15-11-2001 05:16									#91
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

You're right, I can't, just the same as you can't prove that you weren't. Why? Because you made an after-the-fact statement saying you were 'joking'. Har, har, har; when pressed for proof, it becomes a 'joke'. Doesn't look too good, G-lo.

	15-11-2001 05:19									#92
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by rev You're right, I can't, just the same as you can't prove that you weren't. Why? Because you made an after-the-fact statement saying you were 'joking'. Har, har, har; when pressed for proof, it becomes a 'joke'. Doesn't look too good, G-lo.

Do you actually think I am saying that I think the US supports terrorism? Stupid... Stainball.

	15-11-2001 05:23									#93
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Remember


It's the soldier, not the reporter,
who has given us freedom of the press.

It's the soldier, not the poet,
who has given us freedom of speech.

It's the soldier, not the campus organizer,
who has given us freedom to demonstrate.

It's the soldier, not the lawyer,
who has given us the right to a fair trail.

And it's the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves under the flag and whose coffin is draped by the flag, who gives the protester the right to burn the flag.

	15-11-2001 05:23									#94
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

You use that 'insult' every time you need to prove that you're 'better' than me ("I'm the son of a Diplomat, Steinball. I'm better than all of you"). At least find some creativity and come up with a new one.

"Do you actually think I am saying that I think the US supports terrorism?"

Well it does/did. So you're either denying the truth or you're trying to say that the US *did* support terrorism, but after September 11 it magically stopped (without providing any evidence of this statement). Choose your weapon.

	15-11-2001 05:26									#95
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Cute poem. So what you're saying is that if we take away those rights, we're disrespecting the sacrifices (some mortal) of millions of our soldiers? I agree.

	15-11-2001 05:45									#96
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Freedom of all kinds are generally won on the battlefield. Let's hope the Afganis take this opportunity to excercise their right to such freedoms...If for anything they should do it for their children...

	15-11-2001 06:09									#97
	Suffering from ads?

quote: A democratic society in Afghanistan? Is that an oxymoron... even I thought about the difficulties of setting up such a government. Is it even remotely possible?

Currently. it would be hard to implement, but we can at least set p the means for implementation, and a different form of government than a NA dictatorship would be a start toward democracy.

The US does not obviously support terrorism now, but it supported anti-Communist terrorism in the past. If you consider terrorism against supposedly communist targets a legitamite extension of politics, than the US does not support terrorism.

"Freedom of all kinds are generally won on the battlefield. Let's hope the Afganis take this opportunity to excercise their right to such freedoms...If for anything they should do it for their children..."
Exactly. Why would we fight a war in Afghanistan and upon its conclusion let Afghanistan revert to the 1992-96 period? For revenge? Does revenge mean killing an equal number of Afghani civilians for no discernable purpose? I hope not...

	15-11-2001 08:11									#98
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Admiral The true test will come if we do allow the NA to take over without US/UN/Coalition advisement. If they don't set up a dictatorship i will be very surprised.

I doubt the NA leadership is so dumb as to be unaware of how quick and how hard they'd get ****ed the moment we stopped supporting them. The alliance is only one of convenience against a common enemy, and the rivalry between Uzbeks and Tajiks is very long standing. They are small minority ethnic groups, with almost no presence in the majority Pashtun southern plains, and loyalty is the scarcest commodity of all in Afghanistan.

Most of the same leaders and groups who've risen against the Taleban in the last few days are the ones who rose against and contributed to the NA's rout starting in 1996.

The real problem prior to the Taleban taking over wasn't the brutality of the NA as a cohesive organization, it was the component groups of the NA fighting each other (and attacking rival ethnic civilians who were the base of support of their enemies) in an extension of old tribal warfare. The situation was one of virtual anarchy, and the NA isn't far from that now, without the presence of all that external support they have now.

I agree with GP that the specific military mission is not nationbuilding, but the long term political and grand strategic goals of a war on terrorism must include some serious aid and nationbuilding efforts. We have the examples of political decision making after the world wars - the Treaty of Versailles, and the Marshall Plan. Which was more effective?

	15-11-2001 14:36									#99
	Get a bigger avatar today!

If the US doesn't want an American body count arising under the perennially unpopular auspices of "peacekeeping" after the war, then go ahead and simply let a responsible UN force do it, while supporting them with air power. This looks to be what's going to happen, given the recent Sec. Council declaration.

If nobody keeps the peace then the resulting chaos and new dictatorship will likely not be in the US's best interests, in addition to harming further the US's international credibility/popularity.

	15-11-2001 14:40									#100
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

That's a reasonably stated option, KH. There are down sides/risks with staying around as well as with leaving. I would really want to know more about the details on the ground before making a commitment to protect a UN occupation force. (That's what it ends up being in effect.)

	15-11-2001 15:03									#101
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

"Peacekeeping" sounds much more friendly than "occupation", though.

	15-11-2001 18:24									#102
	Support Apolyton

Well the NA just freed those aid workers.

The Taliban said they were going to return them, but , we know how good their word is.

http://news.excite.com/news/ap/0111...cks-aid-workers

	15-11-2001 22:03									#103
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse "Peacekeeping" sounds much more friendly than "occupation", though.

You'll go far in business, young man...

	15-11-2001 22:14									#104
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

KH - the only trouble with that is the UN doesn't want to go (or stay) anyplace where there's real fighting. They like to kid themselves that if you take outdated equipment, paint it white with UN logos on it, ridding yourselves of heavy weapons, you can tell warring local groups what to do, and they'll do it out of sheer respect and admiration for the UN Charter.

I don't want to see a UN occupation force at all unless they've seriously rethought their abysmal approach to such missions.

On the humanitarian side of things, fine, but I think most of the military aspects should be worked out among the six plus two group, with additional participation by India (as the main regional power not in the six plus two) and Turkey (as a reliable US lackey Islamic source of occupation troops who will definitely be the baddest mother****ers in the valley*)


* from the grunt's version of the 23rd Psalm

	15-11-2001 22:46									#105
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

The Turks are defintely bad ass soldiers. My old man worked with them in the Korean war and as an advisor in the early 60's...

	15-11-2001 23:56									#106
	Re: NA back to their old ways of raping, excecuting and pillaging Got spare money?

Were they trying out some new ways of raping, executing and pillaging, then?

	16-11-2001 00:42									#107
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat KH - the only trouble with that is the UN doesn't want to go (or stay) anyplace where there's real fighting. They like to kid themselves that if you take outdated equipment, paint it white with UN logos on it, ridding yourselves of heavy weapons, you can tell warring local groups what to do, and they'll do it out of sheer respect and admiration for the UN Charter. I don't want to see a UN occupation force at all unless they've seriously rethought their abysmal approach to such missions. On the humanitarian side of things, fine, but I think most of the military aspects should be worked out among the six plus two group, with additional participation by India (as the main regional power not in the six plus two) and Turkey (as a reliable US lackey Islamic source of occupation troops who will definitely be the baddest mother****ers in the valley*) * from the grunt's version of the 23rd Psalm

The point of a peacekeeping force is not that they can impose their will on all sides through pure force; it's that they provide a nice "cushion" to maintain the balance of power. They're a moderator, not an arbitrator.

	16-11-2001 00:43									#108
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by GP The Turks are defintely bad ass soldiers. My old man worked with them in the Korean war and as an advisor in the early 60's...

When I was one or two, my Dad used to work in Turkey and in the region where there were a lot of Kurds. Soliders usually were everywhere. He worked with Petroleum. They also were very well equipped.

Now they are going to kick some Taliban ass in Afghanistan.

	16-11-2001 00:54									#109
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I've talked with my aunt's dad (don't know what the proper term for that is) and he has some crazy stories about Korea and Turk soldiers. He was put in a mixed unit with the Turks after his unit was wiped out when the Chinese crossed the Yalu. All the Turks carried big ass machetes with them and this made him curious, so he asked one of the Turks if he could look at their machete. The Turk told him no; the machete could only come out if it was going to be used. To make a long story short, the Chinese attacked that night and he finally got to see the machetes in action. So, I second your description of the Turks as bad asses.

	16-11-2001 01:37									#110
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse The point of a peacekeeping force is not that they can impose their will on all sides through pure force; it's that they provide a nice "cushion" to maintain the balance of power. They're a moderator, not an arbitrator.

Yeah...we've all heard that, Kitty. The point is, is that sufficient in this case? See examples from Bosnia for implications of inadequate UN forces.

Gen Clark's book is a good read...

	16-11-2001 02:05									#111
	Increase the size of your Attachments

There was no wish for anything but fighting it out there. Bosnia was for crap from the get-go. Peacekeeping obviously can't solve all the world's ills, but it can sure go a long way toward preventing a "Whoops! We started another war by mistake". See Canuck presence on Cyprus or between Egyptians&Israelis for details.

	16-11-2001 02:16									#112
	Tired of ads?

So is Afghanistan more like the Sainai or like Bosnia?

FYI: there were peace accords before the UN peacekeepers went in.

Would this end up with a bunch of captured Danish (Dutch? can't remember) peace-keepers and a big fiasco like Bosnia. Or just be a sit on the border and check little issues thing like the Sinai? I don't know. But obviously the UN is capable of both...

	16-11-2001 02:20									#113
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Or a bigger fiasco like Somalia... that is what I am hoping that it won't become.

	16-11-2001 02:22									#114
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

I'd say it's more like Cyprus than either of those. While there are ethnic tensions, they hopefully aren't of the "we want total control or death" variety. A decentralized government would be a fairly stable, IMHO. Keep central authority out of the villages and hand it over to regional leaders, then make sure you guard the pseudo-borders between ethnic regions fairly well.

	16-11-2001 02:24									#115
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

The sad thing is that somalia was "winnable". There was a crazed over-reaction by the world community after the death of ~20 Pakistani peacekeepers, and the pop started to really get pissed off at the manhunt which ensued.

	16-11-2001 02:24									#116
	Got spare money?

I will also add to the stories of Turks being badasses.

A little known story of Turkish commandoes in WW2. Yes, I said that right, WW2.

Turks would sneak into occupying German barracks and strangle sleeping German soldiers with piano wire. But they would just kill one of the soldiers, and leave the rest alone, let them sleep through the night.

Well you can imagine the terror of those soldiers when they awoke the next morning. Sure as hell makes it hard to get a good night's rest.

Talk about pshychological warfare.

Puts shivers down my spine.

	16-11-2001 03:03									#117
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse I'd say it's more like Cyprus than either of those. While there are ethnic tensions, they hopefully aren't of the "we want total control or death" variety. A decentralized government would be a fairly stable, IMHO. Keep central authority out of the villages and hand it over to regional leaders, then make sure you guard the pseudo-borders between ethnic regions fairly well.

Factional fighting within ethnic groups, as well as ethnic competition and unequal distribution of resources, are two major problems. Cypress also doesn't have a centuries long history of piracy and brigandage, whereas Afghani tribes thrived off of either protecting or "appropriating" the caravan trade. Blood feuds between families and clans are also traditional to many groups there.

There is a huge fundamental distrust of Pakistan by the non-Pashtun Afghans, due to the fact that most of what is now western Pakistan was once part of the Kingdom of Afghanistan, which then had seaport access. The Afghans have not only the unenviable situation of being resource poor, they are landlocked, with their only access to international trade being through less than ideal "partners" (Iran or Pakistan), or the old fashioned way of the old smuggler's routes.

There are weapons out the wazoo, grinding poverty, no real opportunities, etc. etc. - so many structural defects, that it's hard to even call it a real country anymore. The two money making commodities are opium (not likely to have external government support for allowing that biz) and gemstones, particularly lapis and opals. Both of those business lines are subject to the normal black marketing, brigandage, etc., that really don't do much for the notion of stability.

Decentralized government really gets back to the rule of village headmen and tribal elders, and that has had a long history of civil war. Central authority is precisely what is needed to keep the local badasses in check, and to oversee fundamental improvements in the standard of living and basic institutions.

Overall, putting Afghanistan into some semblance of order is several orders of magnitude beyond anything UN peacekeeping forces have managed even semi-successfully.