View Full Version : Latest Taliban Atrocities



ThomPaine
08-27-2012, 08:01 AM
From the Washington Post:

KABUL Taliban insurgents beheaded 17 Afghan civilians in a rebel-controlled area of southern Afghanistan, officials said Monday, and two NATO troops were killed by an Afghan soldier in the eastern part of the country. The civilians, two of them women, were killed Sunday night in the Kajaki area of Helmand province, apparently because they were attending a party that featured music and mixed-gender dancing, provincial
officials said.

Regardless of your thoughts on how we got here or how the Taliban came to hold some much power, I think most would agree that the sooner we are out of Afghanistan, the better. The place is literally ungovernable, and every additional US/NATO life lost or penny spent there is a complete and utter waste.

I think we obviously had to act after 9/11 and we were completely justified in dealing death and destruction on the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, but why we feel the need to build a society/democratic government there is completely beyond me. Some criminals cannot be reformed, they must just be punished.

As we have seen repeatedly throughout history, revolutions last only when they are begun from within. When the Afghan people are truly tired of being abused and lorded over by these lunatics, they will rise up and push them out of power. We need to get out now.

Roadhawg
08-27-2012, 08:32 AM
I agree

Midtowner
08-27-2012, 09:02 AM
It's not ungovernable, we just have to be willing to invest trillions of dollars and about a generation's worth of time to reshape their culture entirely.

Totally doable!

Roadhawg
08-27-2012, 09:22 AM
I'm thinking it will take longer than a generation to turn around a few thousand years way of doing things.

metro
08-27-2012, 09:36 AM
From the Washington Post:


Regardless of your thoughts on how we got here or how the Taliban came to hold some much power, I think most would agree that the sooner we are out of Afghanistan, the better. The place is literally ungovernable, and every additional US/NATO life lost or penny spent there is a complete and utter waste.

I think we obviously had to act after 9/11 and we were completely justified in dealing death and destruction on the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan, but why we feel the need to build a society/democratic government there is completely beyond me. Some criminals cannot be reformed, they must just be punished.

As we have seen repeatedly throughout history, revolutions last only when they are begun from within. When the Afghan people are truly tired of being abused and lorded over by these lunatics, they will rise up and push them out of power. We need to get out now.

So do you support Barry when he sent in more troops?

ThomPaine
08-27-2012, 09:46 AM
I know it's pointless to reply, because people who fail to show the proper respect for people who have earned it (you should use President Obama, and Governor Romney) are usually pretty narrow minded.

However, I was against troop increases in Afghanistan. But remember who asked/demanded them. It is a no-win situation for civilian leaders to deny troop increases when asked for by the experts on the ground. Failure to do so (as in Somalia) might be disastrous, and the last time we had done it (Iraqi surge) it was extremely successful (if only for the short term). The President really only had one option, and that was to support the flag officer who asked, and in this case, it was General McChrystal.

Easy180
08-27-2012, 10:49 AM
So do you support Barry when he sent in more troops?

Nope from me...Worst thing he has done to date... he could have shown some political courage but decided to help his re-election chances instead

ThomPaine
08-27-2012, 03:20 PM
Nope from me...Worst thing he has done to date... he could have shown some political courage but decided to help his re-election chances instead

Unfortunately, job #1 for ANY politician is to get re-elected. (

Roadhawg
08-27-2012, 03:43 PM
Nope from me...Worst thing he has done to date... he could have shown some political courage but decided to help his re-election chances instead


Not sure he was in a position to start pulling troops out and he didn't want to leave them in there undermanned so the choices were limited. If we stayed out of Iraq it wouldn't have been an issue.

Jersey Boss
08-27-2012, 04:20 PM
As most of us know the President could not have started pulling troops out w/o the support of the GOP leadership. An influential opposition would have denied the funding it would have taken to initiate this troop pull out. The President would have been running a fools errand with the chicken hawks squawking "he lost Afghanistan to his Mooslim pals." We saw what happened when he tried to close Gitmo.

metro
08-27-2012, 05:07 PM
Not sure he was in a position to start pulling troops out and he didn't want to leave them in there undermanned so the choices were limited. If we stayed out of Iraq it wouldn't have been an issue.

Well, according to Barry's campaign promises he was going to pull out of Iraq and Agghanistan first thing in 2009, you can YouTube for the audio/video, followed by closing down Guantanamo, removing trade embargo with Cuba, having transparency on his website of all bills he signs, and ending corporate lobbying.

metro
08-27-2012, 05:08 PM
As most of us know the President could not have started pulling troops out w/o the support of the GOP leadership. An influential opposition would have denied the funding it would have taken to initiate this troop pull out. The President would have been running a fools errand with the chicken hawks squawking "he lost Afghanistan to his Mooslim pals." We saw what happened when he tried to close Gitmo.

Hello, he controlled all 3 branches his first two years in office.

Jersey Boss
08-27-2012, 05:12 PM
Hello, he controlled all 3 branches his first two years in office.

That is BS. The political system in this country is not Parliamentary. No President has the power that a Prime minister does. In fact the Dems did not have a 60 vote majority in the Senate but for a few months. Since when does the President control the judicial branch. Hello back to ya!

Jersey Boss
08-27-2012, 05:19 PM
Well, according to Barry's campaign promises he was going to pull out of Iraq and Agghanistan first thing in 2009, you can YouTube for the audio/video, followed by closing down Guantanamo, removing trade embargo with Cuba, having transparency on his website of all bills he signs, and ending corporate lobbying.

He never said he pull out of Afghanistan first thing in 2009. I doubt you will be able to show me the money on that one. As far as Iraq, he was bound by a treaty the previous administration signed, and he honored it to the chagrin of the neo-cons. The trade embargo on Cuba is an ongoing utter failure that once again he can't change. Ending corporate lobbying, really? Is that not a function of Congress? In fact wouldn't the embargo also fall under their purview? I doubt a professor in constitutional law would make the promises you claim. Give me some cites or links to make your case.

Jersey Boss
08-27-2012, 05:21 PM
I do remember McCain say he had a plan to catch Bin Laden. How come he did not share it with either President?

PennyQuilts
08-27-2012, 05:32 PM
It was one thing to go in and blow terrorist camps in Afghanistan to smithereens in the aftermath of 9-11. You might not get them all but it needed to be done to draw a bright line in the sand around the world that you can't come over here and attack civilians the way they did. And I have no problem with going back and doing it again if they don't get the message and start looking like they are setting up to hit us or allies, again.

But I just don't see how we can possibly go in there and turn around a culture that has such deeply held beliefs that are so fundamentally opposed to what we American's tend to expect, especially with a government that is corrupt from the ground up. Flexing military might in response to terrorism on our shores is one thing. Nation building is another.

And, yes, Obama is our commander in chief and he certainly could have pulled out the troops in Afghanistan. That is his call. It is a judgment call but he has the power.

PennyQuilts
08-27-2012, 05:34 PM
That is BS. The political system in this country is not Parliamentary. No President has the power that a Prime minister does. In fact the Dems did not have a 60 vote majority in the Senate but for a few months. Since when does the President control the judicial branch. Hello back to ya!

Well, perhaps he meant the administrative "branch?" :)

PennyQuilts
08-27-2012, 05:38 PM
He never said he pull out of Afghanistan first thing in 2009. I doubt you will be able to show me the money on that one. As far as Iraq, he was bound by a treaty the previous administration signed, and he honored it to the chagrin of the neo-cons. The trade embargo on Cuba is an ongoing utter failure that once again he can't change. Ending corporate lobbying, really? Is that not a function of Congress? In fact wouldn't the embargo also fall under their purview? I doubt a professor in constitutional law would make the promises you claim. Give me some cites or links to make your case.

He has shown next to no real understanding of the constitution such that you'd expect from a college - not professor - but instructor. I am not sure he ever even practiced law and if he did, not for long. And law professors argue about the law all the live long day so that doesn't mean he got it right.

Jersey Boss
08-27-2012, 05:41 PM
It was one thing to go in and blow terrorist camps in Afghanistan to smithereens in the aftermath of 9-11. You might not get them all but it needed to be done to draw a bright line in the sand around the world that you can't come over here and attack civilians the way they did. And I have no problem with going back and doing it again if they don't get the message and start looking like they are setting up to hit us or allies, again.

But I just don't see how we can possibly go in there and turn around a culture that has such deeply held beliefs that are so fundamentally opposed to what we American's tend to expect, especially with a government that is corrupt from the ground up. Flexing military might in response to terrorism on our shores is one thing. Nation building is another.

And, yes, Obama is our commander in chief and he certainly could have pulled out the troops in Afghanistan. That is his call. It is a judgment call but he has the power.

And if Congress refuses to authorize the funds??

zookeeper
08-27-2012, 08:29 PM
Why do I see so much politics allowed in the Current Events & Open Topics thread? These threads that are obviously going to get political are just as poisonous to this forum as that politics section.

PennyQuilts
08-27-2012, 08:32 PM
And if Congress refuses to authorize the funds??

What has this got to do with bringing them home? Yes, they can deny the funds supporting a war, but that isn't the same thing as ending a war or somehow forcing the commander in chief to keep military on the front lines.

ThomPaine
08-27-2012, 08:46 PM
Why do I see so much politics allowed in the Current Events & Open Topics thread? These threads that are obviously going to get political are just as poisonous to this forum as that politics section.

Probably my fault for posting it here... It was "current" and I naively assumed since we've been there since 2001, it was more of a "US" position rather than a GOP or DEM issue.

mugofbeer
08-27-2012, 08:52 PM
So devil's advocate since everyone else on here seems to think pulling up and leaving is the thing to do ---- So we leave Afghanistan up to whatever fate has in store for it. The Taliban take it back over and resume using it as a base to export their brand of Islam. As can be seen by a group of Taliban who beheaded people solely because they went to a dance, is it reasonable to assume they will stop when they reach the border? Does the Taliban honor colonial borders? Do we just sit by until another 9-11 is launched? Do we just turn over the country to the Taliban until they have enough control and are able to organize enough to start attacking Packistan? What about the former Soviet countries to the north? Do you think the Taliban are just going to sit in Afghanistan and be happy with just that?

Easy180
08-27-2012, 09:00 PM
Can't out wait the Taliban...They will patiently wait for another decade if they have to while our finest continue to die...No thanks

ThomPaine
08-27-2012, 09:12 PM
So devil's advocate since everyone else on here seems to think pulling up and leaving is the thing to do ---- So we leave Afghanistan up to whatever fate has in store for it. The Taliban take it back over and resume using it as a base to export their brand of Islam. As can be seen by a group of Taliban who beheaded people solely because they went to a dance, is it reasonable to assume they will stop when they reach the border? Does the Taliban honor colonial borders? Do we just sit by until another 9-11 is launched? Do we just turn over the country to the Taliban until they have enough control and are able to organize enough to start attacking Packistan? What about the former Soviet countries to the north? Do you think the Taliban are just going to sit in Afghanistan and be happy with just that?

All your suppositions are valid. Personally I think we need to look at a punitive response for countries that allow safe haven, promotion or any type of support of terrorism. I'm against keeping boots on the ground trying to "rebuild" a legitimate goverment, but I fully support a proportional response to any wrongdoing visited upon the US or its citizens. As far as that goes, Saudis are some of the biggest supporters of terrorism across the globe (both financially and through their fundamentalist imams), yet they have gotten off scot free.

mugofbeer
08-27-2012, 09:48 PM
All your suppositions are valid. Personally I think we need to look at a punitive response for countries that allow safe haven, promotion or any type of support of terrorism. I'm against keeping boots on the ground trying to "rebuild" a legitimate goverment, but I fully support a proportional response to any wrongdoing visited upon the US or its citizens. As far as that goes, Saudis are some of the biggest supporters of terrorism across the globe (both financially and through their fundamentalist imams), yet they have gotten off scot free.

But isn't Afghanistan simply a punitive response against a country that had no legitimate government and couldn't stop Al-qaida? I think the people of Afghanistan and Iraq have stated quite clearly they greatly prefer a non-Taliban government. But there are enough rural Taliban supporters, tribal types and warlords who still control much of the mountains that will simply shoot first and not even bother to ask questions. Beheading young people for dancing was nothing more than terrorism. The population has little power to stop that kind of mentality - just as there are often not ways to stop an insane person from shooting up a movie theater if he puts his mind to it.

As for the Saudi's, there is more at play than just the oil. They are the stabilizing force against Iran in the gulf. Abandon or alienate the Saudi's and you have radical Islamists controling half the worlds oil. All the more reason to drill here, convert to natural gas and electric cars until other technologies are available.

ThomPaine
08-28-2012, 06:25 AM
But isn't Afghanistan simply a punitive response against a country that had no legitimate government and couldn't stop Al-qaida? I think the people of Afghanistan and Iraq have stated quite clearly they greatly prefer a non-Taliban government. But there are enough rural Taliban supporters, tribal types and warlords who still control much of the mountains that will simply shoot first and not even bother to ask questions. Beheading young people for dancing was nothing more than terrorism. The population has little power to stop that kind of mentality - just as there are often not ways to stop an insane person from shooting up a movie theater if he puts his mind to it.

As for the Saudi's, there is more at play than just the oil. They are the stabilizing force against Iran in the gulf. Abandon or alienate the Saudi's and you have radical Islamists controling half the worlds oil. All the more reason to drill here, convert to natural gas and electric cars until other technologies are available.

I think my thoughts are in line with yours, but this forum makes it difficult. I am certainly not an isolationist, but I also know that we can't be everywhere all the time. About a third of the African continent (maybe closer to half) is ungovernable in similar fashion, yet we are not there assisting their populations either. I am just weary of spending money and lives in a country that will never change unless the people themselves do something about it.

We are in absolute agreement on Saudi Arabia, and I hate the situation in which we have allowed ourselves to be stuck. Had the terrorists of 9/11 been from Yemen, Somalia, or even Jordan or Syria, we probably would have dealt them a blow, but Saudi Arabia is off limits.

Roadhawg
08-28-2012, 06:49 AM
Well, perhaps he meant the administrative "branch?" :)

then what's the 3rd branch he was talking about? There are only 3.

PennyQuilts
08-28-2012, 07:04 AM
then what's the 3rd branch he was talking about? There are only 3.

Looked like just a mispeak to me - just counted the senate and the house as separate branches?

Roadhawg
08-28-2012, 07:32 AM
It might have been, but ya never know.

Mel
08-28-2012, 02:27 PM
They will not change over there. Might as well try to teach a pig to whistle.

Achilleslastand
08-28-2012, 03:54 PM
They will not change over there. Might as well try to teach a pig to whistle.

You may have better luck getting a pig to whistle as pretty much the whole area has been in some sort of conflict for hundreds of years.

metro
08-28-2012, 05:01 PM
You may have better luck getting a pig to whistle as pretty much the whole area has been in some sort of conflict for hundreds of years.

Obama said we can win.

ThomPaine
08-28-2012, 07:11 PM
Obama said we can win.

You are truly delusional.

metro
08-29-2012, 10:48 PM
You are truly delusional.

Sorry those were your dear leader Obamas words, not mine.