Afghan Evacuationl; the US Soldier's Perspective

Irwin said:
We didn't kill Bin Laden until 2011 after we had already been at war for nearly 10 years, and he was hiding in Pakistan for some if not most of that time. What the U.S. did was the dumbest thing we could have done, which was invade a sovereign country just to go after one terrorist. We should have just hunted him down and killed him. Or we could have put a bounty on his head of a couple million dollars and then just waited. He would have been dead within a month.
Click to expand...
Bin Laden ought to have been brought to trial, not murdered.
 
cdestroyer said:
as an aside, let me remind you that the government does not have any money... that is OUR money we paid in taxes of one form or another. The government spends it willy nilly cause how the hell else to you get 23 trillion in debt...sheesh wish my bank would let me do that! (you wanna build a bridge over what swamp?)
Click to expand...

Verisure said:
Why is it that so few Americans understand that?
Click to expand...

Devi said:
I don't think that's true at all.
Click to expand...

Verisure said:
I'd like to believe that.
Click to expand...

Of course we know it. We pay taxes to the federal government. That's where they get the money. It's not exactly a big surprise.

But, believe it or don't. It's up to you.
 
Irwin said:
We didn't kill Bin Laden until 2011 after we had already been at war for nearly 10 years, and he was hiding in Pakistan for some if not most of that time. What the U.S. did was the dumbest thing we could have done, which was invade a sovereign country just to go after one terrorist. We should have just hunted him down and killed him. Or we could have put a bounty on his head of a couple million dollars and then just waited. He would have been dead within a month.
Click to expand...
We HAD a bounty on Bin Laden. A mighty big one ... 25 million dollars.
 
Irwin said:
We didn't kill Bin Laden until 2011 after we had already been at war for nearly 10 years, and he was hiding in Pakistan for some if not most of that time. What the U.S. did was the dumbest thing we could have done, which was invade a sovereign country just to go after one terrorist. We should have just hunted him down and killed him. Or we could have put a bounty on his head of a couple million dollars and then just waited. He would have been dead within a month.
Click to expand...
An interesting point of view.
senior chef said:
We HAD a bounty on Bin Laden. A mighty big one ... 25 million dollars.
Click to expand...
Holy mackerel, Amos! It took 10 years for someone to collect the 25 mil bounty? It looks like Mr. bin Laden was a very popular man.
 
Verisure said:
An interesting point of view.

Holy mackerel, Amos! It took 10 years for someone to collect the 25 mil bounty? It looks like Mr. bin Laden was a very popular man.
Click to expand...
The "bounty" was for information that would lead to his capture, and we paid out I think it was 100 million dollars before we got him. I've forgotten the exact number. If we would have offered a few million to anyone who killed him rather than for information, he probably would have been dead within a month. Then again, maybe not. Bin Laden did have his own little military to protect him.
 
Irwin said:
The "bounty" was for information that would lead to his capture, and we paid out I think it was 100 million dollars before we got him. I've forgotten the exact number. If we would have offered a few million to anyone who killed him rather than for information, he probably would have been dead within a month. Then again, maybe not. Bin Laden did have his own little military to protect him.
Click to expand...
It seems clear that he had something much more important than a "little military" to protect him. Needing 10 years and paying out 100 million dollars to get at him sounds like he had a world of friends who supported him despite the millions of dollars offered to rat him out.
 
Verisure said:
I am compelled to remind you that the "accomplishment" you speak of is achieved in the consumption of both your "tax money" and those "military resources". THAT is the full purpose of such wars.

Once again I have to remind you that the U.S. is not policing the world. "Policing" is a smokescreen explanation the government employs to get at your tax money in order to keep the corrupt Military-Industrial Complex machinery in motion. PR-ing the idea that a policing action is needed is a pure concoction with no basis in reality.
Click to expand...


"policing" - what we anti war types always called "playing God"

We've told the pro war crowd that truth often enough but they are too mindless to know it.
 
oldiebutgoody said:
"policing" - what we anti war types always called "playing God"

We've told the pro war crowd that truth often enough but they are too mindless to know it.
Click to expand...
I agree wholeheartedly but I must make one slight addition. There is the "mindless the war crowd" and the war-makers (who are not mindless but determined). Yes, we "anti-war types" have "told the pro war crowd that truth often enough" but we are only one-third of the equation. We've got to keep telling them and one by one we may succeed. (y) :)
 
Verisure said:
I agree wholeheartedly but I must make one slight addition. There is the "mindless the war crowd" and the war-makers (who are not mindless but determined). Yes, we "anti-war types" have "told the pro war crowd that truth often enough" but we are only one-third of the equation. We've got to keep telling them and one by one we may succeed. (y) :)
Click to expand...
Yes, by all means. Don't go to war. Just lie down and accept whatever the Muslim radicals choose to do to you. Your last thought, as your head is separated from your body might be , "Oops, maybe I should have fought".
 
senior chef said:
Yes, by all means. Don't go to war. Just lie down and accept whatever the Muslim radicals choose to do to you. Your last thought, as your head is separated from your body might be , "Oops, maybe I should have fought".
Click to expand...
I haven't decided if I should let my emotions go free and laugh :ROFLMAO: or try to get serious 😐 and lend you some insight. It's possible that you missed the most important part of my post or maybe you just skipped to the part that displeases you and didn't bother reading it in full. Take another look at what I wrote and notice that I very specifically named "war-makers". You know what that means, right? Or is it possible you believe that those "Muslim radicals" (as you call them) dropped out of the sky bent on mayhem with no legitimate grudge? I await your reply with great interest.
 
Verisure said:
I haven't decided if I should let my emotions go free and laugh :ROFLMAO: or try to get serious 😐 and lend you some insight. It's possible that you missed the most important part of my post or maybe you just skipped to the part that displeases you and didn't bother reading it in full. Take another look at what I wrote and notice that I very specifically named "war-makers". You know what that means, right? Or is it possible you believe that those "Muslim radicals" (as you call them) dropped out of the sky bent on mayhem with no legitimate grudge? I await your reply with great interest.
Click to expand...
I don't care what their grudge is. Attack America... get your butt kicked. Period !
 
senior chef said:
I don't care what their grudge is. Attack America... get your butt kicked. Period !
Click to expand...
Now ain't that sumpin'. That there is exactly what the Arabs say every time the Americans attacked them and 9/11 was a taste of what dey's talkin' bout. Do you agree?

goose and gander.jpg
 
senior chef said:
I don't care what their grudge is. Attack America... get your butt kicked. Period !
Click to expand...


The problem is that it is the USA that threw the first punch in that region. Operation Ajax (a blatant act of imperialistic terrorism) in 1953, repeated interventions in the Lebanese civil wars, the support of Israeli expansionism into Lebanon and "settlements" while endorsing the slaughter of Palestinians in Sabra and Shatila, the Bush I and Bush II colonialist wars, Abu Ghraib, Nisour Square Massacre, etc. Hundreds of thousands have been killed because of American imperialistic aggression.

9/11 was a shocking tragedy. Many Americans still have not fully recovered from the losses and shock caused by it (this includes me because I worked at the World Trade Center for 13 years and lost friends in that horror). 3,000 Americans died there. Now multiply that number by 100 and you begin to get a number that represents the amount killed by American aggression. Then calculate the damage to the infrastructure of Middle Eastern lands in terms of lost capital and productivity. By adding all this, then you can see the full extend of the problems caused by the USA and why so many people in that region are so disgusted with this country and its expansionist government.
 

oldiebutgoody said:
The problem is that it is the USA that threw the first punch in that region. Operation Ajax (a blatant act of imperialistic terrorism) in 1953, repeated interventions in the Lebanese civil wars, the support of Israeli expansionism into Lebanon and "settlements" while endorsing the slaughter of Palestinians in Sabra and Shatila, the Bush I and Bush II colonialist wars, Abu Ghraib, Nisour Square Massacre, etc. Hundreds of thousands have been killed because of American imperialistic aggression.

9/11 was a shocking tragedy. Many Americans still have not fully recovered from the losses and shock caused by it (this includes me because I worked at the World Trade Center for 13 years and lost friends in that horror). 3,000 Americans died there. Now multiply that number by 100 and you begin to get a number that represents the amount killed by American aggression. Then calculate the damage to the infrastructure of Middle Eastern lands in terms of lost capital and productivity. By adding all this, then you can see the full extend of the problems caused by the USA and why so many people in that region are so disgusted with this country and its expansionist government.
Click to expand...
Everything you say here is true. My only criticism is to you naming "Ajax". The overthrow of the Democratic Nation of Iran under Mohammed Moseddeq in 1953 was called "TP Ajax".
 
oldiebutgoody said:
just as a point of information Wiki indicates " TPAJAX Project or "Operation Ajax" -- in all honesty, I never heard of the term TPAJAX Project. the other term is how it's been reported on USA tv and media for years
Click to expand...
I've only heard it as "Operation TP Ajax". Apparently, TP was (is?) the CIA prefix for Iran. But hey at least we haven't confused it with Operation Mr. Clean which would be an excellent code name for restarting the US.
 
Verisure said:
I've only heard it as "Operation TP Ajax". Apparently, TP was (is?) the CIA prefix for Iran. But hey at least we haven't confused it with Operation Mr. Clean which would be an excellent code name for restarting the US.
Click to expand...


Ok. Whatever the case, the USA needs to GTH out of there and mind its own business. We can't clean up our streets and highways or keep the criminal cops from spreading drugs and stomping on people's throats. Therefore, we have no godd@mn business telling others how to run their lives.
 
oldiebutgoody said:
Ok. Whatever the case, the USA needs to GTH out of there and mind its own business. We can't clean up our streets and highways or keep the criminal cops from spreading drugs and stomping on people's throats. Therefore, we have no godd@mn business telling others how to run their lives.
Click to expand...
Everything you say about cleaning up the streets and highways and criminal cops is all true. My only criticism is to you naming "GTH out of there ". I only know it as "GTF out of there". And about telling others how to run their lives ... ain't it typical? The one who criticises in the loudest voice is usually guilty of the offence that he denounces.
 
Verisure, you are very wrong. You may "only know it as" GTF out of there, but "GTH out of there" means "get the hell out of there", and is common usage.
 
It was then Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, who ordered the overthrow of Iran's government in 1953 to make the world safe for American oil companies. A year later, he ordered the coup in Guatemala because its government was standing up to United Fruit Co.

The Dulles Airport near Washington, D.C. is named for John Foster Dulles.

Maybe we shouldn't be honoring people who caused so much harm in the world. :unsure:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top