Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

Afghanistan

Featured Replies

"We have shot an amazing number of people, but to my knowledge, none has ever proven to be a threat," said Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal,

You are misrepresenting what he said. What a shock!

He is referring to checkpoint guards or convoys who fired when they felt threatened (like someone not stopping when ordered) and he is trying to get them to be more cautious as some people who were killed did something to worry the troops (like someone not stopping when ordered) , but actually did not mean any harm.

He is trying to solve the problem - and hopefully he can - but in a wartime situation it not easy to judge someone's intentions sometimes.

  • Replies 1.7k
  • Views 8.8k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

Here for Bonobo some details on how media is manipulated.

Another shocker. :)

The liberal media spins events to manipulate public opinion and so does the military. Both sides are out to win hearts and minds and they say that all is fair in love and war.

.....Now that I have read the previous dozen posts (my apologies - often I don't have the time to read everything) I understand that you believe that the U.S. violated international law by seeking to apprehend a self-proclaimed murderer from the terrorists who were providing him protection. It appears from his history BL is determined to continue attacking the U.S., however you liken the U.S. in this case to being a lynch mob.

Specifically which international law(s) were violated, and what would be your recommendation as to how to stop BL from continuing to attack U.S. property, soldiers and civilians?

Were the Taleban terrorists? I don't think there was any violation of international law in "seeking" to apprehend the "suspect" initially when the US asked Afghanistan to hand him over. A little bit of spin there VL. Tut tut. Nevermind....

Don't get me wrong...I do not champion BL. I suggested that the technicality that the Taleban used was valid.

To me it is the same as if a lynch mob came to my door demanding I hand over some guy, perhaps a distant cousin. Using diplomatic speak, of course I will want the mob to jump thru the legal hoops first. I have little doubt as to the Talebans motives, nonetheless, due procees needs to be followed if allegations of breaching the law are to be avoided by "the mob".

Did Rodney King deserve his beating? I don't know, and perhaps he did. Nonetheless, his attackers were guilty of a crime because they did not follow the proper procedure.

I liken the US to a lynch mob (at the time) because, as an outside observer, I saw the hysteria that had been aroused in the US. Do you recall the hysteria? Even Sikhs, because they wore turbans, were being attacked by revenge-hungry red-necks. Innocent mosques were being vandalised etc.

How to stop BL?...perhaps make the first move or three towards being non-beligerant, stop being the antagonist. I know the automatic answer from you will be that America is only retaliating.....and so are they, tit for tat, ad infintum....so it all comes down to a history that I suspect predates 1948. Chuck has posted some good info.... but incomplete, I suspect.There are grudges that go back a long way.

Bl was retaliating "tit for tat"? What civilian buildings did the U.S. fly planes into that were located in the country where BL resides?

"tit for tat" is an expression that infers retaliation. It does not neccessarily imply the exact same action. That is why it's not "tit for tit" or "tat for tat".

Are you going to join the spelling, usage and semantics brigade too? For heaven's sake, all you right-wingers try to make your point by futile attempts at semantics while disregarding the inconvenient points.

Talk about the non-intellectual right!

And all of you socialists choose to ignore the point focusing on semantics. What horrific event was perpetrated by the U.S. against BL that justified BL committing numerous acts of terrorism?

And all of you socialists choose to ignore the point focusing on semantics. What horrific event was perpetrated by the U.S. against BL that justified BL committing numerous acts of terrorism?

BL is dead, now he is just a digital image wheeled out to numb the minds of American couch potatos.

He may have been behind the embassy bombings, but he isnt wanted in connection with 911 (check fbi most wanted website)

BL might have pissed about this:

CENTCOM_AOR.jpg

Not that I am taking sides... Egypt and Israel being the US's largest recipient of military aid... looks like its a crazy arms race!

Awful situation. It's very odd seeing the US portrayed as the hero marching into Afghanistan, being part Russian I grew up with western TV always critical of the Russian invasion! Now, of course, us westerners are meant to believe otherwise?

What kind of dumb ass country starts war over 1 small group, and one big bad leader or two?

Insanity. Millions dead in Iraq, now Iran is under sanctions. When will it end? When the US goes bankrupt or the US sheeple wake up to the slaughter in the name of big oil and global hegemony.

The Chinese and Russians must be rubbing their hands with glee watching the US get sucked into war costing $976,541,297,701 since 2001. Such a bloody waste.

The Europeans have had 2 world wars thrust upon them, the Brits had 30 yrs of IRA terrorism (I'm talking about the common all garden brit with nothing to do with the 'elite') The spanish had ETA terrorism for donkeys years, and yet one incident in the USA has unleashed a sh*tstorm costing millions of lives. Americans dont have the right to talk about terrorism.

Now the US and western countries are held hostage by the US led war on terror, we have such high concentrations of Muslims, usually within an hour's drive from any capital city, we dont want a dirty bomb, .. it would take out an entire country, wheras the USA might lose a city.

I liked the cold war better myself.

Is Harcourt stalking anybody else, or is it just me?

An interesting observation, however. He's been a member since 23 June 2009 and has made 2684 posts, an average of 9.62 per day, most of them as supercilious as the one he just made.

Don't worry. It is not just you. He feels that he has to reply to almost every single post, even though he has pretty much nothing worthwhile to say.

What kind of dumb ass country starts war over 1 small group, and one big bad leader or two?

Neville Chamberlain certainly would have agreed with you. :)

Haha! got me! UG!

p.s: Just in case some seriously patriotic yanks are pissed off...I do like Americans very much - lived there as a kid in LA, and grew up surrounded by yanks back in the UK (and Iraqi's and Iranian's - think international type school) ..,I just hate watching them piss it all away...

Take a lesson from the Chinese and Japs...

Thats real hearts and minds... building infrastructure in return for concessions.

Thats why China is doing so well in Africa.. without guns!

(yes - they don't mind dealing with dictators, but in the end, with infrastructure, maybe its a lesser of two evils - or even the same as the current rulers in the Middle East)

eg: Sudan, Somalia (BL's turf), and sadly Zimbabwe... where they run the prisons :)

What i really fail to understand right now is why the Iranians dont build petroleum refineries!!?

No war needed! Everybody is happy. Why cant the Chinese and Russians just nip over and solve the whole atomic energy thing with a few bits of pipe and some nuts n bolts!!

Grrrrr.. It's going to be a bloodbath over there.

I just dont understand!

BL is dead, now he is just a digital image wheeled out to numb the minds of American couch potatos.

He may have been behind the embassy bombings, but he isnt wanted in connection with 911 (check fbi most wanted website)

I will ask this one more time, then leave it at that as I have yet to get a response.

Osama bin Laden did publicly deny that he was in back of 9/11, although he spoke of it to others as if he was in back of it.  Then, later, he admitted that he was in back of it.  This was broadcast by Al Jazeerah in 2004.  This alone would be pretty concrete evidence in most courts of law.  Yet because it wasn't listed on the FBI website, that lack of confirmation somehow trumps all the other confirming evidence?  Come on, folks, Occam's Razor.

And if bin Laden is dead and Al Jazeerah was hoodwinked into believing a DreamWorks/CIA secret production, don't you think that we would have heard any denials coming from al-Quaida?  They wouldn't even have to admit that he is dead, only that the words aren't his. 

 

I still have no answer back from the FBI on that question. I read somewhere that a guy wrote a book on the very subject and believes is just being kept alive in some digital form like audio messages and poor quality clips. I am not sure if confessing to a crime alone would held up in court.

There are plenty of unanswered questions in this 9/11 thing but I am not sure if it would fit in this discussion although it is related.

April 5 will be interesting to wait for as there seems to be a video of an army attack in Afghanistan where civilians and journalist were (allegedly) intentionally killed will be presented to the media.

As for the BL tapes (some of them being real or not).

post-21826-1269790747.gif

:)

Is Harcourt stalking anybody else, or is it just me?

An interesting observation, however. He's been a member since 23 June 2009 and has made 2684 posts, an average of 9.62 per day, most of them as supercilious as the one he just made.

Don't worry. It is not just you. He feels that he has to reply to almost every single post, even though he has pretty much nothing worthwhile to say.

can you see the irony in your post?

So, tired of spelling etc, it's "post count" now. OK, I'll bite.

Here's another post to ad to my tally. :)

.

Ties in with something UG once said about "the intellectual left".

Actually, it was "something like" the pseudo-intellectual left - which is the exact opposite. Aren't you the one who keeps questioning other poster's honesty?

EV115-031.jpg

No, no questioning; I outright accused you of being a liar. No question.

Thats real hearts and minds... building infrastructure in return for concessions.

Thats why China is doing so well in Africa.. without guns!

(yes - they don't mind dealing with dictators, but in the end, with infrastructure, maybe its a lesser of two evils - or even the same as the current rulers in the Middle East)

I'm not sure that's all that true anymore, Here in Dubai I see big banners hanging on unfinished overpasses with "China Construction Company" but no work is being done. I wish they'd hurry up because traffic over here SUX.

I still have no answer back from the FBI on that question.

Here's a Canadian site that addresses the FBI question. I'm not sure how factual it is but it does bring up some points covered here. They claim to have spoken with someone at the FBI about it and gotten the answer. Click to find out for yourself!

  • Author
Thats real hearts and minds... building infrastructure in return for concessions.

Thats why China is doing so well in Africa.. without guns!

(yes - they don't mind dealing with dictators, but in the end, with infrastructure, maybe its a lesser of two evils - or even the same as the current rulers in the Middle East)

I'm not sure that's all that true anymore, Here in Dubai I see big banners hanging on unfinished overpasses with "China Construction Company" but no work is being done. I wish they'd hurry up because traffic over here SUX.

haha Well you know China Construction is not stupid either. When the pay stops the works stops :)

  • Author
Saddam used to make a lot of noise after getting kicked out of Kuwait. He was more or less contained until 9/11 changed how we viewed the threat. If something happens to change the way we view the threat from NK, ol' Kim's days will be numbered.

Well in some ways I agree....... Kim's threats are words... But he does like to launch his little practice scuds eh?

Saddams threat was real...But I am betting we disagree on what his threat was...

For me I think it was when he changed the price of oil away from dollars & into Euros.

Nov 2000....US could not have that....Without the peg to oil & world reserve status what will the USD be worth?

What if other followed Saddams lead?

We all know what happened next ...less than a year later 9/11 did change/allow how we viewed that. Yet we land in Afghanistan to chase who we still claim is the 9/11 threat....I think? But slam on the brakes do the U turn & go get that guy who had the audacity to change the price of oil from dollars to euros. Yes I know they had their alternate reasons ready..

Iran has recently done the same no? Refuse dollars ....Interesting that right after they did we also view them differently now. Suddenly they seem to also be a big nuke threat or have nuclear ambitions that we deem illegal eh? I would be racing to get a nuke too if I were them. They have eyes & have seen better than us what happens to folks like them. But still timing is quite perfect isn't it?

Could all be coincidence....... But a lot of this aggression by the US is based on Nuclear Threats / Nuclear Ambitions....

But there seems much evidence that it is also about petrol-dollars

Because the USD is the appointed trading currency for oil. A lot of dollars is in use for that purpose.

Take that away & a currency that is backed by faith alone......?? Does make me wonder at times.

DISCLAIMER:,,,,, these are just things I wonder about, I do not have a phone line to the ME or the WH :)

Based on timing of events I find them interesting. Of course 60% of my liquid assets are in USD so of course I prefer not to see anything wreck the USD. But if any of the above is true,, I also do not want my currency protected by such tactics.

  • Author
What kind of dumb ass country starts war over 1 small group, and one big bad leader or two?

Insanity. Millions dead in Iraq, now Iran is under sanctions. When will it end? When the US goes bankrupt or the US sheeple wake up to the slaughter in the name of big oil and global hegemony.

The Chinese and Russians must be rubbing their hands with glee watching the US get sucked into war costing $976,541,297,701 since 2001. Such a bloody waste.

You know whiterussian I liked your post....especially this part above as I feel the same.

It is odd to see so many think it is patriotic to cheer this race to bankruptcy. They are short sighted & do not know where they are headed at all.

Yes very odd at best

Saddam used to make a lot of noise after getting kicked out of Kuwait. He was more or less contained until 9/11 changed how we viewed the threat. If something happens to change the way we view the threat from NK, ol' Kim's days will be numbered.

Well in some ways I agree....... Kim's threats are words... But he does like to launch his little practice scuds eh?

Saddams threat was real...But I am betting we disagree on what his threat was...

For me I think it was when he changed the price of oil away from dollars & into Euros.

Nov 2000....US could not have that....Without the peg to oil & world reserve status what will the USD be worth?

What if other followed Saddams lead?

We all know what happened next ...less than a year later 9/11 did change/allow how we viewed that. Yet we land in Afghanistan to chase who we still claim is the 9/11 threat....I think? But slam on the brakes do the U turn & go get that guy who had the audacity to change the price of oil from dollars to euros. Yes I know they had their alternate reasons ready..

Iran has recently done the same no? Refuse dollars ....Interesting that right after they did we also view them differently now. Suddenly they seem to also be a big nuke threat or have nuclear ambitions that we deem illegal eh? I would be racing to get a nuke too if I were them. They have eyes & have seen better than us what happens to folks like them. But still timing is quite perfect isn't it?

Could all be coincidence....... But a lot of this aggression by the US is based on Nuclear Threats / Nuclear Ambitions....

But there seems much evidence that it is also about petrol-dollars

Because the USD is the appointed trading currency for oil. A lot of dollars is in use for that purpose.

Take that away & a currency that is backed by faith alone......?? Does make me wonder at times.

DISCLAIMER:,,,,, these are just things I wonder about, I do not have a phone line to the ME or the WH :)

Based on timing of events I find them interesting. Of course 60% of my liquid assets are in USD so of course I prefer not to see anything wreck the USD. But if any of the above is true,, I also do not want my currency protected by such tactics.

As I started reading your post I immediately thought of the Iranian Bourse, first mooted in 2007 and actually opened in 2008....yes there does seem to be a parallel. Once it starts trading in crude, then perhaps we'll really see the US propaganda machine get into top gear talking about WOMD in Iran as it did about Iraq. Timing is the thing though.....Iraq and Afghanistan are tying up resources.....have to get out of there fast so that Iran can be concentrated on.

Look what happend when China raised the idea of using the euro as the international currency; The US sold a whole lot of arms to Taiwan (over $6 billion).....a little reminder to toe the line perhaps?

Iran has announced to the world that they are developing a nuclear reactor and are refusing to stop. They have plenty of oil and certainly don't need it for power. They have also threatened Israel and worked towards destroying them for many years.

In this case, how can anyone with more than half a brain doubt their evill intentions? The "US propaganda machine" is not really necessary. :)

Iran has announced to the world that they are developing a nuclear reactor and are refusing to stop. They have plenty of oil and certainly don't need it for power. They have also threatened Israel and worked towards destroying them for many years.

In this case, how can anyone with more than half a brain doubt their evill intentions? The "US propaganda machine" is not really necessary. :)

So you doubt Iran's intentions?

I guess you would have said the same about anyone doubting WOMD in Iraq.

Anyone with more than half a brain knows that nuclear power is cheaper than oil-fired power in the long run. Anyone with more than half a brain knows that if you can sell oil for a profit, it is stupid to burn it for power when there is a cheap nuclear option. Anyone with more than half a brain would know that if push comes to shove, and America decides to attack Iran, that the propaganda machine will certainly be deployed. Anyone with more than half a brain knows that the propaganda machine would be deployed well in advance of any open talk of agression.

Anyone with more than half a brain knows...

I will wait for someone like that to comment. Iran has vast oil reserves and does not need nuclear

power. :)

Anyone with more than half a brain knows...

I will wait for someone like that to comment. Iran has vast oil reserves and does not need nuclear

power. :)

Then you should stop making comments yourself.

"Anyone with more than half a brain knows that if you can sell oil for a profit, it is stupid to burn it for power when there is a cheap nuclear option".

Very simple economics.....that anyone with half a brain would recognise.

  • Author
Iran has vast oil reserves and does not need nuclear

power. :)

Well that does nothing to explain those who produce more Iran yet all have nuclear power/weaponry .....

(well of course Saudi is like Israel in they do not admit nor deny ownership) Funny how that is allowed for "The Chosen"

Not that I can understand this argument of they have oil so they have enough anyway....

If thinking is nuclear weaponry

It is like saying the USA has many cedar trees so they could make wooden arrows & don't need bullets at all.

If it is for nuclear energy versus oil generated the issue is moot as one is far superior & again using cedar trees as a comparison say the US should use fired steam generators for all their needs. Or as *you* say their oil since they produce more.

Top Ten Oil Producing Countries

1. Saudi Arabia … 11 million barrels per day (13.9% of estimated world total)

2. Russia … 9.9 million bpd (12.5%)

3. United States … 8.3 million bpd (10.5%)

4. Iran … 4.2 million bpd (5.3%)

5. Mexico … 3.8 million bpd (4.8%)

6. China … 3.7 million bpd (4.7%)

7. Canada … 3.1 million bpd (3.9%)

8. Norway … 3 million bpd (3.8%)

9. Venezuela … 2.8 million bpd (3.6%)

10. Kuwait … 2.7 million bpd (3.4%).

you_win_the_prize-300x202.jpgThe point is that Iran is going nuclear to produce a bomb, not to use for energy. :)
you_win_the_prize-300x202.jpgThe point is that Iran is going nuclear to produce a bomb, not to use for energy. :)

You can state this as fact how?

Digressing for a bit....your pic of the Downs Syndrome boy is supposed to depict what?

  • Author
The point is that Iran is going nuclear to produce a bomb, not to use for energy.

Ummm yup that is a possibility...Hence the comment about the wooden arrows......

If thinking is nuclear weaponry

It is like saying the USA has many cedar trees so they could make wooden arrows & don't need bullets at all.

And why not? It is obvious that if you do not want to be screwed with you need as big a stick as the others.

Before we hear that old argument about how so & so said they would push so & so into the sea yada yada yada

Who cares? Who said what...Lets judge actions instead.

One country has no rights to control another. Weaponry is like the common cold.Pandora's box is wide open.

There is no putting it back. The sooner the whole world is equal the less bullying will occur. Who is the biggest arms supplier in the world? Why is that ok to trot around the globe & say ...Your ok here ya go 6 billion in weaponry.

Lets not even say we know who deserves it because we all know it has come back to bite us in the a$$ more than once already.

If we were to judge by action & not words/propaganda we would see one glaring fact as to who has actually used nukes in anger/retaliation.

If we were to judge by action & not words/propaganda we would see one glaring fact as to who has actually used nukes in anger/retaliation.

I have to call you on this one, Mr. Flying.

The bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were done neither in anger or retaliation. If that had been the case, why did we stop with only two? We could have bombed Japan back into the stone ages and we didn't.

The bombings were done to grab the attention of the Emperor and the Military of Japan and prove to them there was no way out, other than complete unconditional surrender.

If you think a people such as the Japanese would have surrendered without a very bloody invasion and a large scale loss of life on both the Allied and Axis sides, then you are sadly misinformed.

Here is a link you might want to scan to see what type people we were dealing with:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Japanese_war_crimes

The bombings worked. Any future bombings will likely be in anger or retaliation, but not those in 1945.

One country has no rights to control another. Weaponry is like the common cold. Pandora's box is wide open.

There is no putting it back. The sooner the whole world is equal the less bullying will occur.

You are certainly not very consistent. Or is your "disclaimer" about wanting to prevent "nuts" from getting the bomb just more nonsense to confuse other posters?

Ahmadinejad has denied the Holocaust, repeatedly called for the destruction of Israel, supported terrorist groups, stolen the Iranian election and tortured and killed Iranian students and citizens who were involved in protests against his regime. The Iranian people are oppressed. Yet, here you and Harcourt are justifying letting him have a nuclear bomb.

Thanks, anyway, this pretty much points out exactly where you boys are coming from in ALL of your posts.

Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has a clear record of incitement to genocide as defined under the Genocide Convention and its application to date. He has sought to dehumanize Israelis and demonize Jews. He has repeatedly called for Israel’s destruction in direct and stark terms. He is getting close to acquiring the nuclear arms with which to make good on this genocidal threat. And, through his active support of Hezbollah and Hamas, he has clearly demonstrated that he is prepared to turn his talk of killing Israelis into deadly action. http://www.cufi.org/site/Survey?SURVEY_ID=...N_USER_REQUESTS
Iran has announced to the world that they are developing a nuclear reactor and are refusing to stop. They have plenty of oil and certainly don't need it for power. They have also threatened Israel and worked towards destroying them for many years.

In this case, how can anyone with more than half a brain doubt their evill intentions? The "US propaganda machine" is not really necessary. :)

So you doubt Iran's intentions?

I guess you would have said the same about anyone doubting WOMD in Iraq.

Anyone with more than half a brain knows that nuclear power is cheaper than oil-fired power in the long run. Anyone with more than half a brain knows that if you can sell oil for a profit, it is stupid to burn it for power when there is a cheap nuclear option. Anyone with more than half a brain would know that if push comes to shove, and America decides to attack Iran, that the propaganda machine will certainly be deployed. Anyone with more than half a brain knows that the propaganda machine would be deployed well in advance of any open talk of agression.

Tell it to the Democrats. They have been fighting nuclear power ever since Three Mile Island & "The China Syndrome" with non other than "Hanoi" Jane Fonda (the Republicans are pro-nuclear power). At least Obama has talked about using more nuclear power. That should drive his base crazy.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.