Fucking Bullshit

UKDave

callen wrote:

those are the two major decisions he's made....and as much as I hate war...we did need to take out the Taliban.

And I'm questioning the understanding and the motivation, surely that is the ongoing concern for future decisions...?

bee_boy

It would be quite funny to have an Muslim extremist as a fellow Pearl Jam fan... I guess we would all have to get some firewalls

Skitch Patterson

How's the NFL boycott going, chief?

callen

trappedinmyradio wrote:

okay, you missed it - where did he solidify that belief? on his prayer rug...and his contemplation of the "message" he received. i am not arguing here. just talking about how a statement about asking god for guidance leads to the conclusion that someone is doing something based on what god has led, guided, or told them to do when the action is started to relieve the situation for which guidance (from god) was asked.

guess I need another cup of coffee...please clarify for me...no bad intent on this post by the way.

callen

UKDave wrote:

And I'm questioning the understanding and the motivation, surely that is the ongoing concern for future decisions...?

I agree...I shudder at the thought that any religious influence in anyway affects me.

jlew24asu

UKDave wrote:

And I'm questioning the understanding and the motivation,

really? what dont you understand about taking out the taliban? I will be happy to explain it to you

callen

bee_boy wrote:

Wow. That's pretty full on.

have a freind that's pretty religious....told me his wife and others felt the Tsunami was gods revenge.....sick.

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

Iraq, i'm with you on that.

but afgah?? seriously? you didnt see the taliban and el queda as a threat to american security? they attacked us remember ?

Al Queda yes. But what id Al Queda? These people came out of Saudi Arabia. The Taleban weren't a threat to America. And George Bush doesn't believe that Osama Bin Laden is a threat to America as he's said so. According to George Bush, he doesn't give Bin Laden a seconds thought. Anyway, I don't believe that bombing the crap out of a country is the right way to apprehend a bunch of suspected criminals.
Remember that the Taleban didn't say they would protect Bin laden, just that they wouldn't seek him out and hand him over.
And don't forget that since the routing of the Taleban in 2002, Osama Bin laden is still at large today, so i don't understand your point.

UKDave

jlew24asu wrote:

really? what dont you understand about taking out the taliban? I will be happy to explain it to you

I'm not arguing that it was or right wrong :rolleyes: like I say even a muppet like Bush may occaisonally make the right decision, I'm questioning whether or not you are comfortable with "how" the decision making process is carried out....?

jlew24asu

Byrnzie wrote:

Al Queda yes. But what id Al Queda? These people came out of Saudi Arabia.

you mean the terrorists who attacked us? yes they did. but the saudi government was did not assist in planning or harboring them. as far as I know. I have read reports that they hang el queda members all the time. by no means am I cheerleading for the saudis. I dont trust them at all. but what should we do invade them?

Byrnzie wrote:

The Taleban weren't a threat to America.

we disgree on alot but this is something we are way off on. the taliban allowed el queda
to function, train, grow. el queda was free to do whatever it wanted. not only was the taliban a threat to america, but to britain as well. why would you be ok with a country allowing sworn enemies of me and you to have a base of which they can attack us?

Byrnzie wrote:

And George Bush doesn't believe that Osama Bin Laden is a threat to America as he's said so. According to George Bush, he doesn't give Bin Laden a seconds thought.

Bush says alot of stupid things

Byrnzie wrote:

Anyway, I don't believe that bombing the crap out of a country is the right way to apprehend a bunch of suspected criminals.

I can live with that

jlew24asu

UKDave wrote:

I'm not arguing that it was or right wrong :rolleyes: like I say even a muppet like Bush may occaisonally make the right decision, I'm questioning whether or not you are comfortable with "how" the decision making process is carried out....?

"how" he came to that decision? we were attacked. thats how. whether or not god helped him decide, the fact still remains.

callen

Byrnzie wrote:

Al Queda yes. But what id Al Queda? These people came out of Saudi Arabia. The Taleban weren't a threat to America. And George Bush doesn't believe that Osama Bin Laden is a threat to America as he's said so. According to George Bush, he doesn't give Bin Laden a seconds thought. Anyway, I don't believe that bombing the crap out of a country is the right way to apprehend a bunch of suspected criminals.
Remember that the Taleban didn't say they would protect Bin laden, just that they wouldn't seek him out and hand him over.
And don't forget that since the routing of the Taleban in 2002, Osama Bin laden is still at large today, so i don't understand your point.

not many on this board understand your far far left views...but I do..and agree with 99.99% of what you say..but......the Taliban clearly gave a refuge to Osama.....and would have continued to till they were removed. I hate war...last resort always...but the Taliban had to go.

Byrnzie

callen wrote:

not many on this board understand your far far left views...but I do..and agree with 99.99% of what you say..but......the Taliban clearly gave a refuge to Osama.....and would have continued to till they were removed. I hate war...last resort always...but the Taliban had to go.

And where is Osama now that the Taleban have been removed? Oh yeah, he's still free at large like before.

UKDave

jlew24asu wrote:

"how" he came to that decision? we were attacked. thats how. whether or not god helped him decide, the fact still remains.

No... being attacked was the first milestone.... invade Afghanistan was the eventual response... the process is everything that happens in between... and that either gives you confidence in any future decision or it doesn't...

I could add 2+2 and get 4 through one process and it would be right every time, if I used another process it would be wrong for every other decision and I'd have been lucky with the first one, there's a difference.

Are you saying you agree about how he goes about making decisions or that you agree with the one on Afghanistan?

jlew24asu

Byrnzie wrote:

And where is Osama now that the Taleban have been removed? Oh yeah, he's still free at large like before.

you are correct. biggest fuck up ever, even bigger then Iraq. IMO of course.

osama ran over to the "tribal" areas of afgah and pakistan. these areas have been lawless for hundreds of years.

but osama still being free is besides the point. taliban gave osama an entire country to set up shop. a internationally recognized government was protecting him. that had to stop.

now osama is traveling from mut hut to cave in the remotest area on the planet.

UKDave

Anyway I'm outta here, peace

jlew24asu

UKDave wrote:

Are you saying you agree about how he goes about making decisions or that you agree with the one on Afghanistan?

I agree with the one on afgah.

IF (if if if) Saddam had WMDs and was harboring el queda I might have been on board with that as well. turns out neither were true. so I am not on board with that decision to invade.

Byrnzie

jlew24asu wrote:

taliban gave osama an entire country to set up shop. a internationally recognized government was protecting him. that had to stop.

now osama is traveling from mut hut to cave in the remotest area on the planet.

Were they 'protecting him' though?
And if Bush wanted him caught then he would have been by now. Perhaps he's more useful alive though, because we all need an enemy with a recognized face to justify our 'war with no end', right?

jlew24asu

Byrnzie wrote:

Were they 'protecting him' though?

the taliban? yes they were. do you believe otherwise?

Byrnzie wrote:

And if Bush wanted him caught then he would have been by now.[\quote]bush did fuck up but not getting him in afgahistan but then again its not as easy you you think it is.

Byrnzie wrote:

Perhaps he's more useful alive though, because we all need an enemy with a recognized face to justify our 'war with no end', right?

this is just your opinion. no way do I believe Bush wants osama alive.

miller8966

Byrnzie wrote:

Were they 'protecting him' though?
And if Bush wanted him caught then he would have been by now.quote]

I guess clinton was protecting him too?