Surprise, surprise, surprise, you are purposely missing the point.

Ok.......Sure.........This is why I usually do not reply to you. You do not have the capacity to carry your idea or to let it drop.

Instead you revert to the one liner's that means zilch. I called it your low orbit before & even warned Harcourt about the futility of bothering with you.

I missed no point as you gave none.

You compare Afghanistan to Nazi Germany saying in so many words that the Nazi's must have also felt they were protecting the home land from invasion.

Yet they compare not at all.

Nazi Germany of course was guilty of atrocities that have probably never been matched.

Yet you say Afghanistan deserves invasion because....

1) they allow terrorist camps.....

I did not miss it I discount it as so does the US.....Does that mean it is ok to invade the US....NO

You say Afghanistan deserves invasion because....

2)Taking away rights from women

Again I did not miss it & remember the same in the US & the women had to fight for their rights to even vote...

Does that mean the US should have been invaded back then ? ....NO

You say Afghanistan deserves invasion because....

3)Harboring fugitives that killed thousands of innocent civilians

Can you guess? probably not so..............

your #3 is supposition....

So back to the discussion I thought you wanted.............Yes you need to list more of a reason why you think you can compare a world super power of its time WWII Germany with a country that has no army,no air force, no navy & is a stones throw from the stone age.

Or not your choice but do not expect me to do your low orbit keyboard dance with silly little one liners.

Because surprise I did not miss your point it is plain to see. It is the same point you always wear

I do not think you really care to "understand" any position other than your own.

And that is fine but I see no point in arguing. Reading your posts of recent days that is all I see....arguing over minutia.

The pot is calling the kettle black for about the millionth time.

One line or 100 does not really matter when you just twist the truth or ignore it anyway. In fact, a long post does not necessarily have any more facts or truth than a very short one and you have proved that many times.

Afghanistan was harboring dangerous international criminals and was allowing them to train other criminals freely. They do not have to be as bad as Nazi Germany to deserve being stopped by the international community.

(By the way, apparently Harcourt does not believe anything you tell him either. He seems to be ignoring your instructions completely).

I do not think you really care to "understand" any position other than your own.

And that is fine but I see no point in arguing. Reading your posts of recent days that is all I see....arguing over minutia.

Afghanistan was harboring dangerous international criminals and was allowing them to train other criminals freely. They do not have to be as bad as Nazi Germany to deserve being stopped by the international community.

Ummm you may want to stick to one question/claim at a time.

The one you quote now above was something I mentioned to VL not you.

But at this rate you easily could claim it or share or with him?

Yes I see you may be a bit closer to the point you *thought* you made earlier.

Yes Afghanistan is not anywhere near Nazi Germany it was your claim not mine.

Very exhausting talking to you......

Try to stick to one thing & focus....or not...

Is it possible that those who chose to fight were/are fighting what they see as an invasion of their soil nothing more?

Many of the Germans who were fighting to protect the motherland at the end of WW2 probably felt the same way, but if they were too stupid to realize the evil that their government had done, that is their problem, not ours.

Who knows what you are on about? This is the claim I made and all the rest was clarifying "evil" for your benefit. I am never sure if you and Harcourt are really that obtuse or are just pretending.

.........

(By the way, apparently Harcourt does not believe anything you tell him either. He seems to be ignoring your instructions completely).

I must have missed that sage advice from Flying amongst all the astute and informative posts he makes.

I will follow it where possible, but sometimes I have to let a taunting idiot know he can never get the better of me.

To be fair....I will rephrase that and change "never" to "rarely", even though I can't think of an instance, I must suppose it could happen.

Mr. Flying:

Do you believe the entry of the US into WWII was a justified action and legally sound?

I am simply curious about how you feel about this issue.

If Afghanistan had arrested and prosecuted Bin Laden and his organization, the Taliban would still be in power.  If the Afghanistan forces had just stood by and let our forces prosecute BIn Laden, then they would still be in power.  But not, they chose to fight.  Their choice.

I am really at a huge loss as how to understand what you wanted us to do.  Sit back and let Bin Laden plan more attacks because they were hiding in Afghanistan?  I am sorry, but I don't see it.  

Is it possible that those who chose to fight were/are fighting what they see as an invasion of their soil nothing more?

Would America respond the same if the invasion occurred on US soil? Regardless of the claim that the US supposedly harbored a fugitive...supposedly accused of an act not yet proven? Is that enough then to invade a country?...Supposition?

Would they? I think we all agree none would dare such an act because as Yamamoto basically said behind every blade of grass they would find a rifle.

If so I guess the US should be grateful most of the other countries have turned their economy away from spending every dime on their military. Other wise they would surely find themselves in similar situations. Because surely over the years the US has been *accused* of many things. Yet none has invaded them over these accusations.

Of course that is what the bulk if not all the Afghans who fought against the NATO forces felt.  Afghanistan has hundreds of years of history of fighting back invading forces.  So what?  To get down to the nitty gritty, who cares what their motivation was?  We had a specific, limited objective, and we were going to get it done.  The Taliban government could have cooperated, but they chose to fight.  Stupid decision, if you wanted to stay in power.

If the US harbored similar criminals, then I would say the victims of those criminals would have a moral right do do what they could to rectify the situation.  But as the US has the strongest military in the world, practicality means not too much could be done about it. But I personally would decry any such action by the US government to harbor terrorists, and I would vote against any politician who supported that sort of action.

As many other members of the military, I think now and thought then that our invasion of Iraq was wrong and a mistake. But I can't see how any rational person would argue that there was no moral ground for going into Afghanistan.

I tend to see both ( Iraq & Afghanistan )as the same mistake....Lack of concrete evidence makes for a poor reason to invade any country given the collateral damages & financial hardships that will surely follow.

Lastly in this day & age when they can read the date on a dime on a beach from space.... Do not tell me they cannot find one man in 10 years.....If they wanted to or if they did not long ago already find & kill him at the battle of Tora Bora

But then what reason would be left to stay/continue the invasion?

The US is following the same recipe that has been repeated through out history by others & the result will probably taste the same.

The same thing?  How are they the same?  Because the missions are being prosecuted by men and women in uniform?

Well, the NATO countries sure don't see them as the same. Do you see Canadian or German troops in Iraq?

Of course that is what the bulk if not all the Afghans who fought against the NATO forces felt.  Afghanistan has hundreds of years of history of fighting back invading forces.  So what?  

So that is what I said was a possibility & I still maintain it is the reason why. As more & more innocents are killed more & more will pick up arms. The US is making terrorist not chasing them.

The same thing?  How are they the same?  

How are they the same? I said so in my original post.

Lack of concrete evidence makes for a poor reason to invade any country given the collateral damages & financial hardships that will surely follow.

Mr. Flying:

Do you believe the entry of the US into WWII was a justified action and legally sound?

I am simply curious about how you feel about this issue.

Come now chuck

What is with all this polling of my feelings today? First VL & now you?

Yes I am certain my belief on the entry into WWII by the US is the same as yours.

But before we go where you want to take this let me just say that does not automatically mean we will agree on

the actions of a few men on 9/11 justifying the invasion of a whole country.

Mr. Flying:

Do you believe the entry of the US into WWII was a justified action and legally sound?

I am simply curious about how you feel about this issue.

Come now chuck

What is with all this polling of my feelings today? First VL & now you?

Yes I am certain my belief on the entry into WWII by the US is the same as yours.

But before we go where you want to take this let me just say that does not automatically mean we will agree on

the actions of a few men on 9/11 justifying the invasion of a whole country.

My question had nothing to do with the actions of a few men on 9/11. I was simply curious to get your thoughts.

Now that you have stated your beliefs on the US entry into WWII are the same as mine, then you will see nothing wrong with the US declaring war on Germany, even though Germany never attacked the US directly. Right?

My thought process is that Germany was a threat to the free world and was thus a threat to the security of the US. These threats had to be addressed with military action.

But to take it one step further, both Iraq and Afghanistan also constituted a threat to the free world, both in their own ways, and had to be dealt with before that threat manifested itself into something much larger.

Perhaps you will now disagree with me on Germany. We shall see.

My question had nothing to do with the actions of a few men on 9/11. I was simply curious to get your thoughts.

Now that you have stated your beliefs on the US entry into WWII are the same as mine, then you will see nothing wrong with the US declaring war on Germany, even though Germany never attacked the US directly. Right?

My thought process is that Germany was a threat to the free world and was thus a threat to the security of the US. These threats had to be addressed with military action.

But to take it one step further, both Iraq and Afghanistan also constituted a threat to the free world, both in their own ways, and had to be dealt with before that threat manifested itself into something much larger.

Perhaps you will now disagree with me on Germany. We shall see.

Kor Tort Chuck ......

I should not have second guessed your intentions ..... Sorry for that

In any case yes I agree about Germany as the proof was in the pudding so to speak.

But I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention.

Honestly I do not.

My question had nothing to do with the actions of a few men on 9/11. I was simply curious to get your thoughts.

Now that you have stated your beliefs on the US entry into WWII are the same as mine, then you will see nothing wrong with the US declaring war on Germany, even though Germany never attacked the US directly. Right?

My thought process is that Germany was a threat to the free world and was thus a threat to the security of the US. These threats had to be addressed with military action.

But to take it one step further, both Iraq and Afghanistan also constituted a threat to the free world, both in their own ways, and had to be dealt with before that threat manifested itself into something much larger.

Perhaps you will now disagree with me on Germany. We shall see.

Kor Tort Chuck ......

I should not have second guessed your intentions ..... Sorry for that

In any case yes I agree about Germany as the proof was in the pudding so to speak.

But I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention.

Honestly I do not.

Having worked rather intimately in the dreaded military industrial complex for the better part of 30 years, most of that time in the Middle East, I would very likely have a different perspective than you would.

It is highly unlikely we will ever see eye to eye on that. Let's take our agreement on Obama as a good thing, however.

My question had nothing to do with the actions of a few men on 9/11. I was simply curious to get your thoughts.

Now that you have stated your beliefs on the US entry into WWII are the same as mine, then you will see nothing wrong with the US declaring war on Germany, even though Germany never attacked the US directly. Right?

My thought process is that Germany was a threat to the free world and was thus a threat to the security of the US. These threats had to be addressed with military action.

But to take it one step further, both Iraq and Afghanistan also constituted a threat to the free world, both in their own ways, and had to be dealt with before that threat manifested itself into something much larger.

Perhaps you will now disagree with me on Germany. We shall see.

Kor Tort Chuck ......

I should not have second guessed your intentions ..... Sorry for that

In any case yes I agree about Germany as the proof was in the pudding so to speak.

But I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention.

Honestly I do not.

Having worked rather intimately in the dreaded military industrial complex for the better part of 30 years, most of that time in the Middle East, I would very likely have a different perspective than you would.

It is highly unlikely we will ever see eye to eye on that. Let's take our agreement on Obama as a good thing, however.

I tend to agree with Flying, "... I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention....".

You, chuckd, seem to have information that we do not. Please enlighten us with the facts.

I tend to agree with Flying, "... I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention....".

I'd fail to see it too if I lived on a small, isolated island in the South Pacific.

In other words, the U.S. looked upon 9/11 as an opportunity,

You say..... I just want to understand your position.

I do not think you really care to "understand" any position other than your own.

And that is fine but I see no point in arguing. Reading your posts of recent days that is all I see....arguing over minutia.

I stated an opinion & it was very clear... If it was not clear enough...Twist it into what you like.

If I have you wrong in this regard.... kor tort

You sound rather paranoid. I state what I believe and mean what I say.

When I find one with a position completely adverse to my own, I want to try to understand them - to clear away any potential misunderstanding on my part.

Apology accepted.

Lastly in this day & age when they can read the date on a dime on a beach from space.... Do not tell me they cannot find one man in 10 years.....If they wanted to or if they did not long ago already find & kill him at the battle of Tora Bora

Eric Rudolph, Atlanta Olympic Park bomber & more. On FBI Most Wanted list for 5 years while he eluded capture. American, English-speaker, hiding out in the Smokey Mountains USA, not being protected by locals and it still took FIVE YEARS to capture him and that was by chance.

Bin Laden - if even alive which I doubt - is hiding out in a larger area, on the other side of the world, in a foreign land with foreign languages and culture, protected by locals.

It's not hard to believe whatsoever that he hasn't been caught yet even with our amazing eye in the sky technology.

Please don't confuse the opposition with common sense and facts.

I tend to agree with Flying, "... I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention....".

I'd fail to see it too if I lived on a small, isolated island in the South Pacific.

I hope you didn't think about that one. It was good if it was instant repartee though.

Nonesense, of course, when talking about a developed country.....but you know that. So I have to assume it was repartee! Good one. Lets have more.

Please don't confuse the opposition with common sense and facts.

Come now! You're scraping the bottom of the barrel with that one! If we are going to have "banter", lets please make it original and witty.

And my dady is a policeman and he'll beat your daddy.

Nya nya nya nya.

You mean like this?

And my dady is a policeman and he'll beat your daddy.

Nya nya nya nya.

You mean like this?

Point to you.

Having worked rather intimately in the dreaded military industrial complex for the better part of 30 years, most of that time in the Middle East, I would very likely have a different perspective than you would.

It is highly unlikely we will ever see eye to eye on that. Let's take our agreement on Obama as a good thing, however.

Understood & agreed on Obama

I am sure you do have a different perspective as we are all a sum total of our experiences.

I also understand the fear of retaliation ...nuclear or otherwise.

But in this day I still do not feel these countries which lack any true means of delivery are the threat that demands the invasion as some make it out to be.

If we wanted to talk about such things we could look first to others who actually possess & threaten. Ones such as N Korea

Yet we use economic sanctions against such real threats & there are others.

Yet countries such as the two we mentioned that have no means of delivery ( missiles. air force. navy etc ) nor do they actually possess a world threatening weapon ....These we deem worthy of pre-emptive wars? <sic>

As I said I understand your post above & agree we are shaped by what we believe/see/are taught etc.

I also fully back your right to your opinions.

Thanks

Bin Laden - if even alive which I doubt - is hiding out in a larger area, on the other side of the world, in a foreign land with foreign languages and culture, protected by locals.

It's not hard to believe whatsoever that he hasn't been caught yet even with our amazing eye in the sky technology.

We are then in agreement that we doubt his existence..........?

If so how do we back the chasing of him with dollars loaned to us with interest from the Chinese? All the while the US crumbles financially. I just dont feel as good spending our children's future on such uncertainty. But hey its not like its my decision alone eh?

I tend to agree with Flying, "... I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention....".

I'd fail to see it too if I lived on a small, isolated island in the South Pacific.

I hope you didn't think about that one. It was good if it was instant repartee though.

Nonesense, of course, when talking about a developed country.....but you know that. So I have to assume it was repartee! Good one. Lets have more.

NZ is not on the Islamic Fudamentalist's radar screen. The worst thing you have to worry about getting by your border control is fruit. What's the biggest threat you guys worry about over there? Drunk Aussies coming over for a rugby match acting like crazed Orcs? A chunk of Antarctica breaking off and slamming into you? Sarkozy deciding to begin new nuclear tests?

My question had nothing to do with the actions of a few men on 9/11. I was simply curious to get your thoughts.

Now that you have stated your beliefs on the US entry into WWII are the same as mine, then you will see nothing wrong with the US declaring war on Germany, even though Germany never attacked the US directly. Right?

My thought process is that Germany was a threat to the free world and was thus a threat to the security of the US. These threats had to be addressed with military action.

But to take it one step further, both Iraq and Afghanistan also constituted a threat to the free world, both in their own ways, and had to be dealt with before that threat manifested itself into something much larger.

Perhaps you will now disagree with me on Germany. We shall see.

Kor Tort Chuck ......

I should not have second guessed your intentions ..... Sorry for that

In any case yes I agree about Germany as the proof was in the pudding so to speak.

But I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention.

Honestly I do not.

Having worked rather intimately in the dreaded military industrial complex for the better part of 30 years, most of that time in the Middle East, I would very likely have a different perspective than you would.

It is highly unlikely we will ever see eye to eye on that. Let's take our agreement on Obama as a good thing, however.

I tend to agree with Flying, "... I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention....".

You, chuckd, seem to have information that we do not. Please enlighten us with the facts.

What's your clearance level?

I tend to agree with Flying, "... I fail to see the threat to the free world of the two countries you mention....".

You, chuckd, seem to have information that we do not. Please enlighten us with the facts.

What's your clearance level?

4'10"?

Sorry, couldn't resist.

My question had nothing to do with the actions of a few men on 9/11. I was simply curious to get your thoughts.

Now that you have stated your beliefs on the US entry into WWII are the same as mine, then you will see nothing wrong with the US declaring war on Germany, even though Germany never attacked the US directly. Right?

My thought process is that Germany was a threat to the free world and was thus a threat to the security of the US. These threats had to be addressed with military action.

But to take it one step further, both Iraq and Afghanistan also constituted a threat to the free world, both in their own ways, and had to be dealt with before that threat manifested itself into something much larger.

Perhaps you will now disagree with me on Germany. We shall see.

wrong Chuck! for the record: the U.S. did not declare war on Germany but Germany was bound to declare war on the U.S. based on the agreement "Berlin-Tokyo Axis" after Pearl Harbour respectively the official japanses declaration of war. something similar happened when World War I started and Germany had a pact with Austria. the latter declared war on Serbia and Russia stepped in to declare war on Austria.

Is it possible that those who chose to fight were/are fighting what they see as an invasion of their soil nothing more?

Many of the Germans who were fighting to protect the motherland at the end of WW2 probably felt the same way, but if they were too stupid to realize the evil that their government had done, that is their problem, not ours.

it was their problem. how many survivors do still exist who fought to protect the Vaterland? quel naïveté or is it just stupidity from your side mentioning "too stupid to realise"? was media coverage or internet available in these times? nowadays there are millions too stupid to realise what evil crimes their government has committed in Viet Nam, Iraq and Afghanistan. besides those stupid ones there are those who keep on whining yada yada yada yakety yak "thousands of dead" but forget the 1½ million dead (most probably more) in the above mentioned countries.

now waiting patiently for intelligent remarks like "one or two millions is much less than the alleged six million killed in concentration camps".

now waiting patiently for intelligent remarks like "one or two millions is much less than the alleged six million killed in concentration camps".

Alleged? You do not believe that there were approximately 6 million (5.9 million) Jews murdered during Hitler's reign? Additionally there were millions of others murdered, not just Jews. We know because the Nazis kept records of the murders, medical experiments, etc. You know don't you Naam? Why say alleged?

My question had nothing to do with the actions of a few men on 9/11. I was simply curious to get your thoughts.

Now that you have stated your beliefs on the US entry into WWII are the same as mine, then you will see nothing wrong with the US declaring war on Germany, even though Germany never attacked the US directly. Right?

My thought process is that Germany was a threat to the free world and was thus a threat to the security of the US. These threats had to be addressed with military action.

But to take it one step further, both Iraq and Afghanistan also constituted a threat to the free world, both in their own ways, and had to be dealt with before that threat manifested itself into something much larger.

Perhaps you will now disagree with me on Germany. We shall see.

wrong Chuck! for the record: the U.S. did not declare war on Germany but Germany was bound to declare war on the U.S. based on the agreement "Berlin-Tokyo Axis" after Pearl Harbour respectively the official japanses declaration of war. something similar happened when World War I started and Germany had a pact with Austria. the latter declared war on Serbia and Russia stepped in to declare war on Austria.

The US declared war on Germany AFTER Germany declared war on the US. That has nothing to do with my statement that Germany never attacked the US directly. I am correct with my statement then and now.

Following is the US State Department take on our discussion:

___________________________________________________

U.S. Declaration of War Against Germany

War Message of the President (Roosevelt) to the Congress, Dec. 11, 1941

"To the Congress of the United States:

On the morning of December 11 the Government of Germany, pursuing its course of world

conquest, declared war against the United States.

The long known and the long expected has thus taken place. The forces endeavoring to enslave the entire world now are moving toward this hemisphere.

Never before has there been a greater challenge to life, liberty, and civilization.

Delay invites greater danger. Rapid and united effort by all the peoples of the world who are

determined to remain free will insure a world victory of the forces of justice and of righteousness over the forces of savagery and of barbarism.

Italy also has declared war against the United States.

I therefore request the Congress to recognize a state of war between the United States and

Germany and between the United States and Italy.

FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT.

THE WHITE HOUSE, "December 11, 1941."

(Documents on American Foreign Relations, vol. IV, 1941 / 1942. p. 121. World Peace Foundation, 1942)

Joint Resolution Declaring that a State of War Exists Between the People of Germany and the People of the United States, Dec. 11, 1941

"Whereas the Government of Germany has formally declared war against the Government and the

people of the United States of America: Therefore be it

"Resolved, etc., That the state of war between the United States and the Government of Germany

which has thus been thrust upon the United States is hereby formally declared; and the President is hereby authorized and directed to employ the entire naval and military forces of the United States and the resources of the Government to carry on war against the Government of Germany; and, to bring the conflict to a successful termination, all of the resources of the country are hereby pledged by the Congress of the United States."

(Documents on American Foreign Relations, vol. IV, 1941 / 1942. p. 122. World Peace Foundation, Princeton University Press, 1942)

DISCLAIMER

Any reference obtained from this server to a specific commercial product, process, or service does not constitute or imply an endorsement by the United States Government of the product, process, or service, or its producer or provider. The views and opinions expressed in any referenced document do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government.

U.S. Diplomatic Mission to Germany /Public Affairs/ Information Resource Centers

Updated: August 2001

__________________________________________________________

http://usa.usembassy.de/etexts/ga3-411211.htm