– Good morning infidels. Bush is sucking the big one today, as usual. My most excellant personage has a busy day planned, making the lucritively large kickbacks contracts with the, how you say, “heavy hitters” biggie companies, and beating the ungrateful females. Please to be giving me lots of the site hitsings, or my friend and the mentor, al Sadr, will have me executed. Thanking to all you yankee devils.
monkeyfarts – If the Taliban was using it’s drug money to support their countries flegling psuedo-Democracy, rebuild their country and society, and help us nail Bin Ladens sorry ass to the cave wall, we’d be out of there in a month. Wake up and smell the humus.
If any of the drug money the Afghanistan “government” is getting was actually being put to the uses you listed, would Major John have to be soliciting school supplies for Afghanistan children here?
The Taliban and al Qaeda are making a nice living off the record opium crops we made possible, too…
– Oh jeezus. It’s hard to believe someone this indoctrinated in the anti-American screech, and mishappen blame assignment, can actually walk around breathing on their own.
– Just babble to yourself monkeytwit. Whats the point. If Afghanistan was the very model of a Western Democracy, you moonbat fucks would be bitching about the high Camel accident death rate.
– What a bunch of fucktard losers. It must be that little pain in your ass. You know the one. Where your Islamo-nut brothers are doing whatever they can to help you get elected. That in itself is enough to fuck up anyones mind.
I don’t think questioning if America is actually accomplishing anything with the $500,000,000,000 we’re spending on “defense” every year is “anti-American” BBh.
– I’d say supporting our fight in the WOT, and our troops without calling them stupid, would be more along the lines of patriotic.
– I’d say constantly releasing illegally leaked National secrets, constant carping, and just making yourselves a pain in the ass, siding with the enemy at every chance, using simple minded reductionist tropes to undermine our efforts, and demonize the President and America, is clearly unpatriotic backstabbing bullshit.
– And for what? Just so your dying party can regain power. If the Dems were in, and the Republicans were doing what you’re doing, I would call them on it just as fast.
– Face it. You have no clue or idea’s, so ankle biting, and “we’re not Bush” is all you have left. everybody understands that. Just don’t expect anyone to buy it.
– What’s so fucking amazing is that people who fancy themselves “elitist” thinkers believe they can do these things, alienate everyone in sight, and then expect to get elected. Brilliant stratedgy. I guess that monumental Lieberman move is the “model” that passes for “elitist” thinking these days.
BTW monkeybutt….It looks like your beloved NYT Pravda has stepped on its own crank again:
Jim Geraghty:
“I think the Times editors are counting on this being spun as a “Boy, did Bush screw up†meme; the problem is, to do it, they have to knock down the “there was no threat in Iraq†meme, once and for all. Because obviously, Saddam could have sold this information to anybody, any other state, or any well-funded terrorist group that had publicly pledged to kill millions of Americans and had expressed interest in nuclear arms. You know, like, oh… al-Qaeda.â€Â
Opium is an important crop in Afghanistan, partly thanks to goons like the Taliban. The Taliban may have been working to eliminate the crops, but there is little doubt that their motivation was Islamic. What were the people going to do if they didn’t grow opium? We can offer alternatives (as can the new gov’t). The Taliban’s alternatives? Go kill infidels! No wonder Islamic republics are economic messes.
I think it is fairly clear that monky didn’t read the article that was linked…of course that didn’t stop him from trying to make the name of the link inot something.
But you have to cut someone, like monky, who has done so much to help the Afghan people a little slack, right?
Some Canadian who refused to become their ambassador to the U.S. so he could line his own pockets instead is badmouthing countries that pledged to defend each other for refusing to waste the lives of their troops in a pointless war…
I’d say the Republicans and their trained poodles in Canada and Britain are the ones that are struggling to “remain relevant.”
Astonishing level of ignorance regarding NATO – but I am starting to expect that from the monky. I give, you all can flog him – it’s a waste of time. Makes actus look sharp…
America didn’t jump in to help Europe in WWII until the war was almost over…
Your ignorance is showing again. You really have to get an education.
The US was actively fighting the Germans in the Battle of the Atlantic in 1940. Relieved the British of their responsibilities to defend Iceland in 1940 (I told you about this before–Look up the history of the US 5th Division).
Engaged the Japanse in 1936 and 1939 in China.
When your “perspective” is derived froma position of ignorance it only serves to mislead others.
How about Americans helping the Allies even before 1940 with the tacit approval of the US? Ever heard of the Abraham Licoln Brigade? How about Claire Chenault?
Guarding US bases to free US troops for combat operations? No.
Hunting Submarine Wolfpacks? No.
Actively combating the opposition in country? Well, obviously not.
If you wish to make a point you need to be plain. Well, you need to be educated as well.
Certainly we have allies that are provideing other than combat assistance and otehr than assitance in country. Russia is an excellent example. They have provided massive materiel support in Afghanistan, but for obviuos reasons they have sent no troops. But that’s not what I was citing, so, one more ‘gain; what’s your point?
No idea. Haven’t broken it down that way. And I’m not willing to discuss my “feelings” with you anyhow. I’m wondering how this go to be “the point?” You want to bait someone into badmouthing an ally?
Long and short of the reality of the situation: NATO has accepted responsibility. The commanders have said “we need X number of troops.” If member nations say, “we’ll give communications support and school supplies,” well, there’s room for some criticism as communications and school supplies aren’t troops. If the problem is that the troops that members are able/willing to provide don’t add up to X, then there is fault to be discussed with NATO, accepting more responsibility than it could meet.
So, you’re fishing. I don’t know what for. It’s unlikely you’ll tell us in plain terms.
The article in Major John’s original post that he linked to with the words NATO, put up or go away?
The NATO alliance could die if it does not get the troops it needs to fight the Taliban insurgency in southern Afghanistan, former foreign affairs minister John Manley said Monday…
How about your repeated ignorant historical pronouncements. You know, where I (among others) continue to correct you and you continue to pretend you never said stupid things. Hell, if you hadn’t taken to mutiliating history again, I’d not have replied to this thread at all. Having no grounding in history also means that you posses no meaningful grasp of politics, philosophy or the humanities. Likely your background in literature is highly limited as well as all these sjubjects are dependent on at least the rudiments of history.
There’s a question I asked a while back and the answer is the key to answering, at least in part, one of the questions you pose here.
There is only one country that has the capacity to air and sea lift it’s national assets to any other place on earth.
You are advocating the amoral policies of the past in regard to the middle east. They were justifiable prior to 1990.
Let’s just say we have different opinions about the events of the past.
In the present, we are asking our NATO allies to supply more troops for S. Afghanistan, and the only reason we can offer them is that we need the troops to maintain a stalemate with the Taliban.
Let’s just say we have different opinions about the events of the past.
Leaving events out of the record, or failing to mention them because they don’t support your position, isn’t a matter of “opinion.” The former is ignorant and the latter is dishonest. Without evidence that you knew better, I’ve had to give you the benefit of the doubt, as merely ignorant.
We aren’t asking NATO to supply more troops. NATO is asking NATO members to supply more troops.
As for the matter of stalemante, you’ll have to offer up a cite. So far as I can tell, you’ve made this last bit up out of wholecloth.
Have you ever had a complete conversation? Answer some of my questions. Address some of the points you raised and I rebutted and I’ll consider moving on. Or failing that agree that when you abandon a subject that it means you conceed the point.
NATO is made up of individual countries whose populations have varying degrees of support for the war in Afghanistan.
The administration didn’t make many friends in certain NATO countries when it labeled them “old Europe” and cut them out of reconstruction and oil deals because they didn’t support our invasion of Iraq.
It’s safe to say than some governments of NATO countries would fall if they sent troops to Afghanistan or sent their troops already there to Taliban country…
“It’s safe to say than some governments of NATO countries would fall if they sent troops to Afghanistan or sent their troops already there to Taliban country…”
– That’s total bullshit monkey. Another leap in bad faith to “Blame it on Bush”. some countries are laying low in terms of support because they don’t want to become al Qaeda targets. they’re a hell of a lot closer to the problem physically than we are, so in some ways I don’t blame them, except for Spain that really wussed out in their elections after the train bombings. They’ll find in time they just encouraged attacks, as appeasement enevitably always does, but that’s their problem.
– And why the fuck should Bush rewards poopyheads that duck the coalition efforts in Iraq. Assuming they’re not on the dole for OFF, like France, they had no other reason than fear. so fuck’em. Let them shake in their beds.
There are 26 member nations in NATO. Of those 26, how many have not committed any troops to Afghanistan?
Hopefully, you’ll take a shot at answering this explicit question since you can’t be bothered to look upthread to find the other questions you’ve ignored.
Late? It’s 1730 here in Afghanistan. Where are you? Japan?
All NATO members have sent troops. So now you imagine that to be the case, though earlier you predicted the fall of govenments if they sent troops.
Do you usually try to have things both ways? Prime example of the garbage you peddle. You could even use this internet thingee to check those opinions before making a fool of yourself posting them. But why let facts get in the way of perfectly good theories, eh?
Like this one: what 6 years. It’s only been a NATO operation for 3 years. In 2001 ISAF was a UN operation. NATO didn’t take over until 2003. ISAF’s non US composition has doubled since then. So where’s the reticence?
Any time you’d like to stop trying to sound knowledgable about things. You might be better served to ask questions if you aren’t willing to actually do google searches.
RTO – see why I gave up. God could write the TRUTH in firey letters before monky’s eyes and he’d wander off on a tangent or ask something irrelevant or ignore Him… bless you for trying, however. I gave up a while ago.
Should be a campaign slogan for the RNC.
Or Harry Reid’s campaign?
I think Harry is a corrupt businessman who really wants to be a dangerous warlord, I am hoping the voters don’t let that happen.
– Good morning infidels. Bush is sucking the big one today, as usual. My most excellant personage has a busy day planned, making the lucritively large
kickbackscontracts with the, how you say, “heavy hitters” biggie companies, and beating the ungrateful females. Please to be giving me lots of the site hitsings, or my friend and the mentor, al Sadr, will have me executed. Thanking to all you yankee devils.NATO, put up or go away?
Are you suggesting we pull out and let the Taliban boot out the drug dealers we put in charge of Afghanistan, Major John?
monkeyfarts – If the Taliban was using it’s drug money to support their countries flegling psuedo-Democracy, rebuild their country and society, and help us nail Bin Ladens sorry ass to the cave wall, we’d be out of there in a month. Wake up and smell the humus.
BBh,
If any of the drug money the Afghanistan “government” is getting was actually being put to the uses you listed, would Major John have to be soliciting school supplies for Afghanistan children here?
The Taliban and al Qaeda are making a nice living off the record opium crops we made possible, too…
“The Taliban and al Qaeda are making a nice living off the record opium crops we made possible, too…”
– Yes, yes, of course. They had never heard of opium til we went in there. I must have missed that in the last Lefturd “Evil America” report.
– Monkryshit – do you ever take a moment to actually read your own assinine anti-American screeds? Really. You’re embarrassing yourself.
The Taliban was working on wiping out Afghanistan’s opium crop, BBh…
http://opioids.com/afghanistan/index.html
– Oh jeezus. It’s hard to believe someone this indoctrinated in the anti-American screech, and mishappen blame assignment, can actually walk around breathing on their own.
– Just babble to yourself monkeytwit. Whats the point. If Afghanistan was the very model of a Western Democracy, you moonbat fucks would be bitching about the high Camel accident death rate.
– What a bunch of fucktard losers. It must be that little pain in your ass. You know the one. Where your Islamo-nut brothers are doing whatever they can to help you get elected. That in itself is enough to fuck up anyones mind.
I don’t think questioning if America is actually accomplishing anything with the $500,000,000,000 we’re spending on “defense” every year is “anti-American” BBh.
In fact, I see it as rather pro-American.
Why don’t you?
Monkybot still hasn’t ventured out of that cave, I notice.
– $500 Billion?…I’d say that’s bad math.
– I’d say supporting our fight in the WOT, and our troops without calling them stupid, would be more along the lines of patriotic.
– I’d say constantly releasing illegally leaked National secrets, constant carping, and just making yourselves a pain in the ass, siding with the enemy at every chance, using simple minded reductionist tropes to undermine our efforts, and demonize the President and America, is clearly unpatriotic backstabbing bullshit.
– And for what? Just so your dying party can regain power. If the Dems were in, and the Republicans were doing what you’re doing, I would call them on it just as fast.
– Face it. You have no clue or idea’s, so ankle biting, and “we’re not Bush” is all you have left. everybody understands that. Just don’t expect anyone to buy it.
– What’s so fucking amazing is that people who fancy themselves “elitist” thinkers believe they can do these things, alienate everyone in sight, and then expect to get elected. Brilliant stratedgy. I guess that monumental Lieberman move is the “model” that passes for “elitist” thinking these days.
BTW monkeybutt….It looks like your beloved NYT Pravda has stepped on its own crank again:
Jim Geraghty:
“I think the Times editors are counting on this being spun as a “Boy, did Bush screw up†meme; the problem is, to do it, they have to knock down the “there was no threat in Iraq†meme, once and for all. Because obviously, Saddam could have sold this information to anybody, any other state, or any well-funded terrorist group that had publicly pledged to kill millions of Americans and had expressed interest in nuclear arms. You know, like, oh… al-Qaeda.â€Â
– There goes the “He wasn’t a threat” screed…
– Read the rest here and here….
ugh, always with the school supplies. cause our government provides those for us, right? good lord! you’re dense. Where’s my pony!?
Opium is an important crop in Afghanistan, partly thanks to goons like the Taliban. The Taliban may have been working to eliminate the crops, but there is little doubt that their motivation was Islamic. What were the people going to do if they didn’t grow opium? We can offer alternatives (as can the new gov’t). The Taliban’s alternatives? Go kill infidels! No wonder Islamic republics are economic messes.
Speaking of leaders of Islamic states with their own websites, check on Col. Klinq’s place!
If they could have figured out how to work them, I am sure the trains would have ran on time, too.
I think it is fairly clear that monky didn’t read the article that was linked…of course that didn’t stop him from trying to make the name of the link inot something.
But you have to cut someone, like monky, who has done so much to help the Afghan people a little slack, right?
I read it, Maj. John.
Some Canadian who refused to become their ambassador to the U.S. so he could line his own pockets instead is badmouthing countries that pledged to defend each other for refusing to waste the lives of their troops in a pointless war…
I’d say the Republicans and their trained poodles in Canada and Britain are the ones that are struggling to “remain relevant.”
Hey, at least poodles can be housebroken, Monkeyboy.
Astonishing level of ignorance regarding NATO – but I am starting to expect that from the monky. I give, you all can flog him – it’s a waste of time. Makes actus look sharp…
America didn’t jump in to help Europe in WWII until the war was almost over…
Why, exactly should a country volunteer troops for a war that’s in its sixth year now and the people running it have no idea how to win it?
Your ignorance is showing again. You really have to get an education.
The US was actively fighting the Germans in the Battle of the Atlantic in 1940. Relieved the British of their responsibilities to defend Iceland in 1940 (I told you about this before–Look up the history of the US 5th Division).
Engaged the Japanse in 1936 and 1939 in China.
When your “perspective” is derived froma position of ignorance it only serves to mislead others.
How about Americans helping the Allies even before 1940 with the tacit approval of the US? Ever heard of the Abraham Licoln Brigade? How about Claire Chenault?
Aaah,
Aren’t our NATO allies that don’t have troops in Afghanistan providing us with similar support now, RTO?
???
Guarding US bases to free US troops for combat operations? No.
Hunting Submarine Wolfpacks? No.
Actively combating the opposition in country? Well, obviously not.
If you wish to make a point you need to be plain. Well, you need to be educated as well.
Certainly we have allies that are provideing other than combat assistance and otehr than assitance in country. Russia is an excellent example. They have provided massive materiel support in Afghanistan, but for obviuos reasons they have sent no troops. But that’s not what I was citing, so, one more ‘gain; what’s your point?
Which NATO countries do you feel aren’t doing enough to support our efforts in Afghanistan?
No idea. Haven’t broken it down that way. And I’m not willing to discuss my “feelings” with you anyhow. I’m wondering how this go to be “the point?” You want to bait someone into badmouthing an ally?
Long and short of the reality of the situation: NATO has accepted responsibility. The commanders have said “we need X number of troops.” If member nations say, “we’ll give communications support and school supplies,” well, there’s room for some criticism as communications and school supplies aren’t troops. If the problem is that the troops that members are able/willing to provide don’t add up to X, then there is fault to be discussed with NATO, accepting more responsibility than it could meet.
So, you’re fishing. I don’t know what for. It’s unlikely you’ll tell us in plain terms.
Not really “fishing” for anything, RTO.
I don’t like seeing people suggest we break alliances over this issue.
It seems to me Afghanistan is primarily a U.S. operation and we should be grateful for any help we receive.
We should also accept full responsibility for how Afghanistan and Iraq have turned out and stop trying to blame others for our…planning failures.
Who’s done that?
Who’s suggested otherwise?
You do alot of blind attribution. Who are you talking about.
The article in Major John’s original post that he linked to with the words NATO, put up or go away?
The NATO alliance could die if it does not get the troops it needs to fight the Taliban insurgency in southern Afghanistan, former foreign affairs minister John Manley said Monday…
See. Your little sliver of knowledge is so limited that even when you do read, you don’t understand it.
Try again. Or better yet, give up until you (please, please, please) read a book.
Hehe, RTO
You just don’t understand followed by absolutely no argument is a slight step up from you’re stupid…not by much though.
I see this administration destroying ties with allies that have lasted hundreds of years in some cases over their wars of choice.
Let’s hope we can repair the damage once we’re rid of them.
Have I been unclear? You aren’t stupid. You are uneducated and apparently unwilling to fix that.
You are halucinating too.
Uneducated in what, exactly, RTO?
Better to go down in flames than admit to a mistake?
No thanks.
What does Europe gain from an alliance with America these days?
They could easily join China and their friends in profitable neutrality. All the oil and gas they’d ever need. Plenty of trade opportunities. Peace.
All they’d have to do is turn a blind eye to a few “unpleasant” acts carried out in the Middle East…but they’d be over in a few weeks.
How about your repeated ignorant historical pronouncements. You know, where I (among others) continue to correct you and you continue to pretend you never said stupid things. Hell, if you hadn’t taken to mutiliating history again, I’d not have replied to this thread at all. Having no grounding in history also means that you posses no meaningful grasp of politics, philosophy or the humanities. Likely your background in literature is highly limited as well as all these sjubjects are dependent on at least the rudiments of history.
There’s a question I asked a while back and the answer is the key to answering, at least in part, one of the questions you pose here.
There is only one country that has the capacity to air and sea lift it’s national assets to any other place on earth.
You are advocating the amoral policies of the past in regard to the middle east. They were justifiable prior to 1990.
Let’s just say we have different opinions about the events of the past.
In the present, we are asking our NATO allies to supply more troops for S. Afghanistan, and the only reason we can offer them is that we need the troops to maintain a stalemate with the Taliban.
Not a very compelling reason…
Leaving events out of the record, or failing to mention them because they don’t support your position, isn’t a matter of “opinion.” The former is ignorant and the latter is dishonest. Without evidence that you knew better, I’ve had to give you the benefit of the doubt, as merely ignorant.
We aren’t asking NATO to supply more troops. NATO is asking NATO members to supply more troops.
As for the matter of stalemante, you’ll have to offer up a cite. So far as I can tell, you’ve made this last bit up out of wholecloth.
If NATO completely withdrew from Afghanistan tomorrow, do you think the Taliban would retake Kabul?
Have you ever had a complete conversation? Answer some of my questions. Address some of the points you raised and I rebutted and I’ll consider moving on. Or failing that agree that when you abandon a subject that it means you conceed the point.
I didn’t see a question, RTO.
NATO?
NATO is made up of individual countries whose populations have varying degrees of support for the war in Afghanistan.
The administration didn’t make many friends in certain NATO countries when it labeled them “old Europe” and cut them out of reconstruction and oil deals because they didn’t support our invasion of Iraq.
It’s safe to say than some governments of NATO countries would fall if they sent troops to Afghanistan or sent their troops already there to Taliban country…
“It’s safe to say than some governments of NATO countries would fall if they sent troops to Afghanistan or sent their troops already there to Taliban country…”
– That’s total bullshit monkey. Another leap in bad faith to “Blame it on Bush”. some countries are laying low in terms of support because they don’t want to become al Qaeda targets. they’re a hell of a lot closer to the problem physically than we are, so in some ways I don’t blame them, except for Spain that really wussed out in their elections after the train bombings. They’ll find in time they just encouraged attacks, as appeasement enevitably always does, but that’s their problem.
– And why the fuck should Bush rewards poopyheads that duck the coalition efforts in Iraq. Assuming they’re not on the dole for OFF, like France, they had no other reason than fear. so fuck’em. Let them shake in their beds.
See, here’s this ignornance again.
There are 26 member nations in NATO. Of those 26, how many have not committed any troops to Afghanistan?
Hopefully, you’ll take a shot at answering this explicit question since you can’t be bothered to look upthread to find the other questions you’ve ignored.
>chirp…. chirp…. chirp…<
Kinda late here in lefty land, RTO.
I imagine all NATO countries sent some troops to Afghanistan.
That doesn’t mean they’ll do it again in the sixth year.
We had a lot of support after 9/11…where did it go?
Late? It’s 1730 here in Afghanistan. Where are you? Japan?
All NATO members have sent troops. So now you imagine that to be the case, though earlier you predicted the fall of govenments if they sent troops.
Do you usually try to have things both ways? Prime example of the garbage you peddle. You could even use this internet thingee to check those opinions before making a fool of yourself posting them. But why let facts get in the way of perfectly good theories, eh?
Like this one: what 6 years. It’s only been a NATO operation for 3 years. In 2001 ISAF was a UN operation. NATO didn’t take over until 2003. ISAF’s non US composition has doubled since then. So where’s the reticence?
Any time you’d like to stop trying to sound knowledgable about things. You might be better served to ask questions if you aren’t willing to actually do google searches.
RTO – see why I gave up. God could write the TRUTH in firey letters before monky’s eyes and he’d wander off on a tangent or ask something irrelevant or ignore Him… bless you for trying, however. I gave up a while ago.
S’why I’m not ever going to be an officer, Sir. I’m hardwired for teaching but only quit trying when ordered to stand down. IOW, a born NCO.