Freedom Tour

[Jack]

Found on the web:

http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/tourback600-new.gif



Jack

[Matt]

I'm sure the vast areas of Afghanistan that are still under the control of
the same violent warlords they were ten years ago would love a few of those
shirts. They could, like, give them to their kids.

The ones that aren't fighting in their Warlord's private armies, I mean.

"Jack" > wrote in message
...
> Found on the web:
>
> http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/tourback600-new.gif
>
>
>
> Jack
>

[Jack]

in article , Matt at
wrote on 2003/10/29 20:09:

> I'm sure the vast areas of Afghanistan that are still under the control of
> the same violent warlords they were ten years ago would love a few of those
> shirts. They could, like, give them to their kids.

Your point is what -- that we haven't remade Afghanistan into a modern
Western industrialized and democratic nation, with liberty and justice for
all, in a matter of months?

Ain't gonna happen on this planet, Matt. We are continuing to root out those
who presented the greatest threat to the US and to the people of
Afghanistan. At some point, inevitably, the Afghan people will be left to
pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Of course, they won't be that
much different ten years from now than they have ever been, probably, but
they will be better off than if we hadn't done what we are doing. And so
will we.

If you really want to remake the world be prepared to reinstitute the draft
and double your taxes. Otherwise just be content with occasionally putting a
finger in the dike, while the fingers of your other hand are crossed behind
your back.



Jack

[tscottme]

Hector Le Castor > wrote in message
...
>
> "Jack" > wrote in message
> ...
> > in article , Matt at

> > wrote on 2003/10/29 20:09:
> >
> > At some point, inevitably, the Afghan people will be left to
> > pull themselves up by their own bootstraps.
>
> They're already left to themselves
>
> > Of course, they won't be that
> > much different ten years from now than they have ever been,
probably, but
> > they will be better off than if we hadn't done what we are doing.
And so
> > will we.
> >
> You're absolutely right. Since the rule of Talibans ended,
drug-related
> agriculture has come back, offering them a unique chance of earning a
lot of
> money.
> They're already better off now, thanks to drug-buying countries, that
is
> Western countries.
>
> There's nothing better than free economy.
>
> --
> Hector le Castor

Maybe you should tell the international NGOs in Afghanistan all about
this. I'll bet if the US pulled every last poppy plant from the ground
you would simply start whining that the prices have risen and the
farmers are now unemployed.

In case you haven't noticed, we don't care what you think about the US.
I didn't think we were so subtle that the point was missed. Don't you
have a cemetery or synagogue to desecrate? If you hurry, you might be
able to beat up the last Jew in France before he's killed.

--

Scott
--------
"If Gen. Boykin had been caught giving talks to NAMBLA instead of church
groups, Democrats would be hailing him as a patriot for exercising his
First Amendment rights." Ann Coulter
http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2003/102203.htm

[Mike Marron]

>"Hector Le Castor" > wrote:
>>"Jack" > wrote:

>>Of course, they won't be that much different ten years from now
>>than they have ever been, probably, but they will be better off
>>than if we hadn't done what we are doing. And so will we.

>You're absolutely right. Since the rule of Talibans ended, drug-related
>agriculture has come back, offering them a unique chance of earning
>a lot of money.
>They're already better off now, thanks to drug-buying countries, that is
>Western countries.

No prob. Under the new Afgham regime, it's OK with us if radical
Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing poppies
(but we'll have to step in and draw the line if they cut off people's
hands simply for stealing bread like they used to under the oppressive
Taliban regime). Either way, it's never been much of a problem since
the vast majority of illegal drugs that the West consumes comes from
South America, not Afghanistan.

>There's nothing better than free economy.

A free economy is just one aspect in the broad spectrum of American
civilization that makes the rest of the world green with envy.
American literature, philosophy, religion, education, politics and
military affairs reinforce the brilliance, the beauty, and the awesome
power of the United States of America.

Viva USA!

[Andreas Maurer]

On Wed, 29 Oct 2003 17:54:46 -0600, Jack > wrote:

>Found on the web:
>
>http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/tourback600-new.gif

They forgot to mention Viet Nam.

Bye
Andreas

[John Mullen]

"Mike Marron" > wrote in message
...
> >"Hector Le Castor" > wrote:
> >>"Jack" > wrote:
>
> >>Of course, they won't be that much different ten years from now
> >>than they have ever been, probably, but they will be better off
> >>than if we hadn't done what we are doing. And so will we.
>
> >You're absolutely right. Since the rule of Talibans ended, drug-related
> >agriculture has come back, offering them a unique chance of earning
> >a lot of money.
> >They're already better off now, thanks to drug-buying countries, that is
> >Western countries.
>
> No prob. Under the new Afgham regime, it's OK with us if radical
> Islamic fundamentalists cut off people's hands for growing poppies
> (but we'll have to step in and draw the line if they cut off people's
> hands simply for stealing bread like they used to under the oppressive
> Taliban regime). Either way, it's never been much of a problem since
> the vast majority of illegal drugs that the West consumes comes from
> South America, not Afghanistan.
>
> >There's nothing better than free economy.
>
> A free economy is just one aspect in the broad spectrum of American
> civilization that makes the rest of the world green with envy.
> American literature, philosophy, religion, education, politics and
> military affairs reinforce the brilliance, the beauty, and the awesome
> power of the United States of America.
>
> Viva USA!

And who said Americans didn't 'do' irony! Brilliant...

John

[Matt]

Jack" > wrote in message
...
> in article , Matt at
> wrote on 2003/10/29 20:09:
>
> > I'm sure the vast areas of Afghanistan that are still under the control
of
> > the same violent warlords they were ten years ago would love a few of
those
> > shirts. They could, like, give them to their kids.
>
> Your point is what -- that we haven't remade Afghanistan into a modern
> Western industrialized and democratic nation, with liberty and justice for
> all, in a matter of months?
>
> Ain't gonna happen on this planet, Matt. We are continuing to root out
those
> who presented the greatest threat to the US and to the people of
> Afghanistan. At some point, inevitably, the Afghan people will be left to
> pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. Of course, they won't be that
> much different ten years from now than they have ever been, probably, but
> they will be better off than if we hadn't done what we are doing. And so
> will we.
>
> If you really want to remake the world be prepared to reinstitute the
draft
> and double your taxes. Otherwise just be content with occasionally putting
a
> finger in the dike, while the fingers of your other hand are crossed
behind
> your back.
>
> Jack

My point was that America has, overall, decreased the quality of life of the
average Afghani. The Red Cross, the UN and MSF have all noted that the
quality of life has dropped outside Kabul and Khandahar since the fall of
the Taliban. Poppy farming is up 200% and, whatever you might decide, 90% of
the Heroin coming into Europe and the US is from this region. Vital
international aid has been slow to appear, with the US so far providing less
than 10% of what they promised during the invasion. *Iran* has given more
money to rebuild Afghanistan than the US.

You got the Taliban out of the areas around Kabul and Khandahar. Great.
People in the city are now free to shave and take photographs. It's a
positive thing. Outside Kabul and Khandahar, the people are free to starve
to death because we bombed the food distribution system to pieces and never
replaced it.

The UK might have been complicit in the 'invasion', but at least we've
headed up the international assistance force that is starting to rebuild
Kabul. The US forces haven't done anything other than sit in their heavily
fortified compound, from which they occasionally shoot up the countryside
and drag off anyone who they think has too nice a truck to be a
non-terrorist to Guantanamo Bay, assuming they don't kill them in custody
first. (And that's not rabid loony liberal lies, two Afghani taxi drivers
died in US custody. The cause of death that the US Army Medical Examiners
wrote on the death certificates was 'Homocide'. There was no investigation
into this, and the medical examiners were quietly transferred out.)

The interim administration in Kabul is fighting desperately to unite the
areas of the country still controlled by the warlords, but they are being
hindered by US giving massive bribes of cash and weapons these groups in
their desperation to find Al Qaeda.

And come on, you still haven't caught Osama Bin Laden.

I don't hate America, I don't think Saddam Hussein or the Taliban should
have been left in power, but the 'Liberation of Afghanistan' is a ****ing
fairy tale.

[Jack]

in article , Andreas Maurer at
wrote on 2003/10/30 10:50:

>> http://www.thoseshirts.com/images/tourback600-new.gif
>
> They forgot to mention Viet Nam.

We wisely let the Communists have the place. Their loss.



Jack

[Andreas Maurer]

On Thu, 30 Oct 2003 14:31:58 -0600, Jack > wrote:


>> They forgot to mention Viet Nam.
>
>We wisely let the Communists have the place. Their loss.

I love your term "wisely".


Bye
Andreas

[Alan Minyard]

>I don't hate America, I don't think Saddam Hussein or the Taliban should
>have been left in power, but the 'Liberation of Afghanistan' is a ****ing
>fairy tale.
>
>
No, it is not. You, however. are a foul mouthed loon who has no clue as
to the situation in Afghanistan.

Al Minyard

[Matt]

So, how are are things in Afghanistan?

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>
> >I don't hate America, I don't think Saddam Hussein or the Taliban should
> >have been left in power, but the 'Liberation of Afghanistan' is a ****ing
> >fairy tale.
> >
> >
> No, it is not. You, however. are a foul mouthed loon who has no clue as
> to the situation in Afghanistan.
>
> Al Minyard

[Alan Minyard]

On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 17:24:44 +0000 (UTC), "Matt" > wrote:

>So, how are are things in Afghanistan?
>
>"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> >I don't hate America, I don't think Saddam Hussein or the Taliban should
>> >have been left in power, but the 'Liberation of Afghanistan' is a ****ing
>> >fairy tale.
>> >
>> >
>> No, it is not. You, however. are a foul mouthed loon who has no clue as
>> to the situation in Afghanistan.
>>
>> Al Minyard
>
Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
it is rude.

Al Minyard

[Matt]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 17:24:44 +0000 (UTC), "Matt" >
wrote:
>
> >So, how are are things in Afghanistan?
> >
> >"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >> >I don't hate America, I don't think Saddam Hussein or the Taliban
should
> >> >have been left in power, but the 'Liberation of Afghanistan' is a
****ing
> >> >fairy tale.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> No, it is not. You, however. are a foul mouthed loon who has no clue as
> >> to the situation in Afghanistan.
> >>
> >> Al Minyard
> >
> Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
> it is rude.
>
> Al Minyard

For everyone who yells at you and says "Don't top post, it's confusing.",
there's another one who says "Don't bottom post, I don't want to scroll past
all the previous yatter."

And thank-you, I won a wager that you'd say "Better than they were under the
Taliban" without offering any kind of supporting evidence or reasoning. How
many times have you been in Afghanistan? Why are *you* so authoritative on
the subject?

Things are better in Kabul and Khandahar. Elsewhere, they are much worse,
because the US and UK haven't lived up to their promises. There are children
starving to death there *right now* because our governments bailed on them.
Personally, I love my country, but I'm ashamed of the actions of it's
government.

Matt

[Hector Le Castor]

Good answer Matt. I totally agree.
But please don't bottom post, I don'want to scroll past all the previous
yatter.
--
Hector

"Matt" > wrote in message
...
> "Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Fri, 31 Oct 2003 17:24:44 +0000 (UTC), "Matt" >
> wrote:
> >
> > >So, how are are things in Afghanistan?
> > Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
> > it is rude.
> >
> > Al Minyard
>
> For everyone who yells at you and says "Don't top post, it's confusing.",
> there's another one who says "Don't bottom post, I don't want to scroll
past
> all the previous yatter."
>
> And thank-you, I won a wager that you'd say "Better than they were under
the
> Taliban" without offering any kind of supporting evidence or reasoning.
How
> many times have you been in Afghanistan? Why are *you* so authoritative on
> the subject?
>
> Things are better in Kabul and Khandahar. Elsewhere, they are much worse,
> because the US and UK haven't lived up to their promises. There are
children
> starving to death there *right now* because our governments bailed on
them.
> Personally, I love my country, but I'm ashamed of the actions of it's
> government.
>
> Matt
>
>

[Alan Minyard]

>> >
>> Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
>> it is rude.
>>
>> Al Minyard
>
>For everyone who yells at you and says "Don't top post, it's confusing.",
>there's another one who says "Don't bottom post, I don't want to scroll past
>all the previous yatter."

Not on this group.
>
>And thank-you, I won a wager that you'd say "Better than they were under the
>Taliban" without offering any kind of supporting evidence or reasoning. How
>many times have you been in Afghanistan? Why are *you* so authoritative on
>the subject?
>
I have been there twice. You have absolutely no clue as to what is happening
in Afghanistan.

>Things are better in Kabul and Khandahar. Elsewhere, they are much worse,
>because the US and UK haven't lived up to their promises. There are children
>starving to death there *right now* because our governments bailed on them.
>Personally, I love my country, but I'm ashamed of the actions of it's
>government.
>
>Matt
>
You are incorrect (as usual). All of Afghanistan is better, much better, off.
There certainly are some problems (poppy production comes to mind)
but they are minor compared to the former Islamic theocracy. Do try to
do a little research.

Al Minyard

[killfile]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>
> >> >
> >> Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
> >> it is rude.
> >>
> >> Al Minyard
> >
> >For everyone who yells at you and says "Don't top post, it's confusing.",
> >there's another one who says "Don't bottom post, I don't want to scroll
past
> >all the previous yatter."
>
> Not on this group.
> >
> >And thank-you, I won a wager that you'd say "Better than they were under
the
> >Taliban" without offering any kind of supporting evidence or reasoning.
How
> >many times have you been in Afghanistan? Why are *you* so authoritative
on
> >the subject?
> >
> I have been there twice. You have absolutely no clue as to what is
happening
> in Afghanistan.
>
> >Things are better in Kabul and Khandahar. Elsewhere, they are much worse,
> >because the US and UK haven't lived up to their promises. There are
children
> >starving to death there *right now* because our governments bailed on
them.
> >Personally, I love my country, but I'm ashamed of the actions of it's
> >government.
> >
> >Matt
> >
> You are incorrect (as usual). All of Afghanistan is better, much better,
off.
> There certainly are some problems (poppy production comes to mind)
> but they are minor compared to the former Islamic theocracy. Do try to
> do a little research.
>
> Al Minyard

I see. The UN, The Red Cross, and Medican Sans Frontiere are all wrong. But
you're right, because you're been there ... despite the fact you don't say
where. Or when. Or in what capacity.

There are *still* areas under the control of the Taliban, and those areas
are growing. Saying 'all of Afghanistan is better off' is complete and
obvious bull****. Half of Afghanistan is still under the control of the same
people as it was in 2001 - the warlords.

Matt

[Alan Minyard]

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 04:47:15 -0000, "killfile" > wrote:

>"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>>
>> >> >
>> >> Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
>> >> it is rude.
>> >>
>> >> Al Minyard
>> >
>> >For everyone who yells at you and says "Don't top post, it's confusing.",
>> >there's another one who says "Don't bottom post, I don't want to scroll
>past
>> >all the previous yatter."
>>
>> Not on this group.
>> >
>> >And thank-you, I won a wager that you'd say "Better than they were under
>the
>> >Taliban" without offering any kind of supporting evidence or reasoning.
>How
>> >many times have you been in Afghanistan? Why are *you* so authoritative
>on
>> >the subject?
>> >
>> I have been there twice. You have absolutely no clue as to what is
>happening
>> in Afghanistan.
>>
>> >Things are better in Kabul and Khandahar. Elsewhere, they are much worse,
>> >because the US and UK haven't lived up to their promises. There are
>children
>> >starving to death there *right now* because our governments bailed on
>them.
>> >Personally, I love my country, but I'm ashamed of the actions of it's
>> >government.
>> >
>> >Matt
>> >
>> You are incorrect (as usual). All of Afghanistan is better, much better,
>off.
>> There certainly are some problems (poppy production comes to mind)
>> but they are minor compared to the former Islamic theocracy. Do try to
>> do a little research.
>>
>> Al Minyard
>
>I see. The UN, The Red Cross, and Medican Sans Frontiere are all wrong. But
>you're right, because you're been there ... despite the fact you don't say
>where. Or when. Or in what capacity.

That is not public information.
>
>There are *still* areas under the control of the Taliban, and those areas
>are growing. Saying 'all of Afghanistan is better off' is complete and
>obvious bull****. Half of Afghanistan is still under the control of the same
>people as it was in 2001 - the warlords.
>
>Matt

In 2001 it was controlled by the Taliban, with the exception of
a small area in the North East corner of the country.

Note that Afghanistan is about to vote on a constitution written entirely
by Afghanis. It would make the country an "Islamic Republic". Hardly
anything imposed by the US.

As for the UN and the international Red Cross, they are well known as anti US
entities that twist the "truth" to meet their preconceived notions. If you take
anything coming from the UN as "truth" you are sadly deceived.

Al Minyard

[killfile]

"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 04:47:15 -0000, "killfile" >
wrote:
>
> >"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
> ...
> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
> >> >> it is rude.
> >> >>
> >> >> Al Minyard
> >> >
> >> >For everyone who yells at you and says "Don't top post, it's
confusing.",
> >> >there's another one who says "Don't bottom post, I don't want to
scroll
> >past
> >> >all the previous yatter."
> >>
> >> Not on this group.
> >> >
> >> >And thank-you, I won a wager that you'd say "Better than they were
under
> >the
> >> >Taliban" without offering any kind of supporting evidence or
reasoning.
> >How
> >> >many times have you been in Afghanistan? Why are *you* so
authoritative
> >on
> >> >the subject?
> >> >
> >> I have been there twice. You have absolutely no clue as to what is
> >happening
> >> in Afghanistan.
> >>
> >> >Things are better in Kabul and Khandahar. Elsewhere, they are much
worse,
> >> >because the US and UK haven't lived up to their promises. There are
> >children
> >> >starving to death there *right now* because our governments bailed on
> >them.
> >> >Personally, I love my country, but I'm ashamed of the actions of it's
> >> >government.
> >> >
> >> >Matt
> >> >
> >> You are incorrect (as usual). All of Afghanistan is better, much
better,
> >off.
> >> There certainly are some problems (poppy production comes to mind)
> >> but they are minor compared to the former Islamic theocracy. Do try to
> >> do a little research.
> >>
> >> Al Minyard
> >
> >I see. The UN, The Red Cross, and Medican Sans Frontiere are all wrong.
But
> >you're right, because you're been there ... despite the fact you don't
say
> >where. Or when. Or in what capacity.
>
> That is not public information.
> >
> >There are *still* areas under the control of the Taliban, and those areas
> >are growing. Saying 'all of Afghanistan is better off' is complete and
> >obvious bull****. Half of Afghanistan is still under the control of the
same
> >people as it was in 2001 - the warlords.
> >
> >Matt
>
> In 2001 it was controlled by the Taliban, with the exception of
> a small area in the North East corner of the country.
>
> Note that Afghanistan is about to vote on a constitution written entirely
> by Afghanis. It would make the country an "Islamic Republic". Hardly
> anything imposed by the US.
>
> As for the UN and the international Red Cross, they are well known as
anti US
> entities that twist the "truth" to meet their preconceived notions. If you
take
> anything coming from the UN as "truth" you are sadly deceived.
>
> Al Minyard

That's the 'Fox News' summery, certainly. Outside of the cities, much of
Afghanistan is still controlled by the same warlords as it was under the
Taliban - they just switched flags after a big application of guns and cash
from the CIA, and all of a sudden we've 'liberated the area'.

Whatever you might think of the UN and Red Cross, they're actually spending
money rebuilding Afghanistan, unlike the US - who haven't spent anything
like as much as they promised they would when the eyes of the world were on
them. As I've said, Iran has given more aid to rebuild Afghanistan than the
US so far.

I think those of us who aren't spitting froth and yelling "THE USA CAN DO NO
WRONG!" can agree that the UN and ICRC are political entities, and their
attitude has a lot to do with being "Pro-Me" than "Anti-US". Russia and
France wanted to protect their financial interests in Iraq, and those two
countries were enough to derail the US and UK in their efforts to invade
Iraq. You get the same reaction from the US when Europe tries to condemn
Israel for human rights abuses.

Still if you want to change that attitude, you might:

1.) Pay your UN dues.
2.) Allow the ICRC access to the prisoners you've taken in Gitmo and
Afghanistan.

And you still haven't explained exactly where, when and why you were in
Afghanistan.

Matt

[Hector Le Castor]

"killfile" > wrote in message
...
>
> That's the 'Fox News' summery, certainly. Outside of the cities, much of
> Afghanistan is still controlled by the same warlords as it was under the
> Taliban - they just switched flags after a big application of guns and
cash
> from the CIA, and all of a sudden we've 'liberated the area'.
That"s absolutely correct and a well-documented *fact*.
Note : I see no problem in paying money to save lives, so long as you don't
fool yourself about this so-called "liberation".

>
> Whatever you might think of the UN and Red Cross, they're actually
spending
> money rebuilding Afghanistan, unlike the US - who haven't spent anything
> like as much as they promised they would when the eyes of the world were
on
> them. As I've said, Iran has given more aid to rebuild Afghanistan than
the
> US so far.
>
> I think those of us who aren't spitting froth and yelling "THE USA CAN DO
NO
> WRONG!" can agree that the UN and ICRC are political entities, and their
> attitude has a lot to do with being "Pro-Me" than "Anti-US". Russia and
> France wanted to protect their financial interests in Iraq, and those two
> countries were enough to derail the US and UK in their efforts to invade
^^^^^^^^
> Iraq.
"Were not enough" you mean ?

The illusions of so many American about their country still surprises me.
This attitude of asserting against all evidence that *they* are right and
that the rest of the world is wrong as long as it disagrees with them, I
thought only the Soviets could do that. I was wrong.

(Note to prevent any stupid comment : I disapproved the behaviour of my own
French government about the war in Irak. But I also wish the Bush
administration didn't tell so much WDM bull****).

--
Hector

[Alan Minyard]

On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 19:05:20 -0000, "killfile" > wrote:

>
>"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
...
>> On Tue, 4 Nov 2003 04:47:15 -0000, "killfile" >
>wrote:
>>
>> >"Alan Minyard" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> >>
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> Much better than they were under the Taliban. And stop top posting,
>> >> >> it is rude.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Al Minyard
>> >> >
>> >> >For everyone who yells at you and says "Don't top post, it's
>confusing.",
>> >> >there's another one who says "Don't bottom post, I don't want to
>scroll
>> >past
>> >> >all the previous yatter."
>> >>
>> >> Not on this group.
>> >> >
>> >> >And thank-you, I won a wager that you'd say "Better than they were
>under
>> >the
>> >> >Taliban" without offering any kind of supporting evidence or
>reasoning.
>> >How
>> >> >many times have you been in Afghanistan? Why are *you* so
>authoritative
>> >on
>> >> >the subject?
>> >> >
>> >> I have been there twice. You have absolutely no clue as to what is
>> >happening
>> >> in Afghanistan.
>> >>
>> >> >Things are better in Kabul and Khandahar. Elsewhere, they are much
>worse,
>> >> >because the US and UK haven't lived up to their promises. There are
>> >children
>> >> >starving to death there *right now* because our governments bailed on
>> >them.
>> >> >Personally, I love my country, but I'm ashamed of the actions of it's
>> >> >government.
>> >> >
>> >> >Matt
>> >> >
>> >> You are incorrect (as usual). All of Afghanistan is better, much
>better,
>> >off.
>> >> There certainly are some problems (poppy production comes to mind)
>> >> but they are minor compared to the former Islamic theocracy. Do try to
>> >> do a little research.
>> >>
>> >> Al Minyard
>> >
>> >I see. The UN, The Red Cross, and Medican Sans Frontiere are all wrong.
>But
>> >you're right, because you're been there ... despite the fact you don't
>say
>> >where. Or when. Or in what capacity.
>>
>> That is not public information.
>> >
>> >There are *still* areas under the control of the Taliban, and those areas
>> >are growing. Saying 'all of Afghanistan is better off' is complete and
>> >obvious bull****. Half of Afghanistan is still under the control of the
>same
>> >people as it was in 2001 - the warlords.
>> >
>> >Matt
>>
>> In 2001 it was controlled by the Taliban, with the exception of
>> a small area in the North East corner of the country.
>>
>> Note that Afghanistan is about to vote on a constitution written entirely
>> by Afghanis. It would make the country an "Islamic Republic". Hardly
>> anything imposed by the US.
>>
>> As for the UN and the international Red Cross, they are well known as
>anti US
>> entities that twist the "truth" to meet their preconceived notions. If you
>take
>> anything coming from the UN as "truth" you are sadly deceived.
>>
>> Al Minyard
>
>That's the 'Fox News' summery, certainly. Outside of the cities, much of
>Afghanistan is still controlled by the same warlords as it was under the
>Taliban - they just switched flags after a big application of guns and cash
>from the CIA, and all of a sudden we've 'liberated the area'.
>
>Whatever you might think of the UN and Red Cross, they're actually spending
>money rebuilding Afghanistan, unlike the US - who haven't spent anything
>like as much as they promised they would when the eyes of the world were on
>them. As I've said, Iran has given more aid to rebuild Afghanistan than the
>US so far.
>
>I think those of us who aren't spitting froth and yelling "THE USA CAN DO NO
>WRONG!" can agree that the UN and ICRC are political entities, and their
>attitude has a lot to do with being "Pro-Me" than "Anti-US". Russia and
>France wanted to protect their financial interests in Iraq, and those two
>countries were enough to derail the US and UK in their efforts to invade
>Iraq. You get the same reaction from the US when Europe tries to condemn
>Israel for human rights abuses.
>
>Still if you want to change that attitude, you might:
>
>1.) Pay your UN dues.
>2.) Allow the ICRC access to the prisoners you've taken in Gitmo and
>Afghanistan.
>
>And you still haven't explained exactly where, when and why you were in
>Afghanistan.
>
>Matt
>
We have paid our dues, and the IRC has routine access to the
detainees at Gitmo.

We went into Afghanistan to eliminate the major training and
recruiting areas of the terrorists, and to eliminate as many
terrorists as possible while destroying their command and
control structure.

It has worked rather well.

Al Minyard

[[email protected]]

Alan Minyard > wrote:

>
>We went into Afghanistan to eliminate the major training and
>recruiting areas of the terrorists, and to eliminate as many
>terrorists as possible while destroying their command and
>control structure.
>
>It has worked rather well.
>
>Al Minyard

I see!...and here all along I thought it had something to do with
genocide...dear me...
--

-Gord.

[John Keeney]

"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
> Alan Minyard > wrote:
>
> >
> >We went into Afghanistan to eliminate the major training and
> >recruiting areas of the terrorists, and to eliminate as many
> >terrorists as possible while destroying their command and
> >control structure.
> >
> >It has worked rather well.
> >
> >Al Minyard
>
> I see!...and here all along I thought it had something to do with
> genocide...dear me...

Afghanistan vs Iraq there, Gord.

[Alan Minyard]

On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:09:11 GMT, "Gord Beaman" ) wrote:

>Alan Minyard > wrote:
>
>>
>>We went into Afghanistan to eliminate the major training and
>>recruiting areas of the terrorists, and to eliminate as many
>>terrorists as possible while destroying their command and
>>control structure.
>>
>>It has worked rather well.
>>
>>Al Minyard
>
>I see!...and here all along I thought it had something to do with
>genocide...dear me...

That was a concern, but a secondary one IIRC.

Al Minyard

[[email protected]]

Alan Minyard > wrote:

>On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:09:11 GMT, "Gord Beaman" ) wrote:
>
>>Alan Minyard > wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>We went into Afghanistan to eliminate the major training and
>>>recruiting areas of the terrorists, and to eliminate as many
>>>terrorists as possible while destroying their command and
>>>control structure.
>>>
>>>It has worked rather well.
>>>
>>>Al Minyard
>>
>>I see!...and here all along I thought it had something to do with
>>genocide...dear me...
>
>That was a concern, but a secondary one IIRC.
>
>Al Minyard

Well, I knew better than to comment on politics...it's (as you
see) not my strong suite
--

-Gord.

[killfile]

"Gord Beaman" > wrote in message
...
> Alan Minyard > wrote:
>
> >On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 22:09:11 GMT, "Gord Beaman" )
wrote:
> >
> >>Alan Minyard > wrote:
> >>
> >>>
> >>>We went into Afghanistan to eliminate the major training and
> >>>recruiting areas of the terrorists, and to eliminate as many
> >>>terrorists as possible while destroying their command and
> >>>control structure.
> >>>
> >>>It has worked rather well.
> >>>
> >>>Al Minyard
> >>
> >>I see!...and here all along I thought it had something to do with
> >>genocide...dear me...
> >
> >That was a concern, but a secondary one IIRC.
> >
> >Al Minyard
>
> Well, I knew better than to comment on politics...it's (as you
> see) not my strong suite
> --
>
> -Gord.

You've no idea if it worked well at all. Al Qaeda might have more members
than it did before the 'war on terror' ... as Donald Rumsfeld recently said
"We've no idea if we're winning this war or not."

And before Al throws out "Well, we've not had any more attacks, so we must
be winning.", that's just rubbish. There was one major attack on the
continental US in an eight years. Just because there hasn't been another one
in two years since means absolutely nothing, and the bombings in Bali and
Indonesia and the growing frequency of attacks in Iraq certainly indicate
that you are, in fact, not winning anything.

Terrorism is about ideology. In this case, the dislike of America and the
West because of it's foreign policies, wrapped up in a cloak of fanatical
Islam. The way to win this war to persaude the people that are supporting
this, in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, that America is not their enemy, and the
only way to do that is for the US to change is foreign policies.

Matt