US kills 90 civilians in Afghan airstrike

[Flex]

The Taliban government supported and housed Al-Queda, we had to take them out to since they too where a terrorist organization protecting and supporting THE terrorist network responsible for attacking us around the world. This is why even Ron Paul supported this, taking them out WAS a matter of our national security. And I am well aware about where they got their weapons and who trained OBL. Why do you think everyone supports this war!?! Because it is where it should have been fought, not Iraq, after 9/11 this was where we had to attack and was not a mistake. :wutyousay:

In 1998, we attacked Al-Qaeda bases in Afghanistan without permission from the Taliban, the Taliban couldn't believe we would attempt something so cruel. Especially considering the fact that most people we killed were not even part of Al-Qaeda, but the Taliban still let us get away with this.

Do you have proof that the Taliban supported Al-Qaeda? The Taliban was widely unliked around the world, thus Osama Bin Laden and the rest of Al-Qaeda were their only option of learning how to fight against the northern alliance. The Taliban suffered guerrilla warfare attacks on a regular occasion from the anti-Taliban led by Massoud, so what would you do Blake? I would say Al-Qaeda supported the Taliban more than the other way around.

The Taliban were allies with Al-Qaeda, but you have no proof and never will find proof that they were behind the 9/11 attacks. Two days before September 11th Osama did the leader of the Taliban (forget his name) a huge favor, he took out their enemy for years in Massoud. Even so, after the 9/11 attacks the Taliban agreed to the United States to hand over Osama Bin Laden if we had any evidence that he was behind the attacks. However, Bush said something along the lines of "nah, we know he did it so we're invading you anyway." We were given an ultimatum, and we turned it down just like that; leading us into this never-ending war we have today.

Ron Paul did not support overthrowing the Taliban, he agrees with exactly what I'm telling you right now. Our job was to work out a deal with the Taliban and capture Osama Bin Laden and the other leaders involved with Al-Qaeda.

You also throw at me the statistic that "all" of America was behind overthrowing the Taliban government? Dude, you're forgetting that the United States was ATTACKED. 3,000 Americans were murdered, they didn't care who we attacked, as long as we took action! We could of attacked Santa Clause in the North Pole and they'd be behind it. Truth is, Americans wern't aware we were overthrowing Afghanistan's government, they thought we were following Osama Bin Laden and that's it.

2008
September 2008 - Canada: The number of Canadians who disapprove of their country's military action in Afghanistan is at its highest point since Canada became involved in the war in 2002. The majority 56% of Canadians disapprove of their country's military action in Afghanistan, while only a minority 41% approve of it. Almost two-thirds of Canadians, 65%, say the mission is not likely to be successful, while only 28% think it is likely to be successful. The majority 54% of Canadians disagree with an extension of the mission past February 2009, while a minority 41% agree with it.[94]
August 2008 - France: The majority of French voters want their troops to be pulled out of Afghanistan. 55% of French citizens want their government led by Nicolas Sarkozy to bring their troops home, while only 36% are in favour of keeping them in Afghanistan.[95][96]
August 2008 - United States: The majority 54% of Americans are not confident that U.S. efforts in Afghanistan will be successful, while only 17% are confident of success. Only 11% think the situation in Afghanistan is improving, while the plurality 37% think the situation is getting worse.[97][98]
July 2008 - Canada: The majority of Canadians believe their government was wrong to lengthen their country’s military mission in Afghanistan. 58% of Canadians disagree with their government's proposed extension of the mission past February 2009, while only 36% agree with it.[99]
July 2008 - Norway: 45% of Norwegians oppose their country's military participation in Afghanistan, while 42% support it.[100]
July 2008 - United States: 51% of Americans think the war in Afghanistan has not been successful, while 44% think it has been successful. 51% of Americans think the war in Afghanistan is worth fighting.[101]
June 2008 - United Kingdom: The majority of people in Britain want their soldiers in Afghanistan to return home. 54% of Britons think the troops should be brought back from Afghanistan, while only 34% think they should remain.[102]
May 2008 - Canada: The majority of Canadians believe their government was wrong to lengthen their country’s military mission in Afghanistan. 54% of Canadians disagree with their government's proposed extension of the military mission past February 2009, while only 41% agree with it.[103]
April 2008 - Netherlands: 49% of Dutch citizens are against the mission and want their government to pull their troops out from Afghanistan in the summer of 2008, while 44% support it.[104]
April 2008 - Netherlands: 49% of Dutch citizens oppose the Dutch engagement in Uruzgan province, while 46% support it.[105]
April 2008 - France: The majority in France rejects a larger role in Afghanistan. 68% of French citizens are against their government's plan under Nicolas Sarkozy to increase the number of their troops in Afghanistan, while only 15% support his increase.[106]
April 2008 - United Kingdom: The plurality 48% in the United Kingdom oppose their country's military involvement in Afghanistan, while 40% support it.[107]
March 2008 - Canada: The majority of Canadians believe their government was wrong to lengthen their country’s military mission in Afghanistan. 58% of Canadians disagree with their government's proposed extension of the military mission past February 2009, while only 37% agree with it.[108]
January 2008 - Netherlands: 50% of Dutch citizens oppose the Dutch engagement in Uruzgan province, while 43% support it.[109]
January 2008 - Italy: 56% of Italians want their soldiers to leave Afghanistan.[110]
January 2008 - Canada: 56% of Canadians oppose sending troops to Afghanistan, while only 39% support.

 

[Braaq]

^^ All the more reason to take them down, I don't see what your not understanding because you haven't really proved why we shouldn't have gone to war with them. In fact you proved even more IMO that it was a good decision. This is why Ron Paul and every other leader around the world, including the Afghan population agree with this war.... jk, but IMO this war is just, but we can agree to disagree on this one subject.

 

[Robcardu]

Actually the Euro is at an all time low and still dropping, and I would want to switch myself if I was in the same boat. But as the article said below if we want to maintain our "empire" we can't let that happen... it will be our downfall possibly

yes, but that doesnt explain what i said, they went to war with Saddam because he wanted to get his money in Euros... yeah in that case US will have to go to war with at least 12 more countries, thats not the main reason of the "war on terrorism".

 

[Robcardu]

^^ All the more reason to take them down, I don't see what your not understanding because you haven't really proved why we shouldn't have gone to war with them. In fact you proved even more IMO that it was a good decision. This is why Ron Paul and every other leader around the world, including the Afghan population agree with this war....

 

[Braaq]

yes, but that doesnt explain what i said, they went to war with Saddam because he wanted to get his money in Euros... yeah in that case US will have to go to war with at least 12 more countries, thats not the main reason of the "war on terrorism".

But what you said was not correct. Iraq was not and is not a part of the war on terrorism, that was a cover up for the rest of the world to buy in to the real reason listed below. And we are looking to do the same thing with Iran, but you can think what you want. Unless you can post a better source then me, to back up your claim :wutyousay:

 

[Flex]

^^ All the more reason to take them down, I don't see what your not understanding because you haven't really proved why we shouldn't have gone to war with them. In fact you proved even more IMO that it was a good decision. This is why Ron Paul and every other leader around the world, including the Afghan population agree with this war.... jk, but IMO this war is just, but we can agree to disagree on this one subject.

You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

If we showed one bit of evidence that Osama Bin Laden was behind the September 11th attacks to the Taliban, they would have handed him over to be tried in the court of law.

This would have saved thousands of lives, instead we began bombing the Taliban. I think the problem you're having Braaq is you think the Taliban is the exact same thing as Al-Qaeda which isn't the truth. Taliban never did anything to provoke war with the United States, and you should know this.

Once again, Ron Paul agrees with me. If you watch his interviews he always states that he was for the invasion of Afghanistan but we never did "what we were supposed to do." Meaning, we wasted our time overthrowing the Taliban rather than finding the terrorist organization that attacked us on 9/11.

Give me one reason Blake, that we had the right to overthrow the Taliban. JUST ONE. Only one rule, you can not use the words September 11th, because they had NOTHING to do with it.

 

[Braaq]

You obviously didn't read what I wrote.

If we showed one bit of evidence that Osama Bin Laden was behind the September 11th attacks to the Taliban, they would have handed him over to be tried in the court of law.

This would have saved thousands of lives, instead we began bombing the Taliban. I think the problem you're having Braaq is you think the Taliban is the exact same thing as Al-Qaeda which isn't the truth. Taliban never did anything to provoke war with the United States, and you should know this.

Once again, Ron Paul agrees with me. If you watch his interviews he always states that he was for the invasion of Afghanistan but we never did "what we were supposed to do." Meaning, we wasted our time overthrowing the Taliban rather than finding the terrorist organization that attacked us on 9/11.

Give me one reason Blake, that we had the right to overthrow the Taliban. JUST ONE. Only one rule, you can not use the words September 11th, because they had NOTHING to do with it.

I do not believe they would have handed them over, and on that note they were an oppressive, radical regime that in some way was either supporting or was supported by Al-Queda. This is why they had such a large rebel opposition against them. If the Taliban would not have cooperated with us at all, you should know that.

 

[Flex]

Watch at 4:45 Braaq.

 

[Robcardu]

But what you said was not correct. Iraq was not and is not a part of the war on terrorism, that was a cover up for the rest of the world to buy in to the real reason listed below. And we are looking to do the same thing with Iran, but you can think what you want. Unless you can post a better source then me, to back up your claim :wutyousay:

Did you read what i said?

ok read it again.....

 

[Flex]

I do not believe they would have handed them over, and on that note they were an oppressive, radical regime that in some way was either supporting or was supported by Al-Queda. This is why they had such a large rebel opposition against them. If the Taliban would not have cooperated with us at all, you should know that.

So what if they were oppressive or radical, what does that have to do with giving us the right to invade them?
We'll never know if the Taliban would have cooperated with us, because Bush wouldn't have anything of it. Bush didn't even attempt to negotiate, so for you to say they "wouldn't" when they were the only one's to "attempt" is in my opinion ignorant.

Why would they not negotiate? They were about to be invaded by the most powerful nation on earth. The United States, the country that spends 1/2 of all the military spending was about to wipe them off the earth and you really don't think they'd be willing to negotiate?

 

[Braaq]

Watch at 4:45 Braaq.

True, true, I concede

Bill pissed me off in that video, interrupting Ron Paul.. he should be beaten!!:angrydude:

 

[Robcardu]

Watch at 4:45 Braaq.

That video makes me feel like punching Bill in the face. :angrydude:

 

[Braaq]

Did you read what i said?

ok read it again.....

Well... you didn't really SAY anything.. so what should I re-read? You didn't disprove me that is for sure, so why again do you think that the war in Iraq was started?? :wutyousay:

 

[Braaq]

So what if they were oppressive or radical, what does that have to do with giving us the right to invade them?
We'll never know if the Taliban would have cooperated with us, because Bush wouldn't have anything of it. Bush didn't even attempt to negotiate, so for you to say they "wouldn't" when they were the only one's to "attempt" is in my opinion ignorant.

Why would they not negotiate? They were about to be invaded by the most powerful nation on earth. The United States, the country that spends 1/2 of all the military spending was about to wipe them off the earth and you really don't think they'd be willing to negotiate?

First off, don't call me ignorant. Second, when a country knowingly houses a group that kills 3000 of our citizens then we take them out. They don't deserve to be asked IMO, why keep a government around that would keep them in their borders knowingly? Al-Queda and the Taliban were interconnected, unless you can disprove that...if you can I will rethink my position, I am waiting.

 

[Flex]

First off, don't call me ignorant. Second, when a country knowingly houses a group that kills 3000 of our citizens then we take them out. They don't deserve to be asked IMO, why keep a government around that would keep them in their borders knowingly? Al-Queda and the Taliban were interconnected, unless you can disprove that... I am waiting.

I never said they wern't connected, my first post was a good explanation on the background behind the Taliban supporting Al-Qaeda.

As for killing an entire government because they "housed" these terrorists. That's like saying it's alright to bomb parents homes of children who commit murder. Stop making it sound like the Taliban attacked us on 9/11, they had nothing to do with it.

I'm all for invading and attacking Al-Qaeda whether or not they gave us authority to move into their country, but to immediately bomb every Taliban leader and begin nation building is the same old United States being over-aggressive. I think even NATO said we showed too much aggression in the first couple years of Afghanistan.

Finally Blake, I never called you ignorant. I said what you were trying to say, sounded ignorant to me. Re-read what I wrote. I've always considered you one of the smartest on the forum.

 

[Braaq]

I never said they wern't connected, my first post was a good explanation on the background behind the Taliban supporting Al-Qaeda.

As for killing an entire government because they "housed" these terrorists. That's like saying it's alright to bomb parents homes of children who commit murder. Stop making it sound like the Taliban attacked us on 9/11, they had nothing to do with it.

I'm all for invading and attacking Al-Qaeda whether or not they gave us authority to move into their country, but to immediately bomb every Taliban leader and begin nation building is the same old United States being over-aggressive. I think even NATO said we showed too much aggression in the first couple years of Afghanistan.

Finally Blake, I never called you ignorant. I said what you were trying to say, sounded ignorant to me. Re-read what I wrote.I've always considered you one of the smartest on the forum.

Yeah I need to go back and read that..... :carduindisguise
True, we shouldn't have gone right after them without taking out Al-Queda but when you go to war you don't tip-toe around you go in all the way to win. I know the Taliban didn't directly attack us but they were connected and housing the group that did. It is like the driver of the get away car of a bank robbery, he too is guilty and will be tried and punished.

And I know you didn't.. it still hurted my feelings
And thank you, I appreciate that. I have always thought the same about you

 

[Flex]

According to Bush, were numero 1 threat in the continent, why do you think it is?? Chavez??

Hopefully we don't have to move our troops down there and save your freedomz in a few years Rob.

 

[Flex]

More from Ron Paul on Afghanistan at 1:20.

 

[Mygeeto]

im curious, Ron Paul often talks about "Neo-Cons"

may i ask...

- What is a Neo Con?
- Who are the Neo Cons?
- Why are thier policies detrimental to the United States?
- Where do the Neo Cons loyalities lie?

 

[Ironslave]

According to Bush, were numero 1 threat in the continent, why do you think it is?? Chavez??

... you?