Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

KLC Lewis wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
KLC Lewis wrote:
The West invaded the Middle East for oil. Prior to the early 20th
century, the West had little interest in the Middle East, other than for
mutual, consentual trade. And even in the first half of the 20th century,
the money which oil brought into the Middle East was considered fair
compensation for our presence there. Until Western influence and ideals
began to seriously conflict with core Muslim beliefs.
Well I already anticipated this argument and addressed it before you said
it. Why did we invade Afghanistan then? And when you realize you can't
answer that, tag on the follow up question: Why are we still there
sacrificing American lives for the sake of establishing a democracy?

First, you reduce the equation too far when you assume that Afghanistan has
nothing to do with oil (or more precisely, power). The Trans-Afghanistan
Pipeline project has a great deal to do with America's interest in that
particular country.

Hilarious. If you can make a case for anyone wanting to take over
Afghanistan for oil, then you can do it for taking over any country on
earth. Nevermind that the US of course doesn't take over countries and
just like they did with Japan and Italy and Iraq and every other country
they've ever defeated in war, they will give them their country back
with an intact democracy established, so we don't have to fight tyrants
from their again.

But the fact is that our original foray into Afghanistan
was viewed by virtually the entire world, including most of the Muslim
world, as being righteous. And as a matter of fact, I supported it until
that idiot Bush declared victory after three months and pulled out all but a
relative handful of troops and invaded Iraq.

That said, it is impossible for any occupying force to hold Afghanistan. The
more enemies we make there, the greater the insurgency will grow, to the
point that no amount of force will be able to hold it.

Well, good, you agree the US had and still has good reason to restore a
democracy to Afghanistan. We have the same reason for being there now as
we had going in the first place, to make sure there is no extremist
Islamic safe haven for terrorists there. The only moral way to do that
is to establish a strong democracy there. Democracies have never warred
against each other. Of course we aren't trying to hold it by force. We
are trying to give the country to the good people of Afghanistan, who
want freedom just like all humans do.

The militant extremists will always consider Western presence in Muslim
lands to be an occupation of those lands. When we put military might into
those lands, we only further this belief. "We will stop raping you when
you stop resisting." In what sane world does the one being raped not have
the right to resist?
Of course, most of the Afghanies hate the Taliban. They know the brutality
that comes with them. Most Afghanies want a democracy and want the US to
succeed in helping them establish that. The Taliban strategy is the same
one all Muslim extremists are using nowadays. Bomb, kill and terrorize so
many innocent citizens that they wish for the relative safety of the
brutal Taliban government instead of terrorism. And you think the US
should go ahead and let that happen? Weren't you just saying that you
agreed the US should stop them?

Stephen

We disagree on what should be done to "stop them." You view it as a military
problem -- kill them, and keep killing them until they stop fighting. I view
it as a cultural problem. When we stop meddling with affairs that the vast
majority of Americans cannot grasp, as they cannot empathize with any
world-view other than their own, things will improve on their own.

You can't grasp brutal tyrannical theocracies reviled by their own
citizens? Well, most Americans, not to mention most humans can. These
people aren't some foreign subhuman species that like to be abused and
oppressed. They're human beings just like us!

As for the Taliban, this would be the exact same group that the United
States nurtured and supported when Afghanistani mujahideen were fighting
against the evil Soviets. They were led by an individual called Osama bin
Laden. Of course, at that time we were also best buddies with Saddam
Hussein. And Saddam, bless his heart, was gassing kurds and killing Iraqi
revolutionaries at that time.

Sometimes politics involves supporting the lesser of evils.

But who does the Taliban kill? Those who are supporting their enemies. Gee,
sort of like every other government on the planet. How are they any
different than the US, or Israel?

I advise you read _Kite Runner_ written by an Afghanie. Or find some
other source about how the Taliban ran Afghanistan. My goodness.

Stephen

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Democracies have never warred against each other. Stephen

Hogwash.
http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/demowar.htm

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

Dave wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 16:42:01 -0600, Dave said:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:59:53 -0800, Stephen Trapani
said:

most of the Afghanies hate the Taliban.
What support do you have for that proposition?

Still waiting for an answer to that one, Steve.


This is an interesting subject. Charlie Wilson and the CIA introduced
the growing of opium to supplement the war effort against Russia. Then
the Taliban took over and abolished the growing of opium. This didn't
sit well with our politicians so we went after the Taliban and now opium
growing is back to where it was.
Gordon

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
mmc wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
mmc wrote:
wrote in message
...
On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 10:12:36 -0800, "Capt. JG"
wrote:

"Dennis Pogson" wrote in message
...
troll **** removed
Nice to know someone has been controlling the money. I had thought
it was
supreme lack of control that dropped us all in this s**t!

Apparently, for all their vast experience, they aren't doing such a
great
job. :)

Interestingly, this guy posts anonymously, coward that he is. At
least Larry
has the guts to stand up in public.
Yeah, well if you want io go that route, Hitler was probably the most
sincere politician who ever lived.

Larry doesn't have guts. He's a failure in life, and badly needs to
blame it on someone else.

Whether a person is a failure isn't determined by what's in thier bank
account and being able to speak your mind is what this country is
supposed to be about AND what you should be able to do around friends.
Sure you should. But there is a point of being morally wrong enough and
rooting for bad and evil to win against good and innocents, and of
trying to convince others to do so, when one should be considered a
failure. And the sort of vile racism where one wishes the Naziis would
have wiped out an entire race, and rooting for someone else to do so
surely crosses that line, doesn't it?

Have you ever actually read anything Larry wrote saying that? I haven't.

Within the last few weeks he said that he wished the Nazis would have
finished the job. You must have missed that. And I haven't seen any
apologies or retractions from him, so it looks like you are defending
someone you shouldn't be defending, eh?

I'm not an Israel fan and I could give a crap, one way or the other,
about jews, so does that make me a failure too?
Well, if you really don't care about racism and the extermination of
innocents, or are rooting for it to happen, then yes, you are a failure
too. You're not, are you?
I would be if I didn't care about the innocents. Racism and extermination
of innocents happens all over Africa, where is US empathy for those
people? Do we not care because it's "just Africa".

Either you think the US should be more of a policeman to protect
innocents, or less. Here you seem to be saying they should be more. If so
I guess I agree, but if you're saying the US should do less if they don't
do it everywhere, then I disagree. There is a very good reason they do it
more with Israel than most places. Just like there is a very good reason
they are doing it now in Afghanastan, a place where even the kookiest of
conspiracy theorists can't find oil, or Jews ruling the world, or any
other kooky reason to be there besides just doing the right thing.

Racism and genocide have happened throughout history, all over the world
and in many cases commited in the name of Christianity.

You bet!

As to the definition of who is innocent and who is evil, I'll make that
determination for myself, thanks.

Well, if you make it to exclude, say, one race of children who are
targeted by Muslim extremists, then you are as much of a racist as Larry.
Doesn't sound like you are doing that, so hopefully you want the
extremists stopped as much as I do. And if you take even a brief look at
the form of governments desired by Hamas vs Israel, again, the good guys
aren't hard to determine.

Not that my determination will matter to other, just as thiers doesn't
matter to me.

Of course it matters who we help and who we oppose, even in arguments.

Stephen

Stephen,
I don't beleive in anything being black and white as far as who the good
guys and who the bad guys are in Israel any more than I believe we Americans
always deserve to wear the white hat.
In my little world, good and evil exist in all of us and it's up to each to
decide which we will let the world see at any one time.
And yes, I think stepping in when something like the Rwanda genocide was
taking place with 100s of thousands killed, including women and children,
does take a priority over a couple dozen Hamas rockets. Our strategic
partnership is extrememly one sided.
But that doesn't fit the Judeo-Christian goals and objectives does it?
This is my last post on this I don't think we're going to find a common
ground on this subject.
How's your boat? Any cruising plans for this year?

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

Dave wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 16:42:01 -0600, Dave said:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:59:53 -0800, Stephen Trapani
said:

most of the Afghanies hate the Taliban.
What support do you have for that proposition?

Still waiting for an answer to that one, Steve.

You must have missed my reply. Read _Kite Runner_. Plus there are many
other sources of information about how the Taliban treated the citizens
and how hated they were. Or you can just scroll through this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

The rest should be obvious.

Stephen

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 16:42:01 -0600, Dave said:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:59:53 -0800, Stephen Trapani
said:

most of the Afghanies hate the Taliban.
What support do you have for that proposition?

Still waiting for an answer to that one, Steve.

You must have missed my reply. Read _Kite Runner_. Plus there are many
other sources of information about how the Taliban treated the citizens
and how hated they were. Or you can just scroll through this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

The rest should be obvious.

Stephen

You are aware, of course, that "The Kite Runner" is a work of fiction?
Similarly, one could read "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" and come to the
conclusion that most Indians hate the Federal Government.

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

KLC Lewis wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 16:42:01 -0600, Dave said:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:59:53 -0800, Stephen Trapani
said:

most of the Afghanies hate the Taliban.
What support do you have for that proposition?
Still waiting for an answer to that one, Steve.
You must have missed my reply. Read _Kite Runner_. Plus there are many
other sources of information about how the Taliban treated the citizens
and how hated they were. Or you can just scroll through this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

The rest should be obvious.

Stephen

You are aware, of course, that "The Kite Runner" is a work of fiction?
Similarly, one could read "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" and come to the
conclusion that most Indians hate the Federal Government.

It's historical fiction, written by someone who was there.

Stephen

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

On Jan 21, 10:58 pm, Stephen Trapani
wrote:
KLC Lewis wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 16:42:01 -0600, Dave said:

On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:59:53 -0800, Stephen Trapani
said:

most of the Afghanies hate the Taliban.
What support do you have for that proposition?
Still waiting for an answer to that one, Steve.
You must have missed my reply. Read _Kite Runner_. Plus there are many
other sources of information about how the Taliban treated the citizens
and how hated they were. Or you can just scroll through this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

The rest should be obvious.

Stephen

You are aware, of course, that "The Kite Runner" is a work of fiction?
Similarly, one could read "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" and come to the
conclusion that most Indians hate the Federal Government.

It's historical fiction, written by someone who was there.

Stephen

Ahh then that makes it all ok. the author would never overstate any
thing to sell a book.
like news paper and television reporters would never manipulate a
story to propagate there view point.

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

Two meter troll wrote:
On Jan 21, 10:58 pm, Stephen Trapani
wrote:
KLC Lewis wrote:
"Stephen Trapani" wrote in message
...
Dave wrote:
On 20 Jan 2009 16:42:01 -0600, Dave said:
On Tue, 20 Jan 2009 13:59:53 -0800, Stephen Trapani
said:
most of the Afghanies hate the Taliban.
What support do you have for that proposition?
Still waiting for an answer to that one, Steve.
You must have missed my reply. Read _Kite Runner_. Plus there are many
other sources of information about how the Taliban treated the citizens
and how hated they were. Or you can just scroll through this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban
The rest should be obvious.
Stephen
You are aware, of course, that "The Kite Runner" is a work of fiction?
Similarly, one could read "Bury My Heart at Wounded Knee" and come to the
conclusion that most Indians hate the Federal Government.
It's historical fiction, written by someone who was there.

Stephen

Ahh then that makes it all ok. the author would never overstate any
thing to sell a book.
like news paper and television reporters would never manipulate a
story to propagate there view point.

Has anyone every noticed how "pacifists," moral relativists, and lefties
try to sound neutral and fair and respecting of all views, yet they
always end up making excuses and diminishing the evil acts of the worst,
most evil human beings on the planet? That's not neutrality, it's siding
with the bad guys. As if the Taliban weren't one of the most brutal
regimes to their own citizens in recent history.

If you want to be good and kind and gentle, stop siding with people who
are the opposite!!

Stephen

Jews have invaded this newsgroup
 

Dave wrote:
On Thu, 22 Jan 2009 11:21:43 -0800, Stephen Trapani
said:

If you want to be good and kind and gentle, stop siding with people who
are the opposite!!

Don't know about two meter, but I'm not on the side of anyone or anything in
your food fight, other than truth. So when you say "most of the Afghanies
[sic] hate the Taliban," my BS detector lights up and says to me that you're
not in a position to make that judgment based on direct experience. So I ask
for the basis of the conclusion. Your answers to that question have been
less than satisfactory thus far.

So let me see. You educated yourself about the historic brutality of the
Taliban regime and when I said most Afghanis didn't like it, *that* set
off your BS meter??

You'd better get that thing adjusted!!!

Stephen