More Troops to be Deployed- Will Ed Protest?

davidtrios
davidtrios Posts: 9,732
edited December 2009 in A Moving Train
It was understandable that he was against the Iraq War- most people were and for good reason. But, now that a liberal President wants to finish the job in Afganistan to once and for all take out Bin Laden, will Ed support this? Will you?
Post edited by Unknown User on
«1

Comments

  • Newch91
    Newch91 Posts: 17,560
    To me, I think he'll support it because: 1) we all knew he hated Bush and about every decision he made and Iraq was the spark that just made him hate Bush even more (hense "Bushleaguer", the Riot Act Tour, Vote for Change tour, and S/T album) and 2) we should only be in Afgan, even though it's questionable about the number of troops to send.
    Shows: 6.27.08 Hartford, CT/5.15.10 Hartford, CT/6.18.2011 Hartford, CT (EV Solo)/10.19.13 Brooklyn/10.25.13 Hartford
    "Becoming a Bruce fan is like hitting puberty as a musical fan. It's inevitable." - dcfaithful
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,470
    UnthoughtKnown wrote:
    It was understandable that he was against the Iraq War- most people were and for good reason. But, now that a liberal President wants to finish the job in Afganistan to once and for all take out Bin Laden, will Ed support this? Will you?

    it doesn't matter what ed thinks. i am not going to speculate as to how he feels or if he will protest because it does not matter. be your own person and don't wait for what ed does before you decide how you feel. as far as me, i am so fucking over these wars...

    we don't have money for health care, yet when it comes to bombin' and killin' we can find it... what a joke....

    last night obama lost my support and my vote for re-election...

    change we can believe in, yeah right...

    his slogan should have been "same policies, different party"....
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • davidtrios
    davidtrios Posts: 9,732
    Well, Obama followed through- he set a time table to get the troops out of Iraq and focus on Bin laden. I'm happy we're gonna find that fuck once and for all.
  • davidtrios
    davidtrios Posts: 9,732
    http://www.barackobama.com/issues/homel ... mpaign.php

    Bullet point 1:

    "Barack Obama will defeat terrorism worldwide:
    Obama and Biden will find, disrupt, and destroy al Qaeda"
  • he still stands
    he still stands Posts: 2,835
    UnthoughtKnown wrote:
    Well, Obama followed through- he set a time table to get the troops out of Iraq and focus on Bin laden. I'm happy we're gonna find that fuck once and for all.

    I've asked it before with no response... does anyone know if bin Laden is actually in Afghanistan? I thought he was more likely to be in Pakistan? :?:

    I didn't watch his speech at West Point ( I try to stay out of this shit... oh dear me )... did he say WHY we are fighting in Afghanistan? To defeat Al-Qaeda? Stabilize their government? Both?

    I just don't think Al-Qaeda can be "defeated" by fighting them in any single country. It is an international network and as soon as we escalate the troops in Afghanistan they'll pop up in Pakistan or Somalia or Yemen. Actually thats already happened. If we kill all the bad guys in Afghanistan, will the members of Al-Qaeda in the other countries give up too?

    So, the question is not if you support the war in Afghanistan, but if you support a decades long conflict in numerous countries across Asia and Africa. Personally, I do not. I think there are better alternatives that will not cost nearly as many lives or trillions of dollars. We are not the policemen of the world.
    Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
  • WaveCameCrashin
    WaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    he still stands wrote:
    I've asked it before with no response... does anyone know if bin Laden is actually in Afghanistan? I thought he was more likely to be in Pakistan?

    Most seem to think Pakistan
    he still stands wrote:
    I didn't watch his speech at West Point ( I try to stay out of this shit... oh dear me )... did he say WHY we are fighting in Afghanistan? To defeat Al-Qaeda? Stabilize their government? Both?

    Both and get rid of the Taliban
    he still stands wrote:
    I just don't think Al-Qaeda can be "defeated" by fighting them in any single country. It is an international network and as soon as we escalate the troops in Afghanistan they'll pop up in Pakistan or Somalia or Yemen. Actually thats already happened. If we kill all the bad guys in Afghanistan, will the members of Al-Qaeda in the other countries give up too?

    We have to defeat them. We don't have a choice unless you think that they wont try to attack us again.There are cells world wide but hopefully with all of our technology,resources, and our brave men and women we can get rid of these dirt bags once and for all. One 911 was enough.
  • soulsinging
    soulsinging Posts: 13,202
    prfctlefts wrote:
    We have to defeat them. We don't have a choice unless you think that they wont try to attack us again.There are cells world wide but hopefully with all of our technology,resources, and our brave men and women we can get rid of these dirt bags once and for all. One 911 was enough.

    WWII did not stop genocide once and for all. What makes you think we can ever get rid of terrorism once and for all? Do you even have any idea who the dirt bags actually are that you're talking about? Do you think Al-Quaeda is the only group that wants or is willing to plan an attack like 9/11?
  • WaveCameCrashin
    WaveCameCrashin Posts: 2,929
    Yeah it did. As far as I can remember the Nazis were the only one commiting genocide during that time period,and with our help they were defeated.
  • Jeanwah
    Jeanwah Posts: 6,363
    to answer the original question, I'd be surprised if Ed jumps back into the protest arena. Right now, he'd rather look away and be happy with his life. But let's not forget him when he was this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfBSXbuQ ... r_embedded
  • davidtrios
    davidtrios Posts: 9,732
    Jeanwah wrote:
    to answer the original question, I'd be surprised if Ed jumps back into the protest arena. Right now, he'd rather look away and be happy with his life. But let's not forget him when he was this:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JfBSXbuQ ... r_embedded

    Great tag- I wish he still had this passion when they play Porch :shock:
  • Cosmo
    Cosmo Posts: 12,225
    I don't know about Ed... but, I know I am against this.
    I WAS for the Afghanistan war back in 2001/2002 because the Taliban was in full control of the government and openly housing Al Qaeda trainning camps and headquarters.
    Bush fucked it all up by diverting resources towards Iraq and neglecting the efforts to stabalize Afghanistan. I was NEVER for the Iraq War.
    Because of the neglect, Afghanistan has deteriorated into a situation that is even more fucked up. The corrupt Karzai government in place (that we pretty much installed over there) and the Pakistan connections have made this place a lost cause. Our decisions to place Afghanistan on the back burners has weakened the resolve of our NATO Allies... and I don't blame them for pulling out. If we aren't seroius about it... why should they be?
    And what does 'Winning' mean in Afghanistan? Someone needs to explain to me how do we know when we have 'Won'. What are the milestones? What is the outlook? What is 'Winning'?
    I say... withdraw and contain. Afghanistan will not change until the people of Afghanistan want to change. I cannot see US changing their culture to anything they don't want to be. They have a proud tradition and heritage of turning back some of the greatest Empires and military armies of history. To them.. are we just another Empire in line? I don't know.
    ...
    As for Ed... it doesn't matter to me what he thinks about Afghanistan, Obama or whatever. All I know is I oppose President Obama's decision here... we lost Afghanistan the minute we went into Iraq.
    Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
    Hail, Hail!!!
  • Eliot Rosewater
    Eliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    I stopped giving a shit about what Ed supports when he stopped backing Nader and jumped on the Obama bandwagon. IMO he's clearly lost his way. I shall pray for him. :?
  • davidtrios
    davidtrios Posts: 9,732
    I can't blame ED for quitting on Nader. He was one of the reasons why Bush was elected in 2000.
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,470
    prfctlefts wrote:
    Yeah it did. As far as I can remember the Nazis were the only one commiting genocide during that time period,and with our help they were defeated.

    yeah and there have been no genocides since then eh?
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • gimmesometruth27
    gimmesometruth27 St. Fuckin Louis Posts: 24,470
    im sorry guys, but at no point will we ever be able to say "yep, that's the last one, we killed them all, no more terrorists...we rule!!"

    every one we kill has sons or relatives that will wage jihad on us to avenge the loss of their loved one.

    winning a war on terror is about as possible as winning a war on stupidity. neither can be won.
    "You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry."  - Lincoln

    "Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
  • Eliot Rosewater
    Eliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    UnthoughtKnown wrote:
    I can't blame ED for quitting on Nader. He was one of the reasons why Bush was elected in 2000.
    Not sure if I should take this bait....it seems way too easy.

    I'm having a really hard time being respectful with my response.

    The idea that Nader had anything to do with Gore not being able to landslide a terrible opponant is simply ignorant. That's not name-calling. Look it up.

    Nader is not to blame for Gore's inept campaign. In fact, I've read studies that show the exact opposite. That Nader's involvement actually helped Gore make better decisions, which would make him more appealing to liberals.
  • Eliot Rosewater
    Eliot Rosewater Posts: 2,659
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    im sorry guys, but at no point will we ever be able to say "yep, that's the last one, we killed them all, no more terrorists...we rule!!"

    every one we kill has sons or relatives that will wage jihad on us to avenge the loss of their loved one.

    winning a war on terror is about as possible as winning a war on stupidity. neither can be won.
    I think the "terrorists" are waging a war on stupidity, which is why they have "targeted" the good ole' U.S. of A.

    It's silly that anyone even believes our involvement in the middle-east has to to with terroism.

    Obama is a crooked criminal dirtbag who is looking after his friends and family, true to the politician form. Shame on him and shame on his supporters.

    The thing is - we all knew he would send more troops to Afghanistan. That he would "escalate" the war. And the dumb American population STILL voted for him.
  • davidtrios
    davidtrios Posts: 9,732
    Eliot Rosewater wrote:
    That Nader's involvement actually helped Gore make better decisions, which would make him more appealing to liberals.

    This is partly why Bush won- Nader earned a lot of liberal votes that would otherwise went to Al Gore.
  • VINNY GOOMBA
    VINNY GOOMBA Posts: 1,826
    gimmesometruth27 wrote:
    im sorry guys, but at no point will we ever be able to say "yep, that's the last one, we killed them all, no more terrorists...we rule!!"

    every one we kill has sons or relatives that will wage jihad on us to avenge the loss of their loved one.

    winning a war on terror is about as possible as winning a war on stupidity. neither can be won.

    Can't say it any simpler than that. Amen.
  • kenny olav
    kenny olav Posts: 3,319
    Maybe I'm wrong, but I take this as a subtle protest against Obama's war policy: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l3DrY11g5BM

Categories