Support NeoGAF

[tHoMNZ]

The US government has been involved in military conflicts without a formal declaration of war since the Barbary Wars started in 1800. The US has only formally declared war five times, with the most recent being WW2.



This is amazing... So a bunch of militants were just minding their own business in Pakistan with no ill will towards the US, and then from out of nowhere the US attacked Afghanistan. When you put it like that yeah of course they're angry....



Yeah hijacking planes and flying them into buildings and detonating explosives strapped to your chest are far braver. Bin Laden personally did both those things all the time I'm sure....

The Taliban didn't carry out 9/11 you idiot. The people who actually did 9/11 are ALL DEAD. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is captured, Osama is dead. So who the fuck are you bombing huh?

More like a bunch of Taliban were minding their own business (sure, being oppressive) in AFGHANISTAN and yes, out of nowhere the US attacked them. Now some have fled to Pakistan. No doubt their anti US sentiments increased

 

[Gaborn]

What is the legal significance of "4 months in" or is that just an arbitrary number?

Read the War Powers Resolution. The President is required to start withdrawing troops 60 days after a conflict begins without congressional authorization and has 30 days to do so. I think any sane person would consider drones under US control targeting (hopefully at least) the military of a country "hostile acts" within the meaning of the War Powers Resolution.

 

[xbhaskarx]

The Taliban didn't carry out 9/11 you idiot. The people who actually did 9/11 are ALL DEAD. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is captured, Osama is dead. So who the fuck are you bombing huh?

1. The Taliban were in de facto control of 95% of Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and were harboring Al Qaeda leadership within the country, including Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, etc.

2. Wikipedia: After the refusal of the Taliban regime to cease harbouring al-Qaeda, on October 7, 2001, the U.S. government launched military operations in Afghanistan.

3. KSM was captured in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

4. Bin Laden was killed barely a month ago. Deep inside Pakistan. In a military operation that was authorized by Obama. It seems weird for you of all people to be bringing that up....

 

[RustyNails]

The Taliban didn't carry out 9/11 you idiot. The people who actually did 9/11 are ALL DEAD. Khalid Sheikh Mohammed is captured, Osama is dead. So who the fuck are you bombing huh?

More like a bunch of oppressive Taliban were minding their own business in AFGHANISTAN and yes, out of nowhere the US attacked them. Now some have fled to Pakistan. No doubt their anti US sentiments increased

Taliban are a bunch of criminals, just like Al Qaida. They're not elected leaders. Nothing more than warlords who utterly destroyed Afghanistan for poppy trade. They are worse than Gaddafi, because at least Gaddafi allowed education for girls. Not only that, Gaddafi was at odds with Al Qaida. Taliban sheltered UBL.

Al Qaida is even worse. Poisoning wells, blowing up girls schools. True scum of the earth.

Al Qaida is not dead. Zarqawi is running the day to day operations. Then there's Awlaki in Yemen. While I disagree with the nature of the drone strikes carried out, there's no possible way US can depend on Pakistan to capture it's terrorists. We all know how cozy UBL was in Abbotabad.

 

[tHoMNZ]

1. The Taliban were in de facto control of 95% of Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and were harboring Al Qaeda leadership within the country, including Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, etc.

2. KSM was captured in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

3. Bin Laden was killed barely a month ago. Deep inside Pakistan. In a military operation that was authorized by Obama. It seems weird for you of all people to be bringing that up....

2,3: how are small scale direct military operations comparable to drone attacks? why aren't these options used more frequently, if the Pakistani general gives his approval for action? Less kids would be blown to pieces that way.

 

[RustyNails]

2,3: how are small scale direct military operations comparable to drone attacks? Why aren't 2,3 used more often. Less kids would be blown to pieces that way.

This is amazing.

Do you authorize US Commandoes to break into Pakistan's airspace without any authorization, drop down the apache helicopters and take out the terrorists every time terrorists are spotted?

 

[xbhaskarx]

So... more US military forces entering deep into Pakistan without Pakistani government authorization to carry out military operations, less US drones bombing militant groups in certain Pakistani government approved boxes along the border region... got it.

 

[Gaborn]

1. The Taliban were in de facto control of 95% of Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and were harboring Al Qaeda leadership within the country, including Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, etc.

2. Wikipedia: After the refusal of the Taliban regime to cease harbouring al-Qaeda, on October 7, 2001, the U.S. government launched military operations in Afghanistan.

3. KSM was captured in Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

4. Bin Laden was killed barely a month ago. Deep inside Pakistan. In a military operation that was authorized by Obama. It seems weird for you of all people to be bringing that up....

You forgot the important part

 

[tHoMNZ]

Uh no, first, you'd need to declare war on Pakistan. Then you can do that. But if you declared war, the public might see what you're actually doing huh?

Without a declaration of war, none of these attacks should take place. Period.

They don't hate you for your freedoms. They hate you for your nation building. They hate you for your imperialism.

Heck declare war on everyone you think are harboring the 'bad guys'. That'll go down well.

Maybe look at it from the other angle, you're terrorizing citizens of other countries, inside their own country. The US are Terrorists too. Oh wow. What a realization

 

[Gaborn]

Uh no, first, you'd need to declare war on Pakistan. Then you can do that. But if you declared war, the public might see what you're actually doing huh?

Without a declaration of war, none of these attacks should take place. Period.

They don't hate you for your freedoms. They hate you for your nation building. They hate you for your imperialism.

I disagree. Targeting Al Qaeda is completely consistent with the AUMF passed by congress after 9/11. Libya is not under that umbrella, but targets within Yemen, Pakistan, etc would be so long as they have connections to Al Qaeda.

Edit: I should add I agree completely about nation building. The AUMF covers military action, not nation building.

 

[tHoMNZ]

I disagree. Targeting Al Qaeda is completely consistent with the AUMF passed by congress after 9/11. Libya is not under that umbrella, but targets within Yemen, Pakistan, etc would be so long as they have connections to Al Qaeda.

Edit: I should add I agree completely about nation building. The AUMF covers military action, not nation building.

What about targeting Taliban in Pakistan/Yemen?

 

[xbhaskarx]

Uh no, first, you'd need to declare war on Pakistan. Then you can do that. But if you declared war, the public might see what you're actually doing huh?

Without a declaration of war, none of these attacks should take place. Period.

They don't hate you for your freedoms. They hate you for your nation building. They hate you for your imperialism.

How is the public not seeing what the US military is doing now, and how would they see it better if the US declared war?

I thought you just said the US military should utilize "small scale direct military operations" like the one used to kill Osama "more often"?

Should the raid against Osama not have taken place? Should the invasion of Afghanistan not have taken place?

Would the militants not hate the US if the US formally declared war on Afghanistan and Pakistan?

This is all so confusing...

What about targeting Taliban in Pakistan/Yemen?

Has the group being targeted in Yemen denied it was part of Al Qaeda?

Beyond that I'll just quote this bit about the Taliban from earlier:

1. The Taliban were in de facto control of 95% of Afghanistan prior to 9/11 and were harboring Al Qaeda leadership within the country, including Osama Bin Laden, Ayman Al-Zawahiri, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, etc.

2. Wikipedia: After the refusal of the Taliban regime to cease harbouring al-Qaeda, on October 7, 2001, the U.S. government launched military operations in Afghanistan.

 

[Gaborn]

What about targeting Taliban in Pakistan/Yemen?

I think that's a bigger stretch. I think you could get there in that the AUMF specifically says

(a) IN GENERAL- That the President is authorized to use all necessary and appropriate force against those nations, organizations, or persons he determines planned, authorized, committed, or aided the terrorist attacks that occurred on September 11, 2001, or harbored such organizations or persons, in order to prevent any future acts of international terrorism against the United States by such nations, organizations or persons.

It would seem to turn on how loosely you interpret "harbored" and whether that includes the broad Taliban in Pakistan and particularly Yemen. It would certainly seem to include Afghani Taliban members that fled across the border, but I'm not aware of any "Taliban" in Yemen for example. The Taliban was basically a Pushtun political party endemic to Afghanistan. They just happened to be in control of Afghanistan when Al Qaeda made it's home base there.

 

[tHoMNZ]

How is the public not seeing what the US military is doing now, and how would they see it better if the US declared war?

I thought you just said the US military should utilize "small scale direct military operations" like the one used to kill Osama "more often"?

Should the raid against Osama not have taken place? Should the invasion of Afghanistan not have taken place?

Would the militants not hate the US if they formally declared war on Afghanistan and Pakistan?

This is all so confusing...

I don't think the barely conscious American public are aware of the drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan at all.

The Invasion of Afghanistan should not have taken place at all. The Taliban would hate you less if you did not invade their country. Don't you know what happened to the Russians? If you did not attack Afghanistan, sure, there would be Al Qaeda free, however, how many MORE young men have Al Qaeda recruited due to their anti US sentiment AFTER the Afghan Wars? Will you ever defeat "Al Qaeda" (used as a blanket term for anyone who really wants to hurt the US) For every child dead, there's an angry family member left behind. What you're doing is increasing hatred towards the US. How can this end unless the wars end? How can this end as long as innocents are killed?

So How many Al Qaeda were there at the time of 9/11? Was it an army? Was it worthy of a full scale war?

 

[goomba]

2. Wikipedia: After the refusal of the Taliban regime to cease harbouring al-Qaeda, on October 7, 2001, the U.S. government launched military operations in Afghanistan.

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

 

[tHoMNZ]

Back to Libya, i heard about this a while back

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

So In Libya, you support some members of Al Qaeda?? What?

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

Back to Libya, i heard about this a while back

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

So In Libya, you support some members of Al Qaeda?? What?

old ass news

kinda debunked a while ago

 

[Gaborn]

I don't think the barely conscious American public are aware of the drone attacks in Yemen and Pakistan at all.

The Invasion of Afghanistan should not have taken place at all. The Taliban would hate you less if you did not invade their country. Don't you know what happened to the Russians? If you did not attack Afghanistan, sure, there would be Al Qaeda free, however, how many MORE young men have Al Qaeda recruited due to their anti US sentiment AFTER the Afghan Wars? Will you ever defeat "Al Qaeda" (used as a blanket term for anyone who really wants to hurt the US) For every child dead, there's an angry family member left behind. What you're doing is increasing hatred towards the US. How can this end unless the wars end? How can this end as long as innocents are killed?

So How many Al Qaeda were there at the time of 9/11? Was it an army? Was it worthy of a full scale war?

The invasion of Afghanistan was proper. We should have left after the new government was elected.

 

[goomba]

old ass news

kinda debunked a while ago

Debunked how ?.

Hardly surprising considering America backed, armed and trained Al Queda when the soviets were occupying Afghanistan.

 

[RustyNails]

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

In Jalalabad, deputy prime minister Haji Abdul Kabir - the third most powerful figure in the ruling Taliban regime - told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US, but added: "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country".

OK, hand over UBL to Sudan. Nothing can possibly go wrong.

 

[xbhaskarx]

Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over

Did you read your own link?

1. They agreed once the deadline had passed and the bombing had started.
2. And even at that point they didn't agree to hand him over, they only agreed to discuss turning him over.
3. They said they would require evidence that he was behind 9/11 first.
4. And at that point would be ready to hand him over to a third country.
5. The leader of the Taliban refused to hand him over just the day before that.

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.

In Jalalabad, deputy prime minister Haji Abdul Kabir - the third most powerful figure in the ruling Taliban regime - told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US, but added: "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country".

The offer came a day after the Taliban's supreme leader rebuffed Bush's "second chance" for the Islamic militia to surrender Bin Laden to the US.

Mullah Mohammed Omar said there was no move to "hand anyone over".

 

[goomba]

Did you read your own link?

1. They agreed once the deadline had passed and the bombing had started.
2. And even at that point they didn't agree to hand him over, they only agreed to discuss turning him over.
3. They said they would require evidence that he was behind 9/11 first.
4. And at that point would be ready to hand him over to a third country.
5. The leader of the Taliban refused to hand him over just the day before that.

Taliban 'ready to discuss' Bin Laden handover if bombing halts

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

Debunked how ?.

Hardly surprising considering America backed, armed and trained Al Queda when the soviets were occupying Afghanistan.

debunked as in, the Libyan rebels rejected that Al Qaida group, and they're not part of the Rebel Council either.


And for History sake, we did'nt support "Al Qaida", Al Qaida did'nt exist

vs the Soviets we supported Afghans who where rebelling, Afghanistan, being heavily Tribal, all the rebels did'nt share the same views or goals for the country after the Soviets left, and we(USA) unfortunately left them also to fuck themselves.

 

[xbhaskarx]

Taliban 'ready to discuss' Bin Laden handover if bombing halts

Right, and the US was not going to negotiate over an ultimatum (that was non-negotiable already) after the deadline had passed and military operations had commenced. There was nothing to discuss even before that, either they could hand him over or they could refuse, and they chose the latter.

 

[RustyNails]

vs the Soviets we supported Afghans who where rebelling, Afghanistan, being heavily Tribal, all the rebels did'nt share the same views or goals for the country after the Soviets left, and we(USA) unfortunately left them also to fuck themselves.

Correcto. This is why we are not gonna leave just after ousting the Taliban. Not going to repeat the same mistakes again. If we had left soon after the establishment of the government, it would've dissolved into a puddle of goo the moment we left.

 

[goomba]

debunked as in, the Libyan rebels rejected that Al Qaida group, and they're not part of the Rebel Council either.


And for History sake, we did'nt support "Al Qaida", Al Qaida did'nt exist

vs the Soviets we supported Afghans who where rebelling, Afghanistan, being heavily Tribal, all the rebels did'nt share the same views or goals for the country after the Soviets left, and we(USA) unfortunately left them also to fuck themselves.

"Al-Qaida,(sic) literally 'the database,' was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians," admits former British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, whose Foreign Office portfolio included control of British Intelligence Agency MI-6 and the Government Communications Headquarters (GCHQ), in a column published by the UK Guardian newspaper.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/terrorism/story/0,12780,1523838,00.html

 

[Meus Renaissance]

The Taliban and Al-Qaeda do not share the same global political ideology. The latter wanted to wage a war against the West because of perceptions by its leadership of US imperialism in the Middle East. The Taliban in contrast are tribalist local elders - there are not an army. Watching an interview with some of them, they referred to Bin Laden as their "guest. It's incomprehensible to me they would knowingly shelter the leader of the group behind 9/11 at the expense of having their country bombed.

 

[xbhaskarx]

The US funded mujaheddin through Pakistan in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They did not fund Al Qaeda, which didn't exist until well over a decade after the US began funding opponents of the Soviet-backed regime.

Soviet War in Afghanistan: Date 27 December 1979 – 15 February 1989
Al Qaeda: is a global militant Sunni Islamist group founded by Osama bin Laden sometime between August 1988[6] and late 1989.[7]

The Taliban in contrast are tribalist local elders - there are not an army.

They absolutely are an army, how do you think they took over almost all of Afghanistan? That wasn't Al Qaeda, Osama was in Sudan until 96, at which point the Taliban had already taken control of most of the country (96 map). If the Taliban was just tribal elders and no army, Ahmed Shah Massoud would have kicked their asses.

 

[YoungHav]

Funny how the U.S. is gungho about rooting out terrorists everywhere but in their own country. KKK, FBI, CIA >>>>> worse than Al-Queda.

 

[Ignis Fatuus]

Funny how the U.S. is gungho about rooting out terrorists everywhere but in their own country. KKK, FBI, CIA >>>>> worse than Al-Queda.

I too get my political talking points from Black Eyed Peas songs.

 

[YoungHav]

I too get my political talking points from Black Eyed Peas songs.

How about taking a look at history funnyman?

 

[CHEEZMO™]

My brain hurts after reading all that.

 

[Steelrain]

Funny how the U.S. is gungho about rooting out terrorists everywhere but in their own country. KKK, FBI, CIA >>>>> worse than Al-Queda.

Lol oh wow.

 

[theignoramus]

1. The US bombs terrorist targets in Pakistan and Yemen with the consent (and even encouragement) of the Pakistani and Yemeni governments.

2. The US President was democratically elected in 2008 in a contested election that was carried out in accordance with the US Constitution, he will face an election in 2012. Gaddafi came to power in a coup and has ruled Libya for decades with no checks on his power and no mechanism for Libyan citizens to replace him.

3. LOL LOOOL

To be fair, the government of Yemen's legitimacy is under heavy contention. Namely, by the hundreds of thousands of Yemeni youths occupying Sanaa and other cities. Ali Abdullah Saleh ruled Yemen with a dictatorial hand for decades and, as per Wikileaks, he lied to his own parliament about who was carrying out the airstrikes.

 

[theignoramus]

The US funded mujaheddin through Pakistan in response to the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They did not fund Al Qaeda, which didn't exist until well over a decade after the US began funding opponents of the Soviet-backed regime.

Soviet War in Afghanistan: Date 27 December 1979 – 15 February 1989
Al Qaeda: is a global militant Sunni Islamist group founded by Osama bin Laden sometime between August 1988[6] and late 1989.[7]



They absolutely are an army, how do you think they took over almost all of Afghanistan? That wasn't Al Qaeda, Osama was in Sudan until 96, at which point the Taliban had already taken control of most of the country (96 map). If the Taliban was just tribal elders and no army, Ahmed Shah Massoud would have kicked their asses.

furthermore, according to Jimmy Carter's national security advisor,Bzrezinski, US support for Afghan militants began before the Russian invasion and was meant to elicit Russian action to draw them into their own Vietnam.

 

[~Devil Trigger~]

 

[archnemesis]

What does the Arabic text say on the photo with the Star of David?

 

[xbhaskarx]

Awesome, a Star of David on one, and a swastika on another.

 

[archnemesis]

It reminded me of this photo from earlier this year.

 

[Meus Renaissance]

Breaking news:

"Hundreds of Libyans will martyr in Europe. I told you it is eye for an eye and tooth for a tooth. But we will give them a chance to come back to their senses," the Libyan leader said in a televised speech.

 

[Kurtofan]

Breaking news: Gadaffi threatens to send "hundreds of martyrs" to Europe. "An eye for an eye" he was quoted as saying.

It's not the first time he says things like that.

 

[SouthernDragon]

Ghaddafi is a Jewish Nazi.

Huh, go figure.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Ghaddafi is a Jewish Nazi.

Huh, go figure.

Like how Obama is a Communist Fascist.

 

[theignoramus]

Guess what? RT interviewed NATO secretary general about Libya! LOL...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sADFbLo3PRk

Now check out RT's interview with the Syrian regime...note the softball approach.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IZazDKpDBAc
incidentally, the most thumbed up comments below the interview blame the CIA and the 'Jew Khazars" for the bad press the regime is getting.

 

[Naked Snake]

What does the Arabic text say on the photo with the Star of David?

It says "The people have spoken."

 

[archnemesis]

It says "The people have spoken."

Thanks!

 

[theignoramus]

Pizza delivery man helps feed Libyan rebels

A truck full of pizza delivers freshly baked pizza to rebels at the frontline.

 

[Ahoi-Brause]

So the rebels are confirmed jew-haters?

 

[Naked Snake]

So the rebels are confirmed jew-haters?

You're generalizing thousands of people from graffiti?

 

[Ahoi-Brause]

You're generalizing thousands of people from graffiti?

Am I?