War in Afghanistan
POSTED BY: Niki2
UPDATED: Friday, November 28, 2025 16:36
VIEWED: 6755
PAGE 7 of 8
Niki2 said
" 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. "
Mind you, if I was Prime Minister I would sign all the treaties limiting the use of landmines, cluster bombs, etc
But with the caveat that if we are fighting someone who hasn't signed that treaty, or is disregarding same treaty... then that treaty does not apply
Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists 
Lets party like its 1939
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mike,
I think no one supports Al Qaeda. I was being technical, and yes, there's a lot of what we might consider "actual charity" in Al Qaeda, but it's probably more fair to say that people use the Al Qaeda network to do actual charity.
When you consider what the US considers "foreign aid" it's not really that different of a concept.
I have the same issues with the Israeli govt. as everyone else. When I say I support Israel or the Israeli people, I'm countering a position I hear too often here, and elsewhere, which is "Fuck 'em." Israelis are just people with less control over their govt. than we have, and to me they look like sacrificial victims for holocaust v. 2.0, *especially* the west bank jewish settlers. Their govt. *wants* them to be attacked so that it will have a justification for war. Our govt. did the same thing in the 19th c.
That said, you could easily make the case that our "aid" is really to arm and support terrorism, largely Israeli terrorism, govt. sponsored or not, like Rahm's dad's little operation.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Mmmm, Mike, neither of those institutions do terrorist acts, nor do they propagate the "kill all nonbelievers" ideology. That's what I was talking about.
Gino, I wish every head of state would do the same; and I'd leave out the caveat. Doing as our enemies do only brings us down to their level, and a child of either side can be killed/maimed by a landmine, no matter what it's original intent was, yes?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by out2theblack:
Once again , despite the Vile Comments from me, the top-of-the-Go*Se, an effort is made to go back on topic...
I would never say to anyones face the sort of things I indulges in here...Not more than once , that is...Coward...I've never seen one of those 'c-word' things to which one supposes I meant to refer... Unless you count the cows I molested once. I can't spell or use English, that is...Illiterate...
Fixed that for you.
--------------------------------------------------
If you play a Microsoft CD backwards you can hear demonic voices. The scary part is that if you play it forwards it installs Windows.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Gino,
Agreed. But these nations are already signatories to the land mine treaty, which they are now blatantly violating, not to mention the NPT.
I don't like the idea of some large international hand to enforce treaties, but we need something, maybe a gentle-nation's agreement that all allies will back out of supporting anyone who violates international treaties.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
Mmmm, Mike, neither of those institutions do terrorist acts, nor do they propagate the "kill all nonbelievers" ideology. That's what I was talking about.
Gino, I wish every head of state would do the same; and I'd leave out the caveat. Doing as our enemies do only brings us down to their level, and a child of either side can be killed/maimed by a landmine, no matter what it's original intent was, yes?
Actually I was leaving the door open for countries attacked by the US, who is in opposition to most of these treatys...
If your on the recieving end of USAF clusterbombs, and you can dole out the same them it would be wrong not to...
Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists
Lets party like its 1939
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Gino,
Agreed. But these nations are already signatories to the land mine treaty, which they are now blatantly violating, not to mention the NPT.
I don't like the idea of some large international hand to enforce treaties, but we need something, maybe a gentle-nation's agreement that all allies will back out of supporting anyone who violates international treaties.
I think we keep coming back to the idea of an effective UN,
without Veto problems, or handpicked security councils providing undue influences
Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists
Lets party like its 1939
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Gino,
Agreed. But these nations are already signatories to the land mine treaty, which they are now blatantly violating, not to mention the NPT.
I don't like the idea of some large international hand to enforce treaties, but we need something, maybe a gentle-nation's agreement that all allies will back out of supporting anyone who violates international treaties.
Also, take a look at who hasn't signed these treatys
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottawa_Treaty#Signatories
Signatories
Main article: List of parties to the Ottawa Treaty
There were originally 855,000 signatories of the petition launched by the International Campaign to Ban Landmines in 1997; when the Convention was opened for signature, it was signed by 133 countries; as of 10 May 2009, there were 156 States Parties to the Treaty.[4] Thirty-seven countries have not signed the treaty. There is a clause in the treaty, Article 3, which permits countries to retain landmines for use in training or development of countermeasures. 64 countries have taken this option. In total 289,000 mines have been declared as retained by various countries under Article 3. A further 23 countries have not declared a figure.[citation needed]
The list of about three dozen states that have not signed the treaty includes a majority of the permanent members of the United Nations Security Council (People's Republic of China, the United States and Russia), India, and both Koreas, where use of landmines remain common in the Demilitarized Zone.[5]
Either your with the terrorists, or ... your with the terrorists
Lets party like its 1939
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Longest War in United States History
Will Biden End U.S.A's “Forever War” in Afghanistan? Trump wanted out. Now, Biden says he'll withdraw
Biden called George W. Bush before he announced his Afghanistan troop withdrawal plan - but neither said whether Bush supported it
https://www.yahoo.com/news/biden-called-george-w-bush-122849374.html
Father of fallen Canadian soldier of two minds on Biden’s pullout from Afghanistan
https://www.thestar.com/politics/2021/04/15/father-of-fallen-canadian-
soldier-of-two-minds-on-bidens-pullout-from-afghanistan.html
U.S.'s Blinken flies to Afghanistan in show of support after Biden's pull-out announcement
https://uk.news.yahoo.com/u-blinken-flies-afghanistan-show-121304065.h
tml
Biden’s Afghanistan pullout gets mixed reaction in Congress
https://www.defensenews.com/congress/2021/04/15/bidens-afghanistan-pul
lout-gets-mixed-reaction-in-congress/
NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Well, the Libtards insisted upon and Elected a resurgent War around the world, including Afghanistan.
So now they get it.
Who would have thought that a mere 4 years without "War" being cried every couple of days would allow folks to forget about the word.
Oh, wait....Yep, the Conservatives knew this all along - the Libtards would make folk forget that War was their bread and butter.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME