding and arming druglords and several other special interest groups in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Turkey, Iran etc.
[url=http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=10013]The Real Drug Lords: A brief history of CIA involvement in the Drug Trade[/url] William Blum
And speaking of real, there is Edward S. Herman's [url=http://www.intellnet.org/resources/american_terrorism/RealTerrorNetwork.... Real Terror Network[/url] (1982) Herman's co-author on Manufacturing Consent(1988) is famous American socialist Noam Chomsky
[ 04 September 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Fri, 2008-09-05 06:51
#60
quote:
How can I thank you (er, other than the tryst thingie I suggested before)?
Just keep on being your sunny self. Thats more than enough. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Fri, 2008-09-05 07:10
#61
quote:
Right, but those white people hate drugs and love Afghans, so they're so conflicted they have to call in air strikes on wedding parties just to clear their pretty little heads
The problem with not only the air strikes but also other types of counter-insurgency is that the Americans do not vet their intelligence with others and as a result are used by various Afghan elements to settle tribal scores and vendettas.
The cozy relationship US Special Forces and especially the CIA have cultivated with certain elements are not working for them but for the elements' own interests. The users are being used and the Taliban propaganda machine is very good at creating maximum exposure for any negative PR they can spin.
Visualise that there are actually individuals and entities in our own country who are dupes and tools of the Taliban PR machine. They parrot every taliban claim as gospel without bothering to ascertaine the facts because it plays into thier own agenda of 'bringing the troops home'.
I know its hard believe otherwise educated and intelligent people could be so blind but being in the political wilderness for so long creates a sort of 'cabin fever' that detaches reality from their political asperations of socialist utopia.
This detachment from reality is fostered by several generations of residents in the Peacable Kingdom never having exposure to the ravages of violent conflict.
The Peacable Kingdom is a good place but others eye it as an easy place to pillage,considering the residents too soft and weak after generations of 'peace activism'.
It stands to reason that the optimal place to overthrow is one dedicated to peace,with no experience of violent conflict does it not?
What we really need is for the Taliban to send a training mission to the peacable Kingdom to instill that much admired warrior ethos in our own keyboard warriors.
Fri, 2008-09-05 07:15
#62
M. Spector
What a disgusting paean to the imperialist assault on Afghanistan!
Why do we have to put up with this shit on babble?
Fri, 2008-09-05 07:33
#63
Exactly which Babble rule is it violating?
Fri, 2008-09-05 08:00
#64
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
[b]What a disgusting paean to the imperialist assault on Afghanistan!Why do we have to put up with this shit on babble?[/b]
Read it again, Spector. Its a disgusting paean to the imperialist assault on common sense.
Fri, 2008-09-05 08:15
#65
remind
oh, oh, now you can't read either mspector!
Don't you know, he wasn't actually denigrating those in Canada who are against the war in Afghanistan, nor was he calling those people fools and dupes, nor was he fear mongering against Muslims, as represented by the Taliban, nor was he saying; "if we were not there, they would be here". Nor was he calling those "keyboard warriors" cowards whoneed to be instilled with a good fighting against others spirit.
Fri, 2008-09-05 08:25
#66
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
Speaking of 'keyboard warriors', I'm betting dollars to dog biscuits that jester wouldn't dare to get up on his hind legs in public and make his cowardly accusations.
Fri, 2008-09-05 09:09
#67
quote:
Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
[b]Speaking of 'keyboard warriors', I'm betting dollars to dog biscuits that jester wouldn't dare to get up on his hind legs in public and make his cowardly accusations.[/b]
Whyever not? Its not a novel position. If the supporters of Taliban propaganda were to state a balanced position that included the predations of the Taliban on their own people and such injustices as burning schools,killing teachers,aid workers and such then they would not be dupes but the focus is always on one-sided Taliban propaganda to reinforce the 'bring the troops home' meme.
I've stated it publicly before. Its a free country isn't it?
Fri, 2008-09-05 10:11
#68
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
Still locked in a vicious battle with that strawman:
quote:
If the supporters of Taliban propaganda were to state a balanced position that included the predations of the Taliban on their own people and such injustices as burning schools,killing teachers,aid workers and such then they would not be dupes...
Dupes swallow the 'with us or against us' propaganda, and are unworthy of more attention than a toe in the backside. Since you're out of reach...
Fri, 2008-09-05 10:56
#69
quote:
Originally posted by jester:
[b]Whyever not? Its not a novel position. If the supporters of Taliban propaganda were to state a balanced position that included the predations of the Taliban on their own people and such injustices as burning schools,killing teachers,aid workers and such then they would not be dupes but the focus is always on one-sided Taliban propaganda to reinforce the 'bring the troops home' meme.[/b]
If the Republican cabal considered Taliban to be an enemy of school girls and democracy everywhere, then why were they still trying to cut deals with them in 2001, five weeks before 9-11? And why did the CIA-FBI refuse to cooperate with Moammar Qaddafi's intel and security in pursuing Osama bin Laden, and after bin Laden apparently tried to put a hit on Qadaffi inside Libya?
The Taliban, like al Qa'eda, were useful for the CIA. They were useful in preventing universal education, basic human rights, and with maintaining backward conditions in the new frontline state in the effort to disintegrate the former Soviet Union and create several militant Islamic republics. Militant Islam was useful like the Contras were useful in bombing schools and hospitals and waging dirty war on a tiny nation of poor people in Central America. This is the main tactic used by political hawks to strangle socialism in the cradle. Destabilize and maintain as corrupt and repressive a regime as possible. Apparently even the Taliban weren't as malleable as the mercenary Contras, but they are perhaps more highly motivated than previous U.S.-backed terrorists on Uncle Sam's payroll.
Fri, 2008-09-05 12:30
#70
quote:
Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
[b]Still locked in a vicious battle with that strawman: Dupes swallow the 'with us or against us' propaganda, and are unworthy of more attention than a toe in the backside. Since you're out of reach...[/b]
Espousing violence are you? It must be difficult to effect your strategy with the other toe lodged firmly in your mouth. [img]biggrin.gif" border="0[/img]
Fri, 2008-09-05 12:34
#71
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]If the Republican cabal considered Taliban to be an enemy of school girls and democracy everywhere, then why were they still trying to cut deals with them in 2001, five weeks before 9-11? And why did the CIA-FBI refuse to cooperate with Moammar Qaddafi's intel and security in pursuing Osama bin Laden, and after bin Laden apparently tried to put a hit on Qadaffi inside Libya?
The Taliban, like al Qa'eda, were useful for the CIA. They were useful in preventing universal education, basic human rights, and with maintaining backward conditions in the new frontline state in the effort to disintegrate the former Soviet Union and create several militant Islamic republics. Militant Islam was useful like the Contras were useful in bombing schools and hospitals and waging dirty war on a tiny nation of poor people in Central America. This is the main tactic used by political hawks to strangle socialism in the cradle. Destabilize and maintain as corrupt and repressive a regime as possible. Apparently even the Taliban weren't as malleable as the mercenary Contras, but they are perhaps more highly motivated than previous U.S.-backed terrorists on Uncle Sam's payroll.[/b]
Agreed. I'm sure that neither the Taliban or the US or Pakistan or even elements of the Afghan government want stability. Not while there is pillaging and corruption enough for all.
None of the above have the interests of Afghans at heart.
Fri, 2008-09-05 15:30
#72
Yes, they(CIA and Pakistani-ISI, General Zia, and with help from the Saudis, Brits etc) created the Taliban in the 1980's. CBC reported a year or so ago that many people in Kandahar believe the Americans and Pakistanis together are still aiding and abetting the Taliban. It sounds a bit bizarre at first, but this is coming from people who've lived it.
Fri, 2008-09-05 15:44
#73
It may look bizarre filtered through a western lens but the prevailing tribal culture makes it a possibility. The fact that Pakistani and American interests both abet the Taliban doesn't surprise me.
US Special Forces attacks on unarmed parties or weddings is based on 'intelligence' from suspect Afghan forces who use the opportunity to get rid of tribal foes or for revenge. Weddings are ideal because all the tribal foes are clustered nicely together.
So, when the US creates 25 casualties at a wedding, they create hundreds more enemies - and recruits for Taliban operations - from the victims' tribal relations.
Fri, 2008-09-05 16:01
#74
Yes, I was reading your comments above. It wouldn't surprise me at all. It wouldn't be the first time Uncle Sam or corporate America armed both sides in a war. Create a situation as an invitation to themselves. The phony war on terror is integral to U.S. economy based largely on war and weapons. The U.S. did sign a UN security resolution to ban weapons sales to the Taliban at start of the decade. The Russians said at the time it is a resolution without teeth, however. I think the Russians are playing along. This is not a Soviet style military occupation with over 100, 000 troops and hundreds of jets, helicopters etc trying to establish total control. This is an illusion, and surrounding countries in the region know it, too.
Fri, 2008-09-05 16:13
#75
Fidel
I think you missed Jester's point, I think his point is the some tribal/clan/families have used US forces to remove their rivals.
This tactical was used in July 2002.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:03
#76
I didn't miss it. I just didn't acknowledge it. The result is the same - grinding poverty under another U.S.-backed stoogeocracy.
[ 05 September 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:06
#77
Ohhh ok
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:14
#78
Why does it matter?
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:20
#79
Never mind.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:21
#80
Yes sir aye-aye
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:24
#81
You do not need to call me sir. I prefer not to have a title.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:26
#82
Nice to see all you people deciding what is best for Afghans and who really cares about Afghans.
Just wait.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:28
#83
How long do I have to wait and what are we waiting for?
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:29
#84
Do nothing. It's not your business. Stay out. Look after your own affairs. Be patient. Keep waiting. I'll let you know.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:34
#85
Ok, Webgear - are you ready? Have you been patient? Here you go:
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/09/05/poll-afghan.html?ref=rss]Public support for Afghan mission lowest ever: poll[/url]
Now, if one single party had the nerve to seize this moment and demand immediate withdrawal of Canada from Afghanistan, they'd pick up some votes.
And if we lived in a democratic country, the trigger-happy military would listen to the people and get their cowardly asses home tout de suite.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:37
#86
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
[b]Nice to see all you people deciding what is best for Afghans and who really cares about Afghans.Just wait.[/b]
In all likelihood this phony-baloney war on terror is going to last a number of years more and with Afghans living in grinding poverty and fear as a result. And Canada will continue sending soldiers and contributing billions of taxpayer dollar to an American project that was never intended to build democracy in Central Asia - unless Canadians do something nearly as radical as militant Islam and send an unprecedented number of NDP MP's to Ottawa.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:42
#87
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]In all likelihood this phony-baloney war on terror is going to last a number of years more and with Afghans living in grinding poverty and fear as a result. And Canada will continue sending soldiers and contributing billions of taxpayer dollar to an American project that was never intended to build democracy in Central Asia - unless Canadians do something nearly as radical as militant Islam and send an unprecedented number of NDP MP's to Ottawa.[/b]
No, Fidel. The Afghan people will destroy the Canadian "mission" long long before anything "unprecedented" happens in Ottawa. Especially if the NDP skates around the issue the way some babblers do.
Defeat or retreat - those are the choices facing Canada. Would that progressive people prevail upon the NDP, the Bloc, and others to make that a reality. The end is very near, my friend. Check history.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:45
#88
And I think some people would prefer Afghans endure a genocidal ten thousand day war sooner than vote for the one political party calling for troop withdrawal.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:48
#89
Results of a poll can change every daily. I believe there should be a nation referendum to solve the Afghan question.
Well if the NDP were the moral party they believe they are, Afghanistan should be their main policy for the election however we both know that will not happen.
Here is a poll for you.
"Even though they don't see their soldiers as warriors, the study suggests a vast majority of Canadians -- 71 per cent -- regard the military as a source of pride."
[url=http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20080905/dnd_poll_08... Poll[/url]
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:49
#90
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]And I think some people would prefer Afghans endure a genocidal ten thousand day war sooner than vote for the one political party calling for troop withdrawal.[/b]
The Afghan people have long experience in destroying their enemies and sending them screaming out of their homeland. I do believe their fierce pride and spirit resistance may even precede the existence of the NDP. Maybe even the existence of Canada.
So don't kid yourself. They don't need your help. The best advice for Canadians in Afghanistan is to run. Very fast. Now.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:51
#91
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]Results of a poll can change every daily. I believe there should be a nation referendum to solve the Afghan question.[/b]
Yeah, you think Canadians should vote on the Afghan question.
I think Afghans should decide the Afghan question.
That's the difference between you and me.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:51
#92
Your ignorance of history is amazing.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:54
#93
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]Your ignorance of history is amazing.[/b]
You're a bit worried, aren't you, that Canadians have figured out the truth: That you and your comrades-in-arms are losing, miserably, and they don't support you any more. Wake up, while you still can. It's over.
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:56
#94
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
[b]The Afghan people have long experience in destroying their enemies and sending them screaming out of their homeland. I do believe their fierce pride and spirit resistance may even precede the existence of the NDP. Maybe even the existence of Canada.
So don't kid yourself. They don't need your help. The best advice for Canadians in Afghanistan is to run. Very fast. Now.[/b]
Sure Afghanistan can lose many more of its youth to American bombs and Canadian bullets for years to come. That's what the two old line parties are pledging to do.
Afghans don't need the federal NDP to withdraw Canadian troops. They can handle it themselves. That's what I believe you're trying to say. And I must say that I am shocked. I guess you've finally decided to admit where your allegiance lies
[ 05 September 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]
Fri, 2008-09-05 18:58
#95
The current insurgency is weak and small compared anything that has happen in Afghanistan since its creation in 1747.
It is not a popular insurgency by any means, there is no large uprisings or united fronts.
Fri, 2008-09-05 19:02
#96
quote:
Originally posted by Fidel:
[b]Afghans don't need the federal NDP to withdraw Canadian troops. They can handle it themselves. That's what I believe you're trying to say. And I must say that I am shocked.[/b]
Of course you're shocked. You weren't old enough when the people of Viet Nam sent the U.S. scurrying like rats out of their country. And it was a Republican in power, not the NDP, not even the Democrats.
You think the U.S. and Canada are powerful enough to carry on this war for [b]years[/b]? That is the same delusion that afflicted the Soviet Union. Not only did the Soviets suffer a humiliating military defeat at the hands of plain ordinary Afghan folks, but arguably this cowardly invasion was the last nail in the coffin for that dying society.
The Afghan people do not need any well-meaning social gospel White Fathers to win their war. They have crushed the British and the Soviets. They will crush Canada. "Will"? They're doing it now.
Is there actually one single politician who has the nerve to stand up and say: "We must leave - now! This is not our country! We must retreat, apologize, pay reparations!"
I didn't think so. But Fidel, your deep concern for the poor helpless Afghan people is duly noted and appreciated.
ETA:
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]The current insurgency is weak and small compared anything that has happen in Afghanistan since its creation in 1747.It is not a popular insurgency by any means, there is no large uprisings or united fronts. [/b]
What's that - Afghan History 101 а la CAF syllabus? It is just delusional. The insurgency runs huge portions of the country. Just keep your own words in mind when your comrades run screaming from Afghanistan, like all their predecessors.
[ 05 September 2008: Message edited by: unionist ]
Fri, 2008-09-05 19:03
#97
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
[b]You're a bit worried, aren't you, that Canadians have figured out the truth: That you and your comrades-in-arms are losing, miserably, and they don't support you any more. Wake up, while you still can. It's over.[/b]
What are you basing your analysis on?
Fri, 2008-09-05 19:06
#98
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]What are you basing your analysis on?[/b]
Today's CBC poll, which I cited, and which you neglected to take the time to read. I told you: Slow down, be patient. Read. The truth is available to those who seek.
Fri, 2008-09-05 19:07
#99
quote:
Originally posted by Webgear:
[b]The current insurgency is weak and small compared anything that has happen in Afghanistan since its creation in 1747.[/b]
So are Can-Am troop numbers in Afghanistan relatively small. They don't intend on "stirring up the hornets' nest" again like the 1980's. Millions of proxy fighters are waiting to pour in over the borders from surrounding countries if a larger occupation and conflicts were to begin. I really believe that Canadians would come home to their families in plastic bags in greater numbers at that point. If the Soviets found it somewhat easy to arm NVA in VietNam, imagine how easy it would be for SCO countries to arm the Taliban in their own backyard. Yanks are just playing around right now. They don't know what to do next other than maintain grinding poverty and the overall war on democracy/poor people.
Fri, 2008-09-05 19:16
#100
Hahaha, this is hilarious:
[url=http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/09/05/benchmarks-afghanistan.html?re... outlines 21 goals for Afghanistan[/url]
quote:
# Build, expand or repair 50 schools in Kandahar. So far, [b]only one[/b] is complete.# Train 3,000 teachers in Kandahar. So far, [b]none[/b] has gone through Canada's training program.
# Eradicate polio in Afghanistan through vaccine. In 2007, 27.7 million vaccines were administered, but 17 cases of polio were reported nationally.
These are the delusions of war criminals, aided and abetted by the opinions of people in this very thread - people who lack not only any sense of history, but of simple ordinary morality.
We need a clarion voice of solidarity, of peace, condemning these murderers for what they are, and calling on Canadians to wake up from its nightmare of empire-building.
Fri, 2008-09-05 19:17
#101
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
[b]Today's CBC poll, which I cited, and which you neglected to take the time to read. I told you: Slow down, be patient. Read. The truth is available to those who seek.[/b]
You can not be serious? The CBC has not reported anything accurate in years, I have seen them in many places around the world, and they have horrible reporters.