Obama to send 30,000 more troops to Afghanistan

[Hallen]

I reposted the facts and rebutted your new argument.

Did you even bother reading those?

If you did, you would know that your argument is without merit and OBL, in his own words and on the record has stated 2x in the 1990's that he did not work with the US or receive any assistance from them.

Yes, I'm over 25 - what does that have to do with the facts?

Nothing. You don't have any facts on your side, nor have you posted any.

Muddying the waters with the age argument and other arguments doesn't change the facts.

You're still in denial.

Even the Wikipedia link you posted argues against your point.

You are either being purposely obtuse or are ignorant beyond words.

Or both.

lol, yeah, well, it's impossible to actually argue any one topic with Lee, or with most liberals, unfortunately. He either changes the topic of the argument to something he thinks they can win (or on to disparaging Bush), or he does an ad hominem attack (or he does both). It's the only way for him to argue since he doesn't have facts or relevance on his side.

[E30 Cabrio]

Have you Googled what I asked you to? No need to retype the exact same words as in your previous post. buddy. All I read is bold text that you claim is the ultimate truth. I am curious as to how old you are. You don't seem to have much knowledge of your own country's history and military implication over the last decades.

Do you even remember Oliver North and the sale of US weapons to an ennemy country: Iran? With profits being used to support anti-communist guerilla in South America. Do you remember Ortega, Noriega? CIA made so many bad choices. Google is your friend.

I reposted the facts and rebutted your new argument.

Did you even bother reading those?

If you did, you would know that your argument is without merit and OBL, in his own words and on the record has stated 2x in the 1990's that he did not work with the US or receive any assistance from them.

Yes, I'm over 25 - what does that have to do with the facts?

Nothing. You don't have any facts on your side, nor have you posted any.

Muddying the waters with the age argument and other arguments doesn't change the facts.

You're still in denial.

Even the Wikipedia link you posted argues against your point.

You are either being purposely obtuse or are ignorant beyond words.

Or both.

[Massive Lee]

Have you Googled what I asked you to? No need to retype the exact same words as in your previous post. buddy. All I read is bold text that you claim is the ultimate truth. I am curious as to how old you are. You don't seem to have much knowledge of your own country's history and military implication over the last decades.

Do you even remember Oliver North and the sale of US weapons to an ennemy country: Iran? With profits being used to support anti-communist guerilla in South America. Do you remember Ortega, Noriega? CIA made so many bad choices. Google is your friend.

[E30 Cabrio]

e30 cabrio. Either you have short term memory, or are under 25 years old. This is not fresh news that CIA funded and helped the Afghan Mudjahidins against the Russian invaders and against the Marxist Afghan governement. And who was leading the Afghan Mudjahidins? Yup. Our good friend Bin Ladin. CIA has its hands dirty for having fed an organization that later fought back against the US.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

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

Just Google "Bin Ladin CIA" to collect all info regarding his close ties with CIA and how CIA helped fund and nurture "terrorist" Muslim movements. I don't have to make your home works.

What part of this don't you understand?

"Bin Laden himself has repeatedly denied that he received any American support. “Personally neither I nor my brothers saw any evidence of American help,” bin Laden told British journalist Robert Fisk (search) in 1993.

In 1996, Mr. Fisk interviewed bin Laden again. The arch-terrorist was equally adamant: “We were never, at any time, friends of the Americans. We knew that the Americans supported the Jews in Palestine and that they are our enemies.”

Let's see, who to believe?

Bin Laden in his own words, or some left-wing, agenda-driven web site spewing speculation?Bin Laden stated at least twice during the 1990's that he never received assistance from the US, let alone worked for them.

And if you know anything about OBL, you would know that he despises the US and would never accept any assistance from them, let alone work for them or the CIA

Conclusion: You're still an idiot as you have proof right in front of you yet you're still in denial.

More:

Those who contend that bin Laden received U.S. funds usually make the following argument: America financed the Afghan rebels, bin Laden was among the rebels, therefore, in one way or another, America gave money to bin Laden.

This ignores a key fact: There were two entirely separate rebellions against the Soviets, united only by a common communist enemy. One was financed by Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states and was composed of Islamic extremists who migrated from across the Muslim world. They called themselves “Arab Afghans (search).” Bin Laden was among them. When the Saudis agreed to match U.S. contributions dollar-for-dollar, the sheikhs insisted that their funds go exclusively to the “Arab Afghans,” possibly including bin Laden. Meanwhile, U.S. funds went exclusively to the other rebellion, which was composed of native Afghans. Mr. Bearden told me: “I challenge anyone to give any proof that we gave one dollar to any Arab Afghans, let alone bin Laden.”

Even if the CIA wanted to pay “Arab Afghans” -- which agency officials insist they did not -- bin Laden would be a far from obvious choice. Bin Laden himself rarely left the safety of Pakistan’s northwestern cities and commanded few troops of his own. At the time, bin Laden was the Arab Afghan’s quartermaster, providing food and other supplies.

If a CIA officer tried to give money to bin Laden, he probably would not have lived through the experience. The arch-terrorist was known for his violent anti-Americanism. Dana Rohrabacher, now a Republican congressman from California, told me about a trip he took with the mujahideen (search) in 1987. On that trek, his guide told him not to speak English for the next few hours because they were passing by bin Laden’s camp. “If he hears an American, he will kill you.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98115,00.html

And...

BERGEN: This is one of those (myths) where you cannot put it out of its misery.

The story about bin Laden and the CIA -- that the CIA funded bin Laden or trained bin Laden -- is simply a folk myth. There's no evidence of this. In fact, there are very few things that bin Laden, Ayman al-Zawahiri and the U.S. government agree on. They all agree that they didn't have a relationship in the 1980s. And they wouldn't have needed to. Bin Laden had his own money, he was anti-American and he was operating secretly and independently.

The real story here is the CIA didn't really have a clue about who this guy was until 1996 when they set up a unit to really start tracking him.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/asiapc...ers/index.html

[Massive Lee]

e30 cabrio. Either you have short term memory, or are under 25 years old. This is not fresh news that CIA funded and helped the Afghan Mudjahidins against the Russian invaders and against the Marxist Afghan governement. And who was leading the Afghan Mudjahidins? Yup. Our good friend Bin Ladin. CIA has its hands dirty for having fed an organization that later fought back against the US.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

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

Just Google "Bin Ladin CIA" to collect all info regarding his close ties with CIA and how CIA helped fund and nurture "terrorist" Muslim movements. I don't have to make your home works.

[E30 Cabrio]

The big embarassement with The Iraqis gasing the Kurds was that those chemical weapons, as well as many others, were supposed to be used against the Iranians. Iraqis and Iranians have been at war for a long time. Which is why the US supported Iraq both strategically, and by giving tem all sorts of "goodies". Iran was another banana republic supported by the US until they got outed around 1980 by Ayatollah Khomeni and its Muslim revolution. Yup. Hussein was working for the US, just as Bin Ladin was. Bin Ladin was used against the Russians until it backfired. Remember Noriega in Panama? Another CIA op agent (he was a cocaine supplier to the CIA, which used the money to give weapons and support anti-communist guerilla in South America.) It turned bad when congress learned about all that shit of the US government being a pusher.

But hey, all this must be fresh news if you guys are 25 years old.

Utter BS

Bin Laden despised the US and would never accept a penny from us, let alone support or weapons.

I'm sure you have a legit source to back up your claim, right?

"Bin Laden himself has repeatedly denied that he received any American support. “Personally neither I nor my brothers saw any evidence of American help,” bin Laden told British journalist Robert Fisk (search) in 1993. In 1996, Mr. Fisk interviewed bin Laden again. The arch-terrorist was equally adamant: “We were never, at any time, friends of the Americans. We knew that the Americans supported the Jews in Palestine and that they are our enemies.”

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,98115,00.html

"Personally neither I nor my brothers saw evidence of American help."

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article7203.htm

And it was France (F1 jet fighters, Exocet missiles, defense guidance system technology) , Russia (MIG 29 jet fighters, Scud missiles, Kalashnikovs) and China (F7 jet fighters, Silkworm missiles) in addition to Tanks, and other hardware and those countries continually provided parts to keep those jets flying even after the UN sanctions were imposed and they armed Iraq.

Conclusion: You're a dumbass.

[Massive Lee]

The big embarassement with The Iraqis gasing the Kurds was that those chemical weapons, as well as many others, were supposed to be used against the Iranians. Iraqis and Iranians have been at war for a long time. Which is why the US supported Iraq both strategically, and by giving tem all sorts of "goodies". Iran was another banana republic supported by the US until they got outed around 1980 by Ayatollah Khomeni and its Muslim revolution. Yup. Hussein was working for the US, just as Bin Ladin was. Bin Ladin was used against the Russians until it backfired. Remember Noriega in Panama? Another CIA op agent (he was a cocaine supplier to the CIA, which used the money to give weapons and support anti-communist guerilla in South America.) It turned bad when congress learned about all that shit of the US government being a pusher.

But hey, all this must be fresh news if you guys are 25 years old.

[mrsleeve]

My fucking word you are stupid. You know all that gas he used on his own people UHHHHHHH who the fuck do you think gave it to him ( thats a munition too you know) gas a bio weapons are also in the WMD list and were mentioned as well.

Um he had nuke fuel enrichment facilities that UN inspectors were in regularly on PRE ANNOUNCED visits. So that makes it easy to take shit out in the desert and get it buried real quick before the next inspection.

Jesus christ, you really only take half the fact into consideration on anything dont you. Or is just because where ever you get your info on history only gives you the smallest portion to support the view point they want to get across?????

Bush referred to nukes as WMD's. We gave weapons (guns, munitions) to Iraq but not WMD's. Don't be stupid.

[sonnyqm3]

Heroine/Opium same shit i guess. As for the Afghan President Karzai and his brother. LMAO they are the biggest crooks,thieves and liars. Afghanistan is so corrupt now that its almost worst that Pakistan. My dad told stories when Daud Khan was president in the early seventies,the govt officials didnt have the balls to even to even accept a penny for bribe. My point is that all politicians are fuckin crooks. We will never know the truth and that sucks. I just feel sorry for the U.S soldiers and innocent people who die in Afghanistan.

[sonnyqm3]

ha ha! actually, my friend, i am criticizing the fact that one of Obama'a main points was to lessen troops during the election, and now he is doing the opposite.

The fact that troops are being increased is not the criticizing point, but the fact that he said one thing and is doing another.

Now with a republican president, at least he would have said in his campaign that he would increase troops, and then he would have went ahead and did it.

see my point?

to condense it even further: Obama = hypocritical.

I love how some people think. I am a proud U.S citizen from Afghanistan and Afghans know why U.S is really there. Read history and you will know why U.S is there. I personally hate Bin Laden and that Taliban bullshit. I believe there is too much natural resources there and thats why they are there. Remember war makes money!!! I just wonder how heroine gets to U.S and Europe when the farmer in Afghanistan doesn't even have a tracktor for his farm. Whats even funnier, the farmer sell a kilo of heroine for $200 usd and it sells for like $30,000 usd in U.S Hmmm. Pablo Escobar had planes but what about the farmer.;)

[E30 Cabrio]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...cle6936645.ece

It all started back in December 2001 when the US troups were surrounding Ben Ladin (that was the goal of the invasion, right?) and ready to "harvest" him. Easy job. Generals in Afghanistan requested Washington for a little extra help to "close the deal" and capture Ben Ladin. Bush and Rumfeld refused the extra military support to be sent to Afghanistan, Ben Ladin took a hike, and for 8 years American soldiers kept on dying... I guess it was a lesson learned as the current administration wants to end things shortly by sending extra troups to train the "aboriginal" army and then leave in 2011... Afghanistan was a 3 month mission that will have lasted 10 years.

Since you like playing Monday Morning QB so much, tell me what you think of Clinton turning down Sudan's offer to turn OBL to the US not once, not twice, but three times during the late 1990's?

[E30 Cabrio]

Bush referred to nukes as WMD's. We gave weapons (guns, munitions) to Iraq but not WMD's. Don't be stupid.

BS

Show me proof of the US providing Iraq with guns and munitions.

And no wingnut web sites either.

[MFreak89]

God bless our Troops with the strength and will to fight. Bless their families and give them strength to endure anything in their path.

[Hallen]

now Obama is shifting resources back to Afghanistan and the far right is getting all pissed why exactly?

If you want the answer, go back an read my post in this thread.

I'm at a loss here.
Bush Invaded Afghanistan after they wouldn't turn over Bin Laden, didn't catch him, we have pretty much been there since. Bush took resources away from there to invade a country that didn't attack us or have any WMDs.

Your interpretation of the facts are interesting, if somewhat askew.

The reasons for going into Afghanistan were mainly because it was where OBL was at and where a bunch of terrorist training facilities were, and it was, and still is, a huge financial provider for terrorists through the opium trade. It's just like a liberal to figure you can go into something, make a huge mess, and then leave before you clean it up. The second we moved troops into Afghanistan, and for that matter Iraq, we had an obligation to try and clean things up. It's the only moral thing to do. Not to mention, if we leave now, the Taliban will just roll back in and start systematically killing off any local who supported us in any way, kill off all the schools, and destroy any of the progress that has been made there. We leave, and we doom 10's of thousands of people who are starting to trust us, to death. I suppose that's what you want?

Same goes for Iraq. Also Saddam DID have WMD's. What do you think he used to kill off thousands of Kurds? He had other projects going on that front too. I think he just ran out of money and shut them down. Anyway, that was turned into the main reason we went into Iraq by the media and Democrats, but that wasn't the main reason. The main reason was that Saddam did provide funding to terrorists and he was a maniacle dictator that was causing a ton of instability. Plus, our "allies", the Saudis wanted him gone so they could control the oil exports in the region more easily.

Things are more complicated than most people want to beleive they are. There are no easy answers.

[delfin]

It's cool guys I got this.