- 2,970
Is it?
Is Bombing Afghanistan a Bad Idea?
- Thread starter TAFJonathan
- 167 comments
- 5,149 views
- 2,970
I agree. Some people feel it's "inhumane". 
- 268
Okay, this might not be the most popular viewpoint here, but hear me out okay.
I'm not sure that the bombing was such the smartest move and for a number of reasons.
First, your country (and mine) are taking it upon themselves to bomb another sovereign state. Okay, we may be acting in a good cause, but this is risky territory. It is always best to act with the will and authority of the international community behind you - specifically the UN.
Second, there is always collateral damage in this sort of campaign and every time the world sees a bombed Red Cross Warehouse, family home or worse; A MOSQUE! then we lose some of our support and it is absolutely VITAL that we maintain the moral high ground in this one.
We are in the right - you (and us by association) have been brutally attacked and have the right both to defend ourselves and to seek justice, but we have to think long term and think about the manner in which we do it. By bombing Afghanistan we may have made even more enenies than when we started. We have to consider the consequences of what we're doing. Large parts of the Muslim community around the world is now being drawn to the conclusion that 'the West' is fighting Islam. They say - "you are bombing the people of Afghanistan, they are not terrorists". Now we all know the rightness of our cause, but if our methods attract too much controversy the we risk losing the long-term support that is vital to our success.
Having said all that, I am quite happy for us to bomb the **** out of terrorist camps and probably front line Taleban units. I also wholeheartedly support the use of special forces to seek and destroy and to conduct raids like the one last week. I can assure you that the SAS are in those hills and you cannot ask for a finer collection of soldiers to be on your side - I promise you that. Here's hoping that they, SEALS and all those hard mothers catch this Bin Laden ****** and make sure he goes on trial. Capital punishment is preferred.
I'm not sure that the bombing was such the smartest move and for a number of reasons.
First, your country (and mine) are taking it upon themselves to bomb another sovereign state. Okay, we may be acting in a good cause, but this is risky territory. It is always best to act with the will and authority of the international community behind you - specifically the UN.
Second, there is always collateral damage in this sort of campaign and every time the world sees a bombed Red Cross Warehouse, family home or worse; A MOSQUE! then we lose some of our support and it is absolutely VITAL that we maintain the moral high ground in this one.
We are in the right - you (and us by association) have been brutally attacked and have the right both to defend ourselves and to seek justice, but we have to think long term and think about the manner in which we do it. By bombing Afghanistan we may have made even more enenies than when we started. We have to consider the consequences of what we're doing. Large parts of the Muslim community around the world is now being drawn to the conclusion that 'the West' is fighting Islam. They say - "you are bombing the people of Afghanistan, they are not terrorists". Now we all know the rightness of our cause, but if our methods attract too much controversy the we risk losing the long-term support that is vital to our success.
Having said all that, I am quite happy for us to bomb the **** out of terrorist camps and probably front line Taleban units. I also wholeheartedly support the use of special forces to seek and destroy and to conduct raids like the one last week. I can assure you that the SAS are in those hills and you cannot ask for a finer collection of soldiers to be on your side - I promise you that. Here's hoping that they, SEALS and all those hard mothers catch this Bin Laden ****** and make sure he goes on trial. Capital punishment is preferred.
Originally posted by BMW///M3
what tree hugging environmentalist who dosent believe in justice put no!!!
What are you talking about? There are 6 no's. Did you mean yes? And what does justice have to do with it? Or tree hugging, or environmentalism? And please don't forget the 1st Amendment.
Rick
- 10,687
- Everywhere
I have mixed emotions about the whole 'retaliation'.
I have friends that say we're wasting money, our tax dollars. Well damn, the millitary shoots at dirt everyday. At least now they're killing someone that wants to kill us! I prefer that any day. I think there are better ways though. I don't want to get into that.
Blah, I'm in a bad mood, blow them all to crap ... and put a golf course in the crater we leave.
Amen,
~LoudMusic
I have friends that say we're wasting money, our tax dollars. Well damn, the millitary shoots at dirt everyday. At least now they're killing someone that wants to kill us! I prefer that any day. I think there are better ways though. I don't want to get into that.
Blah, I'm in a bad mood, blow them all to crap ... and put a golf course in the crater we leave.
Amen,
~LoudMusic
Let's look at it like this:
Bombing good because:
- leadership probably most oppressive on planet, particularly for women (see www.rawa.org)
- leadership appears to be entwined with Al-Qaeda, who appear to have been involved in the 11/9 attacks
Bombing bad because:
- leadership not popularly elected, and as always is the case the civilian population, who had nothing to do with the 11/9 attack is the worst affected. Blaming the Afghan people for the 11/9 attack would be like me blaming you for the Hiroshima attack
- Afghanistan is not Al Qaeda. The bombing does not appear to be getting the US closer to breaking Al Qaeda or finding Bin Laden (or his more dangerous offsiders)
- the bombing is severely pissing off a significant part of the Muslim world, and causing severe issues in Pakistan, who as you may recall is a nuclear power
Sorry kids - the bombing is a bad idea. Not to do with moral issues, and not to be confused with the whole concept of a military campaign.
It's bad because it's not working - and it's causing a lot of big picture harm.
I know it's going to be horrible, and a lot of people are going to die, but it's time to send in ground troops. The bombing has partially worked because it's made it a lot safer for ground forces, but it's past its usefulness - it's not working anymore. The Taliban aren't going anywhere - if they were going to collapse during a bombing campaign they'd have done it by now.
And to BMW//M3 - in the context of this discussion your comment is actually hypocritical - I understand and appreciate your anger, but remember what you're defending here.
And frankly, the US doesn't need any more pictures of burnt Red Cross supplies or grieving Afghani relatives...
Bombing good because:
- leadership probably most oppressive on planet, particularly for women (see www.rawa.org)
- leadership appears to be entwined with Al-Qaeda, who appear to have been involved in the 11/9 attacks
Bombing bad because:
- leadership not popularly elected, and as always is the case the civilian population, who had nothing to do with the 11/9 attack is the worst affected. Blaming the Afghan people for the 11/9 attack would be like me blaming you for the Hiroshima attack
- Afghanistan is not Al Qaeda. The bombing does not appear to be getting the US closer to breaking Al Qaeda or finding Bin Laden (or his more dangerous offsiders)
- the bombing is severely pissing off a significant part of the Muslim world, and causing severe issues in Pakistan, who as you may recall is a nuclear power
Sorry kids - the bombing is a bad idea. Not to do with moral issues, and not to be confused with the whole concept of a military campaign.
It's bad because it's not working - and it's causing a lot of big picture harm.
I know it's going to be horrible, and a lot of people are going to die, but it's time to send in ground troops. The bombing has partially worked because it's made it a lot safer for ground forces, but it's past its usefulness - it's not working anymore. The Taliban aren't going anywhere - if they were going to collapse during a bombing campaign they'd have done it by now.
And to BMW//M3 - in the context of this discussion your comment is actually hypocritical - I understand and appreciate your anger, but remember what you're defending here.
And frankly, the US doesn't need any more pictures of burnt Red Cross supplies or grieving Afghani relatives...
- 268
If you know anything about infantry warfare you will know that this is not an easy 'send em in to sort the job' type deal. Its going to be winter there soon and that it some cold sh**. We're talking freezing cold - need to survive style weather. That can kill your men as easily as the Taliban. Then there's the mountains. You know what mountains mean? That means exposure, no cover, wide open spaces with high ground all around - killing zones you don't want to be in. It means caves all over the place which the locals know and you don't. Then there's the Taleban, formerly moujahadeen fighters - a guerilla army with local knowledge and no fear of death. These guys fought off the Russians who had tanks, helicopters, special forces and air superiority of their own. In short it means a whole bunch of trouble for anyone trying to invade. Remember Vietnam? Dangerous terrain, guerilla opposition, hostile locals....ringing any bells here chaps?
- 268
Not the sort of thing you want to get quoted on.
- 12,993
- USA! USA!
I don't think "they" killed 4000 people. Homegrown jackasses in the US did it. I see no reason to fight this 'fake war' in Afghanistan.
- 796
At a meeting for peace negotiations, George Bush and Sadam Husein were in Baghdad and, when George sat down in the conference room, he noticed three buttons on the arm of his chair. After a few minutes, Saddam pushed the first button, a boxing glove sprang up and jacked George square in the jaw. In the spirit of peace, George decided to ignore this and continued talking until Saddam pushed the second button and a wooden bat swung out, tagging George in the chin. Saddam started laughing but again George ingnored this and continued. A minute later George saw Saddam press the third button and he jumped into the air. But a big boot sprand out and hit him in the nuts. George decided he'd had enough of this and went home.
Three weeks later, the peace talks were re-scheduled in Washington and as Saddam sat down in George's conference room, he noticed George had three buttons on the arm of his chair. A little while after they started talking, George pushed the first button and nothing happened, George started giggling. They continued to talk and George pressed the second button, Saddam moved but again nothing happened. Saddam was getting a little jumpy and George was laughing even harder. A few minutes later George pressed the third button and started pissing himself but like the others nothing happened. Saddam had enough of this, stood up and said, "That is it! I am returning to Baghdad!" to which George replied, "What Baghdad?"
Three weeks later, the peace talks were re-scheduled in Washington and as Saddam sat down in George's conference room, he noticed George had three buttons on the arm of his chair. A little while after they started talking, George pushed the first button and nothing happened, George started giggling. They continued to talk and George pressed the second button, Saddam moved but again nothing happened. Saddam was getting a little jumpy and George was laughing even harder. A few minutes later George pressed the third button and started pissing himself but like the others nothing happened. Saddam had enough of this, stood up and said, "That is it! I am returning to Baghdad!" to which George replied, "What Baghdad?"
- 543
no matter what you could possibly think, say, or believe, bombing was necessary. What would it say if we did/do not bomb the "homeland" of these terrorists? terrorisms alright. hey guys come hi jack our planes! c'mon. wow innocent people might get hurt. our innocents was hurt by their brutality, i have no sympathy. we're making a martyr out of the middle east, and i'm all for it.
on a slightly personal note, the middle east has been a place torn by fued plague etc. etc. "they" are all a bunch of people growing up learning to hate someone else. it's in my belief, the world would be a better place, if g w b actually did press those buttons.
i don't mean to offend anyone, but if i did, atleast consider my point. a group of people that are born and grow up in a fighting hating environment will inevitably turn into fighting and hating grown ups. so the statement, mid eastern children are innocent, is actually incorrect. therefore, by saying anyone in the middle east is innocent, that would be a falsehood. americans do hold grudges, but we are not in some 2000 year old war alright. we "were" innocent in that sense.
the world is a hating place, it's human nature to posses the philosophy of, "an eye for an eye." even though this way of life is suppresive, it's the only language everyone understands. they bombed us, we're bombing them. i hope the hell rain keeps going until we get every organization member behing 911. for that matter, i hope it keeps falling until terror is not known by any group of people. let's make this the turning point in society.
maybe the bombs are insignificant in finding bin lady, but they make a statement being there. bombing strait for 5 6 month, now that 's power. if the bombs are doing anything, they are helping build the aurora of military superiority of the united states. which i am all for
on a slightly personal note, the middle east has been a place torn by fued plague etc. etc. "they" are all a bunch of people growing up learning to hate someone else. it's in my belief, the world would be a better place, if g w b actually did press those buttons.
i don't mean to offend anyone, but if i did, atleast consider my point. a group of people that are born and grow up in a fighting hating environment will inevitably turn into fighting and hating grown ups. so the statement, mid eastern children are innocent, is actually incorrect. therefore, by saying anyone in the middle east is innocent, that would be a falsehood. americans do hold grudges, but we are not in some 2000 year old war alright. we "were" innocent in that sense.
the world is a hating place, it's human nature to posses the philosophy of, "an eye for an eye." even though this way of life is suppresive, it's the only language everyone understands. they bombed us, we're bombing them. i hope the hell rain keeps going until we get every organization member behing 911. for that matter, i hope it keeps falling until terror is not known by any group of people. let's make this the turning point in society.
maybe the bombs are insignificant in finding bin lady, but they make a statement being there. bombing strait for 5 6 month, now that 's power. if the bombs are doing anything, they are helping build the aurora of military superiority of the united states. which i am all for
- 543
There will always be a couple of misfortunate incidents, do you think that these incidents truly merit the message america would be sending by not bombing?!?
- 543
Well then for arguments sake, why wasn't it necessary??
The best discription of the bombing campaign I've heard is "Ill conceived, hasty and vengeful".
More innocent civilian deaths in Afghanistan from our bombing than died in the Trade Towers.
Al-quaida in Afghanistan is in hiding and waiting for the US to get tired and leave.
Osama hasn't been captured.
No convictions from the hundreds of captives in Guantanimo. Apparently not much useful information either.
Sharon has taken advantage of the situation to expand his program of ethnic cleansing of Palistinians from the West Bank.
Just "for arguments sake" of course. :-)
Rick
- 543
of course you want to include that the "the best description" is of course in your opinion.
that's all and great, but it seemed to dodge the point of the question. Is bombing Afganistan a Bad Idea? You've take the pro side, i the con. Everything you just said was aftermath of the bombings, nothing about why it wasn't a good idea.
i won't try and stop you from saying that the bombings were vengeful, because they were, however I obviously don't believe they were ill concieved.
who knows, I don't really have a rebutle for you, save one question......If not bombing, then what? Allow the trade centers to be destroyed, end of story, succumb to the power in terrorism?
what's is innocents? isn't it the innocent that prove to be the most harmful?
that's all and great, but it seemed to dodge the point of the question. Is bombing Afganistan a Bad Idea? You've take the pro side, i the con. Everything you just said was aftermath of the bombings, nothing about why it wasn't a good idea.
i won't try and stop you from saying that the bombings were vengeful, because they were, however I obviously don't believe they were ill concieved.
who knows, I don't really have a rebutle for you, save one question......If not bombing, then what? Allow the trade centers to be destroyed, end of story, succumb to the power in terrorism?
what's is innocents? isn't it the innocent that prove to be the most harmful?
Similar threads
