The war with Afganistan is pathetic, & it's just America being gun-ho, & Bush trying to get votes by doing what the Rednecks & capital punishment fans want, which is retaliation at ANY cost, no matter what you see on TV it's not going aswell as it seems, & its a waste of time.

Well done for hitting the Red Cross tent aswell, that was a nice touch!

So what are you suggesting, that we go over there and ask them nicely to stop killing thousand of our people? Pretty please with sugar on top? Grow up you fucking liberal child.

Fuck off, George W(anker) Bush is just using Osama bin Laden as a scapegoat!

Americans get the fuck out of the middle east and you won't have to live in fear anymore.

This inflamitory crap is getting a little tired now.....

Tell me about it.

Oh jesus goddamn christ. Dude seems to forget the fact that the only reason he's allowed to post his bullshit on the internet and HAVE an opinion is because we have such a military that retains our "freedom".

Not that anyone cares.

FACT:

Afganistan had no part in the attack of NYC

FACT:

The Taliban ruled(s) Afganistan & harbored Bin Laden & the Alquadia (SP?) terrorist Organsiation

So why attack an all but third world country, that has nothing to bomb, the majority don't like or want the Taliban there.

So I don't see why America/Allies should bomb the crap out of Afganistan, just to weed out Bin Laden.

And consider this fact, if they do ever manage to kill him, do you think that his follwers will let it go, they'll think "hmmmn well they killed our leader, we should stop now..." Or do you think that they'll want a little bit of revenge? The fact that there fanatics & they think they're fighting a Ghad (SP?) - A holy war, where to die is a great honour & will please Alah, do you really think they'll mind dying...?

FACT:
My brother, who is in the military, is currently in Afganistan. He has had to shoot a few "innocent civilians" because the "innocent civilians" are trying to kill American soldiers.
FACT:
a poll was taken. Most of Afganistan seems to think Bin Laden is a hero, not a terrorist.
FACT:
This topic is boring.

Duddy? WHo actually held the poll about bin laden?

If it was the Taliban, then what's their political agenda. Do most afghans see bin laden as a hero?

As to the fact they should be pounded into the earth?

Maybe, but let the Northern alliance serve their purpose. then walk in and set up fair and democratic government with western ecconomic aid and support.

Neon

America wants both the Taliban AND Bin Laden.If they just wanted Laden they would have had him already from the Talibans first offer to hand him over, no they want them both out its just that this is the best chance they have ever had to make it seem like they dont and gain the support of countries that wouldnt give it otherwise.

The Taliban are just saying crap to get people to join and feel sorry for them. I don't see why America has bombed most of Afganistan just to get some people. Too many people have died already, too many innocent people, now even more have died just because they happen to be born in a country where the rulers are evil.

Seeing as the Taliban offered to turn over Bin Laden only if they got the proof the Americans have, which would give away the few intelligence sources the West has in this area, and the great probability that the Taliban would decide that their interpretation of Islam freed them of the need to keep their word to the infidels, I have no problem understanding that USA declined.
Further, it is now clear that just like Iraq and Kosovo, bombing does help. The Taliban are now fleeing back to their caves and dried-up subterranean watercanals. Let's all pray for rain as has not been seen in centuries
Anyone who honestly believes any kind of bargain can be made with this kind of religious fanatics qualify for the Lenin-instituted order of the "Useful Fools".
Bomb them back to stones and bones.

It's not as if they are just flying the airplanes over and randomly bombing a country...they have selected specific targets for elimination...these are places that are hiding weapons, chemical plants and other such nastiness if we were to just sit back and say "o.k. now no more terrorism, that's not nice"These are grown men who have had ample warning that this bombing was taking place, many of the "innocent civilians" have left the country, and those who stayed? This is not "americas" war, many countries are in full support of this decision because it goes beyond bush being president...if terrorists were able to take out an entire landmark(seven buildings)on american soil, in the heart of america...are there any other countries safe if they "upset" these people...now I realise Mr. King of Terror that your goal here seems to be to see who you can upset and create chaos and confrontation, but why not try posting something with a basis rather than something to just instigate more negativity?

It is sad. Really.

Yes it is sad. The suffering of innocents always is, but remember that here, as in Iraq, the suffering of the civilians is caused by the actions of the rulers.

If Iraq had agreed to the weapons inspections, the trade ban would have been lifted, and if Afghanistan had surrendered bin Laden, the US would not have had to bomb. Unfortunately, Taliban could not surrender bin Laden, so the result was inevitable.

I expect that as soon as bin Laden is apprehended, the US will initiate something in the order of the Marshall plan of the late 1940's to rebuild the country and get another ally in the Moslem World. All in all, a happy ending for Afghanistan.

It's unbelievable at first, sometimes......
Then you realize that the Taliban attacked us maybe out of spite, but why would they? An attack on freedom, or just Americans in general?

.... It's not sad, to me. It's downright stupid, why initiate a war, that may leave us all dead, in a nuclear holocast? I mean... those chemical plants could be harboring nuclear weapons, at the first spark, and the world goes in flames, if there's enough to make it so.

It's not the size or the wealth of the country. It's the people that are in it.

Yes because it works so well in Iraq, Kuwait, Isreal and Vietnam.

Neon

Well, in Vietnam, US entered, against better judgement, to support militarily, a thoroughly corrupt regime, with little real support in the population. Further, they made some grave tactical errors, and the soldiers had a hard time seeing friend from foe, and so killed a lot more than needed "just to be sure". Result: they were fucked, and are still having nightmares about it.
Iraq/Kuwait is a whole other matter; Iraq is a power in the region, and removing Saddam Hussein, which Schwartzkopf had a good chance of doing, could have created a power-vacuum in the region, giving more power to US enemy Iran. Kuwait has more money pr. squarekilometer than most other contries.
In the case of Israel, I'd say they've been quite godd at fucking up their own situation, especially Netanyahu, who did just about everything possible short of erecting Concentration Camps, to defeat the Oslo-agreement.

Any more examples?

Fine, I'll give you Isreal, But Kuwait was only defended because of the oil reserves it has. Sod the fact that the place is one of the most corrupt countries in the world. It was financially viable to defend kuwait and that's why it was done, but in doing so, the Iraqi regime has used it's propaganda machine to label the west 'devis' and god knows what else. Removing Hussian would have not left as vast a power vacucm as you may imagine. By using saudi arabia as a backdrop, they could have installed a new governemtn with the saudi backing. Because a democratic ally which owes you money is far better then a ruthless despoit who wants you oil and the two cities of tremndous people power (mecca and Medina) that you hold.

Neon