War in Afghanistan

Quote:

---

I reject your theory, unless you can provide backup to prove your opinion.

---

Nik, read your own words here. This sort of loaded language is what ticks me and probably others off, It's propagandistic.

As for the cluster mines, this has been in the news numerous times, it's not mine, it's not a theory, Israel even tried to take action against the US over this issue, the Pentagon released an official report that stated that as many as 95% of landmines the US vehicles struck were in fact our own cluster munitions. The details of when we replaced "Katys" with small land mines for cluster bombing is also well recorded, and can be found anywhere.

The topic has been discussed at length on this forum in several threads. No one ever called it a theory, attributed it to me, or doubted anything about the idea, which is, btw, the official pentagon position and has been for several years now.

As for the history of Al Qaeda, anyone can find and read that. Osama Bin Laden wrote quite a bit about it. Again, there was no speculation there. Anyone in the muslim world can tell you this. No one in the CIA even uses the term "Al Qaeda" with any seriousness to refer to a specific terrorist organization.

Finally, I have no vested interest in arguing or convincing anyone. Feel free to disagree, but please don't direct your disagreements asking for a response from me if you're not talking to me, as you seem only to be trying to shoot down my credibility as I answer the questions of others to the best of my abilities, which is also manipulative and propagandistic. It's not appreciated. Someone asked the question. Feel free to disagree, but don't ask to debate the topic. I do not have time, and simply don't care about the result.

If you doubt my data, google it. As I said, nothing here is news, except to the people who haven't heard it. Nothing here is theory.

Actually, google everything else too. And not just to prove yourself right by adding words to find sources.

If you actually give a damn about the gorram truth you'd ask yourself any time someone posted something which conflicted with what you believe, if you looked at it and thought "I wonder if that's true" not "how can I shoot this down."

However, my job is not to do your ressearch for you. Right now, and for the next several years, I will be researching medicine, and care little for politics.

I would however, like to answer questions without receiving a personal attack for having done so.

Specifically, re: the use of landmine scattering through cluster munitions is currently a warcrimes claim against the US by the ICC for use during the Kosovo war. But it was acknowledged by the Pentagon to have been used in Lebanon and wide spread useage in Iraq, It's a current US military tactic, which is technically in violation of the landmine treaty, but then, the US govt. doesn't really care much for international treaties.

If anyone cares

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

From Niki2

" What you left out, Mike, is that Al Qaeda is also bent on expanding its doctrines world-wide, and attacking those who do not believe as they do. It IS all those things, tho’ “welfare” and “health care” I would question, but there’s far more to it than that. To call them a “charity” is a huge stretch, from what I’ve researched and know. "

And the US isn't " bent on expanding its doctrines world-wide " ?

Most of the Muslim groups labeled as terrorists have brought alot of support to the populations within their sphere of influence... Hezbollah, for example helped more with the rebuilding effort, medical care and mine clearance efforts in Southern Lebanon than the Lebanese government did after Israel was pushed out.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbollah


As for " We've planted a large number of those IEDs ourself by clusterbombing with landmines

I reject your theory, unless you can provide backup to prove your opinion. Aside from that one line, I agree with your most recent post. "


Yes and No, the use of cluster munitions do have the effects DT is talking about, well documented examples is Israel using them in Southern Lebanon, or the US using them in Bosnia, or Russia using then in Chechnya...

But if you believe the US, they haven't used cluster bombs in Afghanistan since spring 2002, I think one of the reasons why was incidents where food packets given away by Americans and cluster sub munitions were in same in color and size... leading to unfortunate incidents
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/south_asia/1670891.stm

http://www.commondreams.org/views01/1030-11.htm





Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists


Lets party like its 1939

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Gino,

1. Niki clearly misunderstood me when she used the word "planted." I apologize for skimming her posts. But, yes, you are correct, it's a side effect of a tactic, not an intentional "planting."

2. I was referring to land-mine related friendly fire casualties in Iraq, which are also pretty well documented, but now that you bring it up, the scattering and planting of land mines in Afghanistan by many parties at least dating back to the first Soviet Invasion is going to be a perennial problem for the area for a long time to come.

Now if someone strikes a landmine in Afghanistan, you really can't have any idea who planted it or when short of forensic evidence, which admittedly, you sometimes have, but also which the western press often distorts or doesn't report. (anyone remember Bush trying to hawk a bomb shell made in Wilkesbarre PA as proof of Iranian involvement?) It's never going to be in our interests to blame ourselves, and probably not China, Russia, or Afghans fighting China or Russia as a suspect in any land mine usage.

You're right about Russia and Chechnya, also I'd like to add Georgia to that.

The real problem here is that this usage violates the international land mine treaty which states that the exact coordinates of any land mine used must be recorded during any use in any conflict for post-war removal.. That's impossible when you use random scattering.


Oh, as for the designation of Al Qaeda as a charity, it's not my own, it's a technical classification, that's why I put it in such a skeptical framework, but it's a designation that our govt. has used at least as many times as it has "terrorist organization" and honestly, it's more accurate.

Charities simply ferry aid from contributors to recipients without seeking to benefit in the process, What they are charitably supporting is very often something that you wouldn't want to associate yourself with. I think that there was a misapprehension here that "charity=good," no, it's just a means of doing things.

It would be nice if we could abandon all weighted prejudices, like that democrats bring peace, or republicans bring fiscal discipline or that socialism is about helping people or that socialism is about totalitarian control. Democrats are a political party that seeks being elected with left support, Republicans, with right, socialism is short for social engineering, at this point, I'm not too sure of much else.

Whether I'd classify either Al Qaeda or the Mujahideen as terrorist organizations is up in the air for me at the moment. Technically, this would mean that they intentionally fostered an atmosphere of fear for political gain. I'm not sure. It's possible. It's also possible that actions attributed to them are actually committed by hostile govts. such as the US or Russia. I'm just not sure.

I'd be more tempted to say that the US might be a terrorist organization, specific incidents like the bombing of Fallujah seem to serve no other purpose than to foster an environment of fear.

As for charities, The IMF is a charitable institution, as is the WHO. The IRA is a terrorist group, but they will never be as objectively despicable as the IMF or WHO.

I feel there's a constant battle of semantics in the undercurrent of any debate. It's like that nonsense of Obama being a secret muslim last year. If I understand correctly, to the Sunnis of Indonesia, there is no "ex-muslim" and so he's a rather more public muslim, but so what? It's a free country. He can be a muslim christian zionist if he wants. I think his muslim ties are an asset, but one alas he is quickly spending with this war.

At present I'm fairly ticked over the war, I thought the stop loss thing was over, and the drones were going away, Obama pledged both of those, even though he never pledged an end to the war, both of those things have stayed.

sorry [/rant] to the empty room ;)

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

Gino beat me to it, but yes I was gonna bring that up.

The cluster bomb controversy
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2912617.stm

We not only dropped a shitload of clusterbombs and mines, but we used a munition near identical to food drops and often as not dropped em over the same areas - to date no one has proven whether that was stupidity or malice, but frankly knowing the racial and religious bents of the commanders in charge at the time I tend to lean toward deliberate malice, something which I would not say lightly, mind you.

In fact, one of my friends, a British EOD expert, died removing some unexploded allied munitions from a local Iraqis field so he could plant food for his family - I do not begrudge this, cause everyone in that job knows the clock will run out sooner or later, and it was his hope to come back in a matchbox because he "did not want to linger" if his time did come - he not only got his wish on that front, the concussive effect cleared the other munitions and the surviving trainee, who was only thrown into a wall by the blast, managed to certify it safe before being medivaced, so he got the job done even posthumously.

Another of my buds, during the Kosovo deployment, had to be airdropped to work on the antenna farm cause the area was so riddled with mines from both sides as well as some NATO forces, including ours, that it wasn't safe to walk or drive anywhere near the place.

Call me what you will for it, but being how bloody dangerous the damned things are, before the lady was killed by american bombs as a result of collateral damage, one of my contacts with RAWA helped translate instructions on how to disarm various munitions, cause we shouldn't ought to be using the damned things, and they can stay dangerous for an extremely long time.

-F

NOTIFY: N  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME

DT: I don't get your use of "propagandistic", especially where it relates to asking for sources, cites or something to back up what you write. You state things as fact, I and others have been asked to back up statements we have made as fact, so I saw no problem in asking the same of you. How that is "propagandistic" or even "manipulative" eludes me. Doesn't matter; I understand what you're saying; if I'm getting it right, it's that whatever you write should be checked out by someone else if they don't believe it, because what you write is what you believe to be fact. Accepted.

Quote:

---

please don't direct your disagreements asking for a response from me if you're not talking to me

---

I don't understand that sentence at all, and I'm not trying to shoot you down, I'm trying to discern the difference between what you have theorized and what has been proven.

Quote:

---

not just to prove yourself right by adding words to find sources

---

I don't understand that one either. It's no matter, I just found the sentences confusing, so I can't respond to it.

Quote:

---

If you actually give a damn about the gorram truth you'd ask yourself any time someone posted something which conflicted with what you believe, if you looked at it and thought "I wonder if that's true" not "how can I shoot this down."

---

That's not what I do; and many people provide cites for what they state, so I can read the cites and decide for myself. I'd rather decide for myself about things and do google numerous things I read, you just rarely provide them yet make many statements as flat fact. That makes it hard to discuss, not knowing what are assumptions and what are credible facts, that's all.

As for personal attacks, I asked for backup of what you stated, and said I rejected your theory...if you prefer, read the latter as "I disagree", that's what I was saying. There were o personal attacks, just a request and a disagreement. I think it best we agree to disagree and just let things go on from there.

Gino:

Quote:

---

And the US isn't " bent on expanding its doctrines world-wide " ?

---

Oh, good gawd, of COURSE we are..especially the past few years! I never said otherwise, did I? But I believe from what they rant and rave about, that the loose non-organization of people who consider themselves part of that group are bent on "wiping out" and acting through terrorism to kill all non-Muslims and/or Westerners...I guess I should have said "religious doctrine and terrorism".

Nonetheless, I think America contributes a lot to Afghanistan by way of medical, food and other assistance; certainly one nation calls "freedom fighters" what another calls "terrorists" throughout history, we're a prime example, but I don't see calling Al Qaeda a "charity". I would more call the Tliban a charity, as they have given direct aid to the country in many ways.

I agree with what you said about land mines, and Frem as well. I knew about Kosovo, Iraq was pretty easy to surmise, but I don't believe "We've planted a large number of those IEDs ourself by clusterbombing with landmines" in AFGHANISTAN, which is what was being discussed. I could certainly be wrong, but that's not what I've gathered, At least not since, as you cited, incidents which ceased such operations. It is with that which I was disagreeing.

As to landmines in general, I would say some very unpleasant things about them being used at all by anyone; basically, it sickens me. 'Nuff said.

(who's been changing the title...again? This time it was spelled "Afgan War"...sigh...)

NOTIFY: Y  | REPLY  | REPLY WITH QUOTE  | PERMALINK  | TOP  | HOME