 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"They probably have Austrian bank accounts this time Nazeem."
Probably?
"Just give 'em a number and they'll bend over for anybody!"
You're confusing our bankers with your congressmen, yankee.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Shi Huangdi
|
 |
Pittsburgh, PA
Apr 1999
time: 00:28
|
|
"There's a difference between emotion and countertroll. "
I'm trolling? 
"The rabble in the street bit was fairly minor, and didn't lead to the conclusion that popular elections would resoundingly *****slap Musharraf. Some loss of support was expected, but US officials admitted surprise at the strength of the Islamist parties' showing in the elections. Most of the Islamic world was willing to let the Taleban hang - even the Iranians and Saudis had a sort of Fallwell-Phelps thing going with the Taleban. "
What!? That's simply wrong. IIRC even in secular Turkey opposition was around 70% or so for the Afghanistan War. Heck, the Islamic World was never fully convinced that it was Bin Laden responsible for 9/11 in the first place. As for the rabble in the street, all of the media coverage I saw at the time indicated strong Taliban sympathies all throughout Pakistan and people were very quick to rush to the street shouting "Bush! I kill you!" Personally I think we have done well in that Musharaff has simply been able to maintain his presidency.
"The US did have a significant opportunity at the time of the Afghani Loya Jurga to provide greater support those Afghani Pashtun tribal leaders who have close ethnic ties with the NWFP Pakistanis, but failed to do that. "
What!? We had a Pashtun imposed for to be the Premier of that country, Harmid Karzai, and allowed the King to return. What we could do there was very limited since the non-Pashtun Northern Alliance was militarily victorious, and it would have been really messy trying to resist them.
"This having nothing to do with foreign policy must mean that the beheading of Daniel Pearl, the burning of US flags, repeated anti-US demonstrations are all just random events, and like the joke about hiring a retired US Army sergeant to translate your slogans, these guys had no idea what flag they were burning. "
You misunderstood what I meant. I did not mean that this action had no implications for US policy. I meant suggesting that the decision of those Pakistan who implimented these Sharia laws had something to do with endorsement or nonendorsement of our policies was foolish. They are imposing fundmentalist laws because they are fundamentalists.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ted Striker
Did you guys ever pay back the Jews all of the money the Nazis took from them?
|
Most of it, although late.
How is your restitution of 99 % of the country to native americans going, yankee?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"Just a "little bit", huh? I'm sure it's useful to them now that most of them are dead."
You're confusing restitution and compensation. But as you have to get your information from the crappiest media in the western world, I can't blame you.
"I'm sure they have some dirty Old World money stashed away in Austria somewhere to pay for it, though"
Florentines? Ducats?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
 |
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
"There's a difference between emotion and countertroll. "
I'm trolling? |
"What would you have done then, Mr. Foreign policy genious? Let OBL continue to sit pretty and safely?"
Yes, it was a serious response that the only possible way to respond was to let OBL continue to sit pretty. 
quote:
"The rabble in the street bit was fairly minor, and didn't lead to the conclusion that popular elections would resoundingly *****slap Musharraf. Some loss of support was expected, but US officials admitted surprise at the strength of the Islamist parties' showing in the elections. Most of the Islamic world was willing to let the Taleban hang - even the Iranians and Saudis had a sort of Fallwell-Phelps thing going with the Taleban. "
What!? That's simply wrong. IIRC even in secular Turkey opposition was around 70% or so for the Afghanistan War. Heck, the Islamic World was never fully convinced that it was Bin Laden responsible for 9/11 in the first place. As for the rabble in the street, all of the media coverage I saw at the time indicated strong Taliban sympathies all throughout Pakistan and people were very quick to rush to the street shouting "Bush! I kill you!" Personally I think we have done well in that Musharaff has simply been able to maintain his presidency.
|
There are different levels of opposition in the Islamic world. "No, I don't like the pork-eating infidels" isn't quite the same as strapping on a dynamite belt and screaming "Allahu Akhbar!"
The demonstrations in Pakistan were a few hundred to 2-3000, who promptly got their heads busted and their asses chased off by water cannon. Prior to all this crap, popular support for the Taleban in Afghanistan was limited almost exclusively to the Pashtun minority.
quote:
"The US did have a significant opportunity at the time of the Afghani Loya Jurga to provide greater support those Afghani Pashtun tribal leaders who have close ethnic ties with the NWFP Pakistanis, but failed to do that. "
What!? We had a Pashtun imposed for to be the Premier of that country, Harmid Karzai, and allowed the King to return. What we could do there was very limited since the non-Pashtun Northern Alliance was militarily victorious, and it would have been really messy trying to resist them.
|
Messy trying to resist them? They'd just had their leader blown all over a tent because he was hot to give a TV interview, and the Taleban started a general offensive to drive the NA out of the remaining 5 percent or so of Afghanistan that they'd held. Without us, they would have been overrun. The only way they could "challenge" us was because we'd decided at the time not to commit significant ground forces and we had a few SOF teams operating in the middle of them. It's not like they would ever have stood up to something like the 10MD. We had the capability to own the little guys and deal with the big fish that actually constitute half the population.
And so what, we gave them token Karzai? Then the US and the rest of the allies promptly decided the shithole wasn't worth pouring much money into (despite those inconvenient promises we made, but hey honey, that was last night. Today's a new day! Oh, but I'm gonna be late to work, I'll give you a call later.  ) Karzai would have a bit more clout in both directions if he had decent resources to work with.
quote:
You misunderstood what I meant. I did not mean that this action had no implications for US policy. I meant suggesting that the decision of those Pakistan who implimented these Sharia laws had something to do with endorsement or nonendorsement of our policies was foolish. They are imposing fundmentalist laws because they are fundamentalists. |
They ran for office on a "**** Uncle Sam" platform, and were elected on that platform. NWFP has been full of fundamentalists as long as there have been modern fundies. Al Maududi, who along with al Qutb is the inspirational source for modern fundamentalism, was from that area. Despite that, in four decades, popular support for fundamentalists has risen since the US got in bed with Musharraf. That wasn't the aim.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Lord Merciless
|
|
MtG, what do you think the US is going to do when Musharraf is replaced by fundies?
I predict pre-emptive nuclear attacks against Pakistan.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Shi Huangdi
|
|
Pittsburgh, PA
Apr 1999
time: 00:28
|
|
"
Yes, it was a serious response that the only possible way to respond was to let OBL continue to sit pretty. "
Which was a response your seemed to that everything that happens we don't like is someone raising the middle finger against it. Nice job of name calling though, you have certainly impressed us all.
"
There are different levels of opposition in the Islamic world. "No, I don't like the pork-eating infidels" isn't quite the same as strapping on a dynamite belt and screaming "Allahu Akhbar!""
No, I don't like the pork-eating infiedels was the Islamic attitude before we decided to attack Afghanistan. Al Jazeera had done a poll before then on who was the Arabs #1 enemy and the vast majority said the US. Keep in mind, MtG, the Koran does say if your fellow Islamic country is under attack you are supposed to go help it.
"Messy trying to resist them? "
You bet. The NA were hardened fighters who had already fought a sucsessful guerilla war against a superpower, and had risen in stength since the Taliban's fall. If we decided to bust the NA we would have had the whole country up against us. If you are worried about the occupation of Iraq, you can only imagine what'd be like trying to manage an occupation of all Afghanistan on our own. And oh ya, I'm sure that would really make the Islamic world love us.
"They ran for office on a "**** Uncle Sam" platform, and were elected on that platform. NWFP has been full of fundamentalists as long as there have been modern fundies. Al Maududi, who along with al Qutb is the inspirational source for modern fundamentalism, was from that area. Despite that, in four decades, popular support for fundamentalists has risen since the US got in bed with Musharraf. That wasn't the aim."
I've already pointed this out, Mike. Fundamentalists getting elected = does have some direct causation in US policy. However, the obvious cause of fundamentalist lawes being enacted, which as what your article is about, is that the fundamentalists are already there, not, oh lets not allow pictures of females on billboards to show disapproval of the US. Hence the inanity of your troll. It's a shame, this article could have made for an interesting thread if you hadn't felt obligated to go all paitkis on us and made it the way you did.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
No, I don't like the pork-eating infiedels was the Islamic attitude before we decided to attack Afghanistan. Al Jazeera had done a poll before then on who was the Arabs #1 enemy and the vast majority said the US. |
1. Does that surprise you? If so, why?
2. How come out of the maybe a couple hundred million (or tens of million for the arab part of the Ummah) who "don't like the pork-eating infiedels", only a few thousand join islamist terrorism?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Shi Huangdi
quote:
"
There are different levels of opposition in the Islamic world. "No, I don't like the pork-eating infidels" isn't quite the same as strapping on a dynamite belt and screaming "Allahu Akhbar!"" |
No, I don't like the pork-eating infiedels was the Islamic attitude before we decided to attack Afghanistan. Al Jazeera had done a poll before then on who was the Arabs #1 enemy and the vast majority said the US. Keep in mind, MtG, the Koran does say if your fellow Islamic country is under attack you are supposed to go help it.
|
However (look at Israel), most people find ways not to incovenience themselves, and the same with Islamic countries.
quote:
quote:
"Messy trying to resist them? "
|
You bet. The NA were hardened fighters who had already fought a sucsessful guerilla war against a superpower, and had risen in stength since the Taliban's fall. If we decided to bust the NA we would have had the whole country up against us. If you are worried about the occupation of Iraq, you can only imagine what'd be like trying to manage an occupation of all Afghanistan on our own. And oh ya, I'm sure that would really make the Islamic world love us.
|
The NA were a small minority of the Mujaheddin, and the "successful war" they fought was simply to be a persistent pain in the ass against a half-assed commitment of Soviet forces that was poorly motivated and which poorly executed virtually everything they did. The US (correctly, and remember the whiners here?) rejected the idea that the Soviet experience in Afghanistan would be comparable to a US war in Afghanistan. The NA would have been extinct before we ever dealt with them if they hadn't been propped up by India. They'd be a joke against US forces, especially if they were also outside the "official" Afghan government.
We wouldn't have to manage an Afghan occupation all on our own if we hadn't overrelied on mistrusted and feared ethnic minorities and if we had provided an adequate pace of training and level of support (including pay) for a national Afghan Army. Most of the ones that have been trained have been reported to have deserted, for lack of pay.
quote:
I've already pointed this out, Mike. Fundamentalists getting elected = does have some direct causation in US policy. However, the obvious cause of fundamentalist lawes being enacted, which as what your article is about, is that the fundamentalists are already there, not, oh lets not allow pictures of females on billboards to show disapproval of the US. |
Who said it was about showing disapproval? That was just one example of the silly Talebanesque crap they're doing, but the interesting point is that this is in pretty much open defiance of the national government. Remember the bit about 24 mayors resigning in protest?
We're not going to get much intel help from the Pakistanis if they can't operate in a good portion of their own country, or if they're so busy breaking heads and looking at domestic dissent and internal security issues.
quote:
Hence the inanity of your troll. It's a shame, this article could have made for an interesting thread if you hadn't felt obligated to go all paitkis on us and made it the way you did. |
It's only a troll because you want to see it as one. Sorry I can't spin it into an example of US success. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Defiant
|
 |
WISCONSIN
Aug 1999
time: 05:28
|
|
There is US success in Afhanistan,
The critics right away were saying no way can the USA ever win the war there, they will run into the same problem as Russia, the hell we did.
I don't think we went far enough again, we should have wiped out all warlords, maxium effort. Why do liberals think that Afghanistan should be a model nation in so short of time. It is a landlocked nation with little true resources but given enough time and legitimate effort it will turn around, but my God it takes years.
Same with Iraq, all the liberals were whining how long and loss of life we will have in Iraq and it ended in 30 days, given that some loss of life is still happening. It is like the Liberals are running out of crap to blame on this administration so they are cooking up unreal goals. It all takes time, this isn't a diplomacy game.
If we were really going to make this a war on Islam we would have started at home, there is only about 1million of them living in the United States.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
MichaeltheGreat
|
|
Apolyton Grand Executioner
|
|
mooning the house that Ruth built.
Oct 1999
time: 21:28
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Defiant
There is US success in Afhanistan,
The critics right away were saying no way can the USA ever win the war there, they will run into the same problem as Russia, the hell we did.
I don't think we went far enough again, we should have wiped out all warlords, maxium effort. Why do liberals think that Afghanistan should be a model nation in so short of time. It is a landlocked nation with little true resources but given enough time and legitimate effort it will turn around, but my God it takes years. |
I suppose all the bad guys will be nice enough to sit around and wait, then.
quote:
Same with Iraq, all the liberals were whining how long and loss of life we will have in Iraq and it ended in 30 days, given that some loss of life is still happening. It is like the Liberals are running out of crap to blame on this administration so they are cooking up unreal goals.
|
The stated goals were cooked up by the administration. I don't know who "the liberals" are, other than this mythical demon some people like to cite, but I'm not sure they, or anyone else, has cooked up any goals.
quote:
It all takes time, this isn't a diplomacy game.
|
It doesn't matter whether it takes time, if your enemies aren't inclined to give you that time.
You're right, it isn't a game. There are no rules, only results, and your enemies don't wait their turn, they move on their schedule, not yours, unless you succeed in preventing them from moving.
quote:
If we were really going to make this a war on Islam we would have started at home, there is only about 1million of them living in the United States. |
It doesn't matter whether you think it is. It matters whether they can propagandize successfully that it is.
|
|
| |
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
03-06-2003 12:49
I'll be in Thailand watching you suckers trying to figure out what to do when the Apolyton server is radioactive...
|