by giving military aid, we arent "supporting and progressing war" just look at eygpt. we hav ebeen giving them billions for years. what wars have they been in, in the past 30 years?
I guess mankind is doomed to destruction then. Keeping up with the jones's these days means bigger, better faster nukes...
What a shitty reality or "leading edge" so to speak. I was reading yesterday Putin accused the US of starting up another arms race. When I read about all the new weapons being developed by the Pentagon, it's pretty insane....this planet definitely all ends in a huge mushroom cloud...that's where it's going. It does not appear mankind is smart enough to handle physical and cultural indifferences or simple emotion for that matter.
something pretty monumental has take place to resolve it
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I guess mankind is doomed to destruction then. Keeping up with the jones's these days means bigger, better faster nukes...
What a shitty reality or "leading edge" so to speak. I was reading yesterday Putin accused the US of starting up another arms race. When I read about all the new weapons being developed by the Pentagon, it's pretty insane....this planet definitely all ends in a huge mushroom cloud...that's where it's going. It does not appear mankind is smart enough to handle physical and cultural indifferences or simple emotion for that matter.
something pretty monumental has take place to resolve it
"The Bush administration has funneled $10 billion in aid to Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf to fight terrorism and allegedly find Osama. After five years, it’s fair to ask how hard Musharraf is trying. “They’re in the ‘looking for bin Laden’ business,” says Wright. “If they find him, they’d be out of business.” The Bush administration doesn’t push too hard for fear of destabilizing Musharraf and perhaps ushering in an Islamist government that would then have the bomb—and might share it with Al Qaeda. So bin Laden continues to enjoy his freedom while the Iraqi people pay the price for 9/11."
i think it has to be looked at in terms of opportunity costs. i think the costs of destabilizing pakistan are much greater than the costs of depending on pakistan to find bin laden. capturing bin laden would be a big blow to global terrorism, but the movement would continue and perhaps get even worse. on a smaller level, killing zarqawi in iraq didn't make things any better. bin laden's worth to al qaeda is as a figurehead and perhaps some kind of organizing authority, but i don't think his capture would make any real effective or radical changes.
as an economist I can certainly loko at this by opportunity costs. and I agree that destablizing pakistan is has a much higher cost then keeping bin laden free.
but the people around here will tell you he is being kept alive on purpose, even treated at american hospitals, all so bush can keep his war machine moving. even going as far as blaming bush for not taking military action against pakistan :rolleyes: thank you for bringing some common sense to the table.
but I have to disagree somewhat. I think having bin laden proven dead will have a great effect on al qaeda. bin laden is very smart and his expertise, experience, and sheer "legendary" status, will be almost im possible to replace.
on the other hand, i think its far more important to keep pakistan from teetering over the edge into islamic revolution. we'll just end up with another afghanistan or iran only this time they really will have the bomb. we'll have bigger problems than al qaeda. i think right now the US government would rather have ten bin ladens on the loose than a hostile pakistan that is capable of nuking india, US forces in afghanistan, or providing al qaeda with nuclear material.
I agree. hopefully one of these days bin laden will pop is head out and we can hit him with one of our predator drones that patrol the area. but as time goes by with no sign of him, (what seems to be) accurate reports he has had kidney problems, he may already be dead.
I disagree. I think it will have a big effect on al qaeda. will they try and replace him? sure. but the effects will still be there
I don't know. I think the effects will be minimal; perhaps it'll boost the US troops' morale a bit. I think mostly it will be used (depending on who's in charge at the moment) as more fuel for the war machine.
"Hurrah, we caught the bad guy, the war on terror is working!"
Recently, Mullah Dadullah, one of the Taliban's top guerrilla commanders was killed in Afghanistan. Four days later he was already replaced by his brother.
How much effect did Abu Mousad al-Zarqawi's liquidation have on al-Qaeda? Virtually none.
I think they are well organised and calculate on losing some of their leaders, including bin Laden. edit: especially considering, as you mentioned above, his medical condition.
I don't know. I think the effects will be minimal; perhaps it'll boost the US troops' morale a bit. I think mostly it will be used (depending on who's in charge at the moment) as more fuel for the war machine.
"Hurrah, we caught the bad guy, the war on terror is working!"
you say this mockingly when in fact it would be something to Hurrah about.
Recently, Mullah Dadullah, one of the Taliban's top guerrilla commanders was killed in Afghanistan. Four days later he was already replaced by his brother.
How much effect did Abu Mousad al-Zarqawi's liquidation have on al-Qaeda? Virtually none.
I think they are well organised and calculate on losing some of their leaders, including bin Laden.
this may very well be true. but I believe bin laden in several ways would have a higher effect being dead then the people u mention.. he is the man who started al qaeda, the man who is know for successfully attacking america on its soil. maybe its wishful thinking on my part, I dont know.
you say this mockingly when in fact it would be something to Hurrah about.
Catching bin Laden would indeed be a good thing, you're right about that. But I do not believe the war on terror can be won so indeed I said it rather mockingly, especially if it's used as a way to further fuel this war.
this may very well be true. but I believe bin laden in several ways would have a higher effect being dead then the people u mention.. he is the man who started al qaeda, the man who is know for successfully attacking america on its soil. maybe its wishful thinking on my part, I dont know.
I doubt it will be in my lifetime....but mankind does seem to be overly possessed with killing and controlling beyond what should be considered normal.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I doubt it will be in my lifetime....but mankind does seem to be overly possessed with killing and controlling beyond what should be considered normal.
u think now more then other times in history? think about it. today is calm compared to the past.
u think now more then other times in history? think about it. today is calm compared to the past.
I suppose if absolutely everyone has nukes we'll all be too scared to do anything to each other...ironically it could be a good thing in retro...
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I disagree. I think it will have a big effect on al qaeda. will they try and replace him? sure. but the effects will still be there
we're not talking about someone like saddam hussein here. we are talking about a man with a singular purpose. bin laden has no intention of being caught alive and humiliated. and what that means is that he will be martyred. to all those terrorists who follow his lead his death will come to mean so much more. it is difficult to know which way things will swing if binladen is removed.
How much effect did Abu Mousad al-Zarqawi's liquidation have on al-Qaeda? Virtually none.
and why would al-zarqawi's death have any effect on al qaeda as a whole? he was only it's head in iraq, that's it. iraq is in such a mess that he can easily be replaced. you can't equate the situation in iraq with the greater reach of al qaeda. perhaps if bin laden's deputy al zawahiri were killed then we might see a chink.
it was the US's invasion of iraq that provided the opportunity for the greater spread of al qaeda, so it is they who need to do the legwork to find bin laden and al zawahiri and any others necessary, so that the back of al qaeda is broken. relying on pakistan to do it is just asking for trouble and inefficiency.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
ah yes, who doesnt love the spectre of mutually assured destruction.
This is why it makes me wondr why the US is going into and trying to dominate space orbit now for anti nukes and the like....
eye fucking carumba... they'll be building nukes on the moon at some point I imagine...
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
This is why it makes me wondr why the US is going into and trying to dominate space orbit now for anti nukes and the like....
eye fucking carumba... they'll be building nukes on the moon at some point I imagine...
china is planning a trip to the moon next year. so they're what, only 40 years behind?
so? i'm not talking about the moon.
as i said they SHOT A SATELLITE OUT OF THE SKY. you are aware of how reliant these technologically advanced weapons systems are on satellites, right?
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
This is why it makes me wondr why the US is going into and trying to dominate space orbit now for anti nukes and the like....
eye fucking carumba... they'll be building nukes on the moon at some point I imagine...
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.
Comments
I guess mankind is doomed to destruction then. Keeping up with the jones's these days means bigger, better faster nukes...
What a shitty reality or "leading edge" so to speak. I was reading yesterday Putin accused the US of starting up another arms race. When I read about all the new weapons being developed by the Pentagon, it's pretty insane....this planet definitely all ends in a huge mushroom cloud...that's where it's going. It does not appear mankind is smart enough to handle physical and cultural indifferences or simple emotion for that matter.
something pretty monumental has take place to resolve it
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
so for us americans the question remains.
which is more important
capturing bin laden
or
maintaining a "peaceful" relationship with pakistan and avoiding a radical government change there.
Sammi: Wanna just break up?
but the people around here will tell you he is being kept alive on purpose, even treated at american hospitals, all so bush can keep his war machine moving. even going as far as blaming bush for not taking military action against pakistan :rolleyes: thank you for bringing some common sense to the table.
but I have to disagree somewhat. I think having bin laden proven dead will have a great effect on al qaeda. bin laden is very smart and his expertise, experience, and sheer "legendary" status, will be almost im possible to replace.
I agree. hopefully one of these days bin laden will pop is head out and we can hit him with one of our predator drones that patrol the area. but as time goes by with no sign of him, (what seems to be) accurate reports he has had kidney problems, he may already be dead.
I don't know. I think the effects will be minimal; perhaps it'll boost the US troops' morale a bit. I think mostly it will be used (depending on who's in charge at the moment) as more fuel for the war machine.
"Hurrah, we caught the bad guy, the war on terror is working!"
Recently, Mullah Dadullah, one of the Taliban's top guerrilla commanders was killed in Afghanistan. Four days later he was already replaced by his brother.
How much effect did Abu Mousad al-Zarqawi's liquidation have on al-Qaeda? Virtually none.
I think they are well organised and calculate on losing some of their leaders, including bin Laden. edit: especially considering, as you mentioned above, his medical condition.
naděje umírá poslední
this may very well be true. but I believe bin laden in several ways would have a higher effect being dead then the people u mention.. he is the man who started al qaeda, the man who is know for successfully attacking america on its soil. maybe its wishful thinking on my part, I dont know.
Catching bin Laden would indeed be a good thing, you're right about that. But I do not believe the war on terror can be won so indeed I said it rather mockingly, especially if it's used as a way to further fuel this war.
Perhaps, time will tell.
naděje umírá poslední
I doubt it will be in my lifetime....but mankind does seem to be overly possessed with killing and controlling beyond what should be considered normal.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I suppose if absolutely everyone has nukes we'll all be too scared to do anything to each other...ironically it could be a good thing in retro...
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
we're not talking about someone like saddam hussein here. we are talking about a man with a singular purpose. bin laden has no intention of being caught alive and humiliated. and what that means is that he will be martyred. to all those terrorists who follow his lead his death will come to mean so much more. it is difficult to know which way things will swing if binladen is removed.
and why would al-zarqawi's death have any effect on al qaeda as a whole? he was only it's head in iraq, that's it. iraq is in such a mess that he can easily be replaced. you can't equate the situation in iraq with the greater reach of al qaeda. perhaps if bin laden's deputy al zawahiri were killed then we might see a chink.
it was the US's invasion of iraq that provided the opportunity for the greater spread of al qaeda, so it is they who need to do the legwork to find bin laden and al zawahiri and any others necessary, so that the back of al qaeda is broken. relying on pakistan to do it is just asking for trouble and inefficiency.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
ah yes, who doesnt love the spectre of mutually assured destruction.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
This is why it makes me wondr why the US is going into and trying to dominate space orbit now for anti nukes and the like....
eye fucking carumba... they'll be building nukes on the moon at some point I imagine...
this video still (and always) blows my mind:
http://www.truemajority.org/bensbbs/
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
US GOVT: space is ours. we saw it first. it's ours.
and let's not forget china recently shot a satellite out of the sky, so i'm sure washington is cogniscent of what beijing is capable of.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
so? i'm not talking about the moon.
as i said they SHOT A SATELLITE OUT OF THE SKY. you are aware of how reliant these technologically advanced weapons systems are on satellites, right?
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Only enough to completely destroy the world then.
The economy has polarized to the point where the wealthiest 10% now own 85% of the nation’s wealth. Never before have the bottom 90% been so highly indebted, so dependent on the wealthy.