DescentBB

Leaves a bit to be desired...

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/04/ ... PZ20120417

Afghan schoolgirls poisoned in anti-education attack

(Reuters) - About 150 Afghan schoolgirls were poisoned on Tuesday after drinking contaminated water at a high school in the country's north, officials said, blaming it on conservative radicals opposed to female education.

Since the 2001 toppling of the Taliban, which banned education for women and girls, females have returned to schools, especially in Kabul.

When Obama sounds the final horn of retreat (which he has, repeatedly,) these girls will go back to being used as sex slaves and chattel for the taliban islamists.

How would you propose that Obama should proceed with Afghanistan? No other country in the history of the world has been able to conquer or mold that country into it's own ideals. Do we keep throwing troops at the place like cannon fodder until maybe we change hearts and minds in that country? Probably unlikely. Do we keep throwing money down the Afghanistan drain that we don't have enough of for our own schools? I don't see anything that we could ever do to change such a backward and hostile place for the better.

We could do a General MacArthur plan and nuke the boarder between Pakistan and Afghanistan

And how do you think the world would receive that little effort on our part? WWIII maybe? That fallout doesn't include the radioactive fallout that spreads around the world either. It's a no win situation for us, all on behalf of a people that would just as soon stab us in the back for our efforts.

It's not 'backward' TC, it's evil.

My god, I'm actually in agreement with woodchip. Don't know if he's being serious or not, but I say we liquify that ★■◆●ing country.

the region is rife with corruption and tribal warfare.
the country is mostly made of civilians, not tribal leaders.
civilians who would like the situation changed, but must still get by in the meantime, and their current leaders are generally the only available option, so they begrudgingly make do.
Quite often the Taliban itself is the only existing lawful group in some regions. Their crazy-justice is begrudgingly preferred to a lawless vacuum where those kids may have been killed by raiders. The area (i'm not talking about the whole country) is that bad, that the Taliban is actually preferred over lawlessness.

killing the civilians would remove the problem yeah.
yeah lets do that, lets kill those innocent civilians.
this is a wonderful idea.
wow i can't believe this has never been thought of before.
we'll need a name for it. hmmm, here's a new word just off the top of my head, how does it sound:
GENOCIDE.

ps: what the ★■◆●ing ★■◆● is wrong with you people?

roid wrote:ps: what the ★■◆●ing ★■◆● is wrong with you people?

Do you have all day?

MAYBE INSTEAD OF TALKING
ABOUT NUKING INNOCENT CIVILIANS
WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT CRABS
OR SOMETHING ELSE WHICH IS NICE

"Won't need this anymore"

ThunderBunny wrote:It's not 'backward' TC, it's evil.

It's not all "evil", or there wouldn't be all those women that wanted help. But clearing that country of Islamic insurgents would either take years of expensive surgical war, or taking the lazy way out, nuking the whole place, including Pakistan, and neither option is very palatable to Americans right now, nor is it "humane". And quelling insurgency in a country that is rife with tribal corruption is like trying to smash and clean up Jello. Hit one spot and it sprays into another area that needs cleaning out. That doesn't include the civilian collateral death that will certainly occur and the inevitable war crimes that go along with a fatigued and overused Army tired of killing. Our military is burning out.

And doing stuff like this doesn't help win hearts and minds on either side in any war.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_162- ... ghanistan/

http://www.usatoday.com/news/military/s ... 54392648/1

The most damaging part of the photos is the U.S. soldiers and what appears to be a translator, holding up the severed legs of suicide bombers, and laughing. In another photo, a handsome young soldier is grinning like a boy as a fellow soldier puts a severed hand on his shoulder. Everyone is laughing.

Well, the stupid sonofagun did blow his self up Lol. I guess if you have never been in fear of your life or continuously confronted with atrocity you won't get the humor

flip wrote:

The most damaging part of the photos is the U.S. soldiers and what appears to be a translator, holding up the severed legs of suicide bombers, and laughing. In another photo, a handsome young soldier is grinning like a boy as a fellow soldier puts a severed hand on his shoulder. Everyone is laughing.

Well, the stupid sonofagun did blow his self up Lol. I guess if you have never been in fear of your life or continuously confronted with atrocity you won't get the humor

Did you see any Afghani's navel gazing about the vids of AQ/Taliban beheading prisoners? Me thinks this pussy ass wring of hands over these pics only makes us appear weak and will only build the moral of the enemy.

Agreed 100%.

So because other people behave inhumanely, then it's fine if we do too? Silly me, I thought phrases like "moral high ground" meant something.

Honestly, at this point, I think what's best is to do what we can over the next year or so of full deployment, then just cut our losses and get our guys out of there. As history can attest, there's no magic wand out there that can pacify that region.

Well, the point I was making that you can't at one minute expect someone to be a hard-charging hell-raiser and then the very next moment be all compassionate and loving and kind. It doesn't work that way. Plus you are entrusting your life to someone in the hopes they won't run if someone's shooting at you. So, people become hardcore and mean as hell. What do you expect? I have also considered the same thing TC touched on. Over in the war zone, killing people is encouraged. A small percentage (or more) end up getting some kind of thrill out of it and can't make the difference anymore. They think it was ok to kill then, so why not now. They become de-sensitized to it and start taking pictures with severed limbs as a way to cope. I think very few people come through those things unscathed.

Let's see, "An eye for an eye. A tooth for a tooth". Easy to perpetuate war because we can rationalize the evil the other side does and easily justify the need to reciprocate in kind. It makes us feel good for a short time, but it doesn't solve the problem that started the fight in the first place. It only perpetuates the fight. Is that what everyone wants, constant bloodshed because we think the other side deserves it?

It's not what I want but somebody dang sure does.

Someone has to be the grownup, so who will it be?

No, someone has to be the victor. Just the way it is, it's that hard-wiring your always talking about .
People will always be greedy, selfish and harsh. Not most people, just that 10% or so that want to be in charge and are. The people like Bush Sr and on down the line who have their own vision of the world and are in a position to see it through.