View Full Version : Micheal Schuber Interview-CIA
I just heard an interview on FOX news with the former head of the Bin Laden unit in the CIA. He said this administration is fixed on individuals. Right now they want the guy who built the bombs that were sent on the planes the other day. He said this can't be won by singling out individuals. When asked what should be done, he said "kill more of them". He said "we are not going to win the hearts and minds of these people, we just have to kill them all". Finally someone who gets it.
Morgan338LM
11-01-2010, 10:20
This was also the analysis of some of my professors in college who were military and well versed in the subject. We as Americans tend to assume the radicals think like we do, which is a misconception. There is no common ground to find.
Wars have never been won by being nice, tolerant, politically correct or by nation building. They are won by killing the enemy.
The saying goes"cut off the head, and the body will die", but this does not work when dealing with an infection. We still have B-52s and millions of gallons of napalm....jus' sayin'.....If the "insurgents and freedom fighters" had to worry about us laying waste to hundreds of square miles surrounding their homes every time they tried to pull something, they might find it a little more thought provoking. [AR15]
I would tell them we have reached the double bonus round. Every time they pull some crap, we take out 10,000 of them. Each additional action would result in doubling that number. Until the "non-combative" among them are more afraid of us than they are of them, this will never be over. Once they fear us, there will be no place for the rest to hide. As it stands, we pay for "civilian" casualties. We'll hit a building that has 10 or 12 "insurgents" in it but also what they call "innocent civilians" and we pay their families money and say we regret the unintentional casualties. Bullshit! What were they doing hanging out with the bad guys if their so innocent. Kill um wholesale!
StagLefty
11-01-2010, 10:50
You guys are on the right page. Why do we play by the rules and our enemies don't ? Why does world opinion run our wars ? They behead our people on TV and it disappears. We embarrass some prisoners and it's a worldwide incident. The list goes on yet we bow to public opinion instead of ending these conflicts and taking care of our own domestic problems. [Bang]
eh, I've been saying for years we ought to bring home our troops and seal our borders, produce everything in house (but I'm not an isolationist, some people do need our help), etc. We should NOT be the worlds' "Big Brother" and police every situation that arises. It's their own God given free will whether they choose to emulate us or not. Let the M.E. kill themselves if they so choose. However, if they attack us, end thier whole existence on this planet and build a super Walmart on their land. Their should be no second chances or just one individual is repsonsible crap. An act of war should be met with an immediate and uncontrolled act of fury and discipline.
As in personal training, you train to take care of business. Walk away if you can. Talk out of it if you can. However, when threatened and you cannot get away, you end the fight as fast and as destructive as you can. You make them fear for THEIR lives to where the mear whisper or your name or glimpse of your face immediately and uneqivocably send s ashiver of fear through their deepest, innermost parts of their souls... if they live through the immediate response.
Even though there is a lot of problems with that scenario, it's sure sounds nice to me. Flame suit on.
Why do we play by the rules and our enemies don't ? Why does world opinion run our wars ? They behead our people on TV and it disappears. We embarrass some prisoners and it's a worldwide incident. The list goes on yet we bow to public opinion instead of ending these conflicts and taking care of our own domestic problems. [Bang]
Because it's not vengance we're after. Yes, war would be easier if we did those things mentioned before (I highly encourage them against known combatants), however, the blanket bombing of a civilization, regardless of how misled and off base, is criminally and morally wrong (by any religion). I agree that we should punish every single threat to our nation (preferably with lead injections to the head), but not everyone that doesn't like us. Our soldiers are professional warriors, not barbaric, self rightous idiots laying waste to everything. Yes, it is difficult seeing the atrocities that others to to us, but we are better people than that and do so by proving it with our character, composure, skill, and dedication on the battlefield. Any idiot can shoot a gun in combat, a warrior does so appropriately and with HONOR. There is no honor in what our enemy does, I agree 100%, but there is much honor gained from the professonalism our soldiers display in combat, and in reconstruction of those in need of help. Honor is expensive, and it's usually paid for in blood, but it is what separates us from them.
I'm not saying we should torture or behead our enemies. But I would not risk the life of even one of our warriors to save 100,000 of those who not only condone, but also give support by letting the enemy hide among them. wwpd (what would Patton do?)
WTF?
Who is the "all" in "kill them all"? Who is the enemy? What 10,000 people are we going to kill? Did any of you really think about the fact you're advocating mass murder?
What makes someone a terrorist, as in the definition of the term. How can you advocate killing 10,000 people without concern for weeding your enemy out of the innocents and not meet the definition of terrorist? Or is the point of view that no one "over there" is innocent?
I understand the appeal of a black and white world view, but seriously, this is the same rationale that fuels Al Queda. The world isn't that simple. Try and put yourself into the shoes of an average Iraqi, or Afghan, or Yemeni. They don't give a shit about us, they just want to live their lives. They've never met a terrorist, don't wish any American's dead, and are just trying to make the lives of their kids better than the ones they had. Much like us. You're going to advocate killing them?
If you can find 10,000 enemy to kill, congratulations you've just ended the global war on terror, because that's about the estimated size of all these terrorist organizations.
If you're suggesting we just carpet bomb a random city, fuck you.
H.
PS: Here's a definition of terrorist: systematic use of terror (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear) especially as a means of coercion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coercion).[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism#cite_note-0) No universally agreed, legally binding, criminal law definition of terrorism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Definition_of_terrorism#In_international_law) currently exists.[2] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism#cite_note-1)[3] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism#cite_note-2) Common definitions of terrorism refer only to those violent acts which are intended to create fear (terror), are perpetrated for a religious, political or ideological goal, deliberately target or disregard the safety of non-combatants (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non-combatant) (civilians), and are committed by non-government agencies.
Because it's not vengance we're after. Yes, war would be easier if we did those things mentioned before (I highly encourage them against known combatants), however, the blanket bombing of a civilization, regardless of how misled and off base, is criminally and morally wrong (by any religion). I agree that we should punish every single threat to our nation (preferably with lead injections to the head), but not everyone that doesn't like us. Our soldiers are professional warriors, not barbaric, self rightous idiots laying waste to everything. Yes, it is difficult seeing the atrocities that others to to us, but we are better people than that and do so by proving it with our character, composure, skill, and dedication on the battlefield. Any idiot can shoot a gun in combat, a warrior does so appropriately and with HONOR. There is no honor in what our enemy does, I agree 100%, but there is much honor gained from the professonalism our soldiers display in combat, and in reconstruction of those in need of help. Honor is expensive, and it's usually paid for in blood, but it is what separates us from them.
Much better stated than mine. And a boat load more diplomatic.
H.
StagLefty
11-01-2010, 11:40
[SIZE=7]WTF?
[SIZE=2]
If you're suggesting we just carpet bomb a random city, fuck you.
Where did that come from ? All I'm suggesting is that we pursue our enemies aggressively and not by opinion.
I don't want to fight with anyone about this but there are a hell of a lot more than 10,000. Hezbollah probably has that many. I'm not in charge of anything, so I wouldn't be too worried about it happening. By your logic, what we did in Japan and Germany was mass murder. I don't feel that way. By winning a war though attrition is the only way it's ever been done successfully. Do I want woman and children to die, hell no!(or anybody else for that matter) But if it has to happen, I prefer it to be theirs and not ours.
I'd be interested in the pyscological studies of how a people can turn on itself to oust the "terrorists" etc.
Would "capet bombing" and sustaining heavy civilian casulties make them want to oust the purporters or would it create a mindset of "us vs them" ultimately leading to more support for the terrorists... Interesting stuff in my view.
wwpd (what would Patton do?)
Wars may be fought with weapons, but they are won by men. It is the spirit of the men who follow and of the man who leads that gains the victory.
-Patton (September 1933)
I'd be interested in the pyscological studies of how a people can turn on itself to oust the "terrorists" etc.
Would "capet bombing" and sustaining heavy civilian casulties make them want to oust the purporters or would it create a mindset of "us vs them" ultimately leading to more support for the terrorists... Interesting stuff in my view.
The views of the "supporters" or most of the people in Afghan now got their opinion of the US from their elders, who were disgruntled from the end of the Soviet-Afghan war. We can not change their oppinion by becoming who they say we are, we have to show them that we are better men. This takes time and perserverence. We are basically telling them that their father & grand fateher were full of if and they need to trust us. Not an easy pill to swallow for them. Killing every hadji we see only confirms what they've been taught and creates another dedicated supporter for the Taliban. Once a legal combatant, GAME ON!
I'd be interested in the pyscological studies of how a people can turn on itself to oust the "terrorists" etc.
Would "capet bombing" and sustaining heavy civilian casulties make them want to oust the purporters or would it create a mindset of "us vs them" ultimately leading to more support for the terrorists... Interesting stuff in my view.
It worked pretty well in Italy where they were "liberated" LOL
Look, I don't claim to have the real answers. I was just venting a little. I do believe we should pursue them MUCH more aggressively and punish those that harbor our enemies. And instilling fear in an enemy is not terrorism all the time. In Vietnam some of the tanks played the middle part of Whole Lotta Love to instill fear. We carpet bombed Germany to instill fear. The psycops units were designed to instill fear.
It worked pretty well in Italy where they were "liberated" LOL
Look, I don't claim to have the real answers. I was just venting a little. I do believe we should pursue them MUCH more aggressively and punish those that harbor our enemies. And instilling fear in an enemy is not terrorism all the time. In Vietnam some of the tanks played the middle part of Whole Lotta Love to instill fear. We carpet bombed Germany to instill fear. The psycops units were designed to instill fear.
I hear you man, the thread was starting to get rough with people saying F you and etc gettin' all emotional, so I just thought I'd change it or steer in a different direction.
There are so many aspects of war that one person will never have the answer. One says "kill 'em all", the other says "show them love", and etc. We just need to find that happy median. I'm all for the "kill 'em all" approach when it comes to terror, but I know that classifying one particular ethincity as a terrorist is wrong as I've met some "Great Americans" who are one particular ethinicty and completely and loyally assilmilate to the American lifestyle and systems, etc. Anyways, enough rambling. Game on.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0CdcCnLdtE (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u0CdcCnLdtE)
The views of the "supporters" or most of the people in Afghan now got their opinion of the US from their elders, who were disgruntled from the end of the Soviet-Afghan war. We can not change their oppinion by becoming who they say we are, we have to show them that we are better men. This takes time and perserverence. We are basically telling them that their father & grand fateher were full of if and they need to trust us. Not an easy pill to swallow for them. Killing every hadji we see only confirms what they've been taught and creates another dedicated supporter for the Taliban. Once a legal combatant, GAME ON!
Do you think that trying to show them that we are better and then killing a family member or friend (legitimately) due to their terror connections makes them think of us as hypocrits? How do we get over that? That instills the hate for us. Once a wall like that is built, it's hard to tear down.
Also, who defines what the definition of "a better man" is? The American image of a man is everything they detest it seems.. For them, could it be who kills the most infidels, etc?... just some interesting thoughts to me.
Not trying to start anything, just interested in peoples thoughts.
. I do believe we should pursue them MUCH more aggressively and punish those that harbor our enemies.
Wrong Commander in Chief....
and with McChrystal out....no more balls left in military managemet (dont even get me started on that waste of oxygen Petraeus)
Do you think that trying to show them that we are better and then killing a family member or friend (legitimately) due to their terror connections makes them think of us as hypocrits? How do we get over that? That instills the hate for us. Once a wall like that is built, it's hard to tear down.
Also, who defines what the definition of "a better man" is? The American image of a man is everything they detest it seems.. For them, could it be who kills the most infidels, etc?... just some interesting thoughts to me.
Not trying to start anything, just interested in peoples thoughts.
Didn't suggest that it is an easy task. Doing the right thing seldom is...The day we as a country decide to pick the easy way out instead of the right thing is the day when I pick up and move.
The misconception here is that we can instill OUR sense of morality in the Muslim extremists by showing them how much more noble we are and taking the higher path. This method might work with enemies that share our world view, but the extremists that comprise Al Qaeda and allied organizations are not bound by our conceptions of what is right or moral. For the last 6000 years(Yes, I know Islam is not that old, but bear with me), the only tactic that has worked with these tribes is to instill fear and respect, as their only loyalties lie with family, clan, and religion. The only way to deal with them as equals is to have a credible threat available to use against any of those 3. As soon as you show weakness, you are no longer an equal, and will be treated with derision and contempt. Not all Muslims are terrorists, and many are willing to embrace western values, but they must do it on their own terms, and some will reject them altogether.
I think everybody knows my thoughts on how to deal with terrorism.
They can hate us all they want, blame us for their problems, march, burn flags and shout allah akbar all day. I don't give a shit, as long as it goes no further.
But they need to learn and we need to teach them that if their hate overflows into action they will pay a price so steep that others that follow after will think twice, and hard, before fucking with us.
but the extremists that comprise Al Qaeda and allied organizations are not bound by our conceptions of what is right or moral. ...and some will reject them altogether.
That's where the lead injections come in!!
(updated...non-toxic, lead free copper and tungsten injections. I forgot about the new M855A1 ammo.)
Didn't suggest that it is an easy task. Doing the right thing seldom is....
Big +1, rgr that...
The misconception here is that we can instill OUR sense of morality in the Muslim extremists by showing them how much more noble we are and taking the higher path. This method might work with enemies that share our world view, but the extremists that comprise Al Qaeda and allied organizations are not bound by our conceptions of what is right or moral. For the last 6000 years(Yes, I know Islam is not that old, but bear with me), the only tactic that has worked with these tribes is to instill fear and respect, as their only loyalties lie with family, clan, and religion. The only way to deal with them as equals is to have a credible threat available to use against any of those 3. As soon as you show weakness, you are no longer an equal, and will be treated with derision and contempt. Not all Muslims are terrorists, and many are willing to embrace western values, but they must do it on their own terms, and some will reject them altogether.
First sentence is exactly what I was trying to convey. Thanks. I agree with the rest as well.
...They can hate us all they want, blame us for their problems, march, burn flags and shout allah akbar all day. I don't give a shit, as long as it goes no further.
But they need to learn and we need to teach them that if their hate overflows into action they will pay a price so steep that others that follow after will think twice, and hard, before fucking with us.
True, and thus the vicious cycle of "how"? But, I do completely agree. Wipe tribe 1 from the face of the earth and tribe 2 will think long and hard before committing any certain act.
Big +1, rgr that...
First sentence is exactly what I was trying to convey. Thanks. I agree with the rest as well.
True, and thus the vicious cycle of "how"? But, I do completely agree. Wipe tribe 1 from the face of the earth and tribe 2 will think long and hard before committing any certain act.
I'd tell you how, but then folks wouldn't think I was such a nice guy.
Where did that come from ? All I'm suggesting is that we pursue our enemies aggressively and not by opinion.
Well I'm less irritable after I've had some coffee, but I read the first few posts as "Let's retaliate against them indiscriminately", and that is irrationality that I can't abide.
The comparison to WWII is not apt. The civilians working in those plants producing munitions (the broad sense of the word) are valid targets. The people in WTC? No. The insurgents in the training camp? MQ-9 go!
The idea that we should "kill em all" in an environment where the enemy doesn't wear uniforms and uses the human populace as a shield is repugnant. I should have found some sources on the original posters comments, because it's hard to believe a CIA analyst, knowing the relative scope of the task, would use such a blanket phrase. It implies a callous disregard for innocent victims, and that disregard is a larger long term threat than our opponents.
H.
He was on FOX this morning. I was working in the next room when I heard it and I was a little shocked to hear that in an interview so I went and backed it up so I could listen to it again. I don't think he meant civilians. I think the context was more "insurgents". But you don't hear that kind of thing very often. That said, the way they hide among the population, I don't see how an effective campaign can be waged without a lot of casualties, innocent? or not. I do not believe the ones that are radicalized can be changed. They will never be peaceful people. What sucks it they are indoctrinating more and more everyday. And a lot of those are children.
That said, the way they hide among the population, I don't see how an effective campaign can be waged without a lot of casualties, innocent? or not.
Not to beat a dead horse, but that's why we need McChrystal back... we were doing it just fine on 01-02 with him running JSOC.
The first few suggestions in the thread sounded like the equivalent of leveling an urban city block after a trio of gang bangers ran and hid in a project apartment complex.
Troublco
11-01-2010, 13:41
We as Americans tend to assume the radicals think like we do, which is a misconception.
This. Every liberal in our country (and a lot of others) just assume that everyone else thinks the way they do. It just ain't so. And thinking this way is dangerous. You can't just figure that everyone else thinks the same way as you, would respond to a given situation like you, and would react the same way as you. Just look at the difference between the values of a Socialist Liberal, and a Jeffersonian Conservative. And that's just in our country!
I agree that going in and decimating a population isn't a good way to take care of things. We do need to stop pulling crap like prosecuting those Navy SEALs who allegedly "roughed up" that Al Qaeda leader. And then asked him if he'd been mistreated? They are using our own rules against us, and laughing all the way to the mosque, which they are probably using to store their weapons since they know that we won't bomb the damn thing even if we could prove they used it for weapons storage (which makes it a legitimate target!) because they'll just lie and claim they were innocent. I don't advocate killing innocents. I do advocate whacking those who need/deserve it. If you turn around and whip an AK out of your robes, shoot a couple of soldiers, then throw the gun away and run, you need a couple of bullets. Period. I don't think we need to treat every one of their ilk as an honored guest, either. Sufficient shelter, food, etc, but to be honest I don't care if they lost their prayer rug and Koran because they were in a pitched battle with our troops. Too bad. Let 'em kneel on the damn concrete. For that matter, if they were, we shouldn't be taking them captive; just shoot them and be done with it. That way we won't be fighting them later, which has happened with a number of the former Guantanamo inmates.
F@#%K the CIA and their hellish idea of spookdom!
The CIA has been giving out so many lies, crap and misinformation especially about UFO's and ET's that they will never have my respect, now or in the future!
When the "Spook" say's "Kill Them All," he is just downgrading the CIA as being compared to the Hitler's jackboot juggernaut during World War 11.
BLOODY FACISTS!
Let me quote Jeff Cooper:"A person who owns a gun does not make him a shooter, just as a person who owns a guitar does not make him a musican"
This spook who claims he is a warrior, has just played into the hands of AL QAEDA!
Osama Bin Liden was on the CIA payroll during the Afgan-Russian War; and the spooks gave the Muhajdeen mostly all of the AK 47's that exist in Afganistan, that have been killing some of our coliation forces.
I hated the Russians when they used "burn't Earth" tactics against the Afgan's; and I'll hate anybody else who uses the same slash and burn tactics in this bloody Afgan War foreign or domestic!
This isn't just a war against AL Qaeda and their supporter's; it is a war against the opium and heroin trade in Afganistan with recent Russian coperation in a recent drug lab bust in the Afgan nation.
Afganistan is the "Saudia Arabia of Minerals", and these greedy mining interests whether in the U.S., Russia or China want to perpetuate this bloody war in Afganistan at the expense of our coliation force's; so they can get some of their greedy little hands on some of it!
[M2]
rockhound
11-01-2010, 17:59
trying to fight a politically correct war was why we have failed militarily for at least the last four decades.
our troops are capable of hunting down the enemy effective and with limited collateral damage and without carpet bombing.
the liberal PC touting public and govt officials alike will not let that happen.
not only are we not carpet bombing, but we have tied the hands of the troops in other ways.
i have spoken to some of the soldiers that have come back from iraq and they are disgusted with the PC bullshit they have to go through.
we are not fighting we are so limited in the rules of engagement that they can barely defend themselves without being court marshaled, much less actually take out the enemy.
YOU CANNOT WIN A WAR BY BEING POLITICALLY CORRECT [Bang]
Morgan338LM
11-01-2010, 18:15
Since I posted second and everyone is referring to the first few posts as Kill em all ideas, let me clarify... When I said there is no common ground to find, I mean that the radicals, not Average Joe Afghani/Iraqi who are literally not interested in this war other than how it affects their lives. The radical extremists/terrorists who have a blind ideology that cannot be reasoned with are the intended subjects of my comment. That we cannot find common ground with them; the only thing we can do is kill them, or they will spend eternity trying to kill us. I do not endorse any wholesale killing of any kind. If you want to read a great book, "Lone Survivor" is about some damn fine human beings, including a Pashtun village that defended Marcus Luttrell (Navy Seal) against the Taliban and refused to hand him over in the face of threats and constant harassment. There is a small group of supremely dedicated ideological zealots who cannot be dissuaded from their goal, the destruction of western civilization. That's a more verbose version of my argument, I hope I have given a better description of what I believe than I did in my short post at #2 on the thread. Cheers
W.
As in any war, the civillans pay the heavest price.
so we invaded iraq for the oil, now we're in afghanistan for the minerals.
okey dokey.
so we invaded iraq for the oil, now we're in afghanistan for the minerals.
okey dokey.
Have you SEEN the prices minerals are going for now a days?
http://www.co-ar15.com/forums/showthread.php?t=22047&highlight=cool+rock
War has always been horrific and brutal, only very recently (a century or two, or much less, depending on how you view things) has Liberalism attempted to water it down to make it 'acceptable' to the general populous. Meanwhile, none of our potential or real enemies hamstring themselves like America and its allies.
Islam will never be compatible with Western civilization. I don't support "mass murder" but, like half-retarded gangbangers, they only respect force...
theGinsue
11-01-2010, 23:23
I'm with Stag and Bear here. We'll never remove the threat by keeping our borders open, mettling in everyone elses affairs in the guise of "helping" them, nor by playing fair.
Some of you will call an all out blitzkrieg retaliatory offensive "murder" if "innocents" are killed. I do not. If you willingly tolerate those who seek to be our enemies or you stand in the center of aggression and claim "innocence", you are not a non-combatant, you are an enemy of this nation and a target. If you allow "extremists" militant combatants to HQ themselves in your mosque, your mosque is now a viable target as is everyone inside. PERIOD.
You wanna play nice, OUR people are going to die. We can reduce the number of our men and women who have to die by actually fighting a war like we're FIGHTING A WAR, not by tying our hands.
I saw that someone quoted Gen Patton when he said:
“Wars may be fought with weapons, but they are won by men. It is the spirit of the men who follow and of the man who leads that gains the victory.”
This is a truism, but it's also true that if you remove the men who will fight, either by killing them, or eliminating their "spirit" to fight by pounding them relentlessly, you've won the war. Patton also said a few other things that I think are applicable:
"The more I see of Arabs the less I think of them. By having studied them a good deal I have found out the trouble. They are the mixture of all the bad races on earth, and they get worse from west to east, because the eastern ones have had more crosses."
"The object of war is not to die for your country but to make the other bastard die for his" (There are several variants of the previous quote all attributed to General Patton)
“So let us do real fighting, boring in and gouging, biting.
Let's take a chance now that we have the ball.
Let's forget those fine firm bases in the dreary shell raked spaces,
Let's shoot the works and win! Yes win it all."
"A good solution applied with vigor now is better than a perfect solution applied ten minutes later."
"Don't fight a battle if you don't gain anything by winning."
and my favorite,
"May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won't"
I couldn't have said it better myself.
I was wondering when Patton's Arab quote would come up....
I agree that we cannot fight a war and be politically correct at the same time. BTDT, have the scars to remind me. More was accomplished in the first few months of war in Afghanistan when no one even knew what was happening than in the past 7-8 years. I also agree, as much as I do not like it, that we cannot ignore the ramifications of not being somewhat diplomatic or civil in this effort. If we do not change their views, the years of brainwashing; we will be back again. The humanitarian role, although not what we typically attribute to warfare, is important to the overall process. Like I said, I don't necessarily agree, but it is a necessary role. There is a line between too much interference with the soldiers out front and providing media support for the workers in the rear building schools. That line is getting crossed more and more, preventing our soldiers from doing their job effectively.
There are some over there with such a twisted midset and view of the western world, that there is no solution for them except a 62 gr injection to the head. We all agree that they are threats to not just our society, but every society including their own. These individuals must be hunted down, in whatever country they are hiding in. Again, PC has to stay out. We cannot capture and pamper these fanatics, they must be dealt with severely and out of the public's eye. Not everyone in the world needs to know how it's being done, just that it is.
they must be dealt with severely and out of the public's eye. Not everyone in the world needs to know how it's being done, just that it is.
Lol, I've been saying that for a while too. Just bring our troops home. Send in a few black teams and tell 'em to clean up the mess... The conventional war would be over in a month at the most and most of the "terrorist leaders" would never be heard from again.
so we invaded iraq for the oil, now we're in afghanistan for the minerals.
okey dokey.
Oh yeah? Well look what invading Iraq got us, besides waging a war based on false pretences: A Shite domminated government with Iranian ties, that is a gateway for Iran to take over the whole Middle East!
They estimate the wealth for Afganistan's diamonds, gold, copper and uranium at 1 trillion dollars; and that will make the Taliban fight so much harder.
"Afganistan is the graveyard of empires"
I wish we would have taken the oil. It might have been worth it then. Instead, WE paid to repair their oil infrastructure and now we're paying them for the oil. I think we should take the oil until we've recovered the cost of both Iraq wars.
Oh yeah? Well look what invading Iraq got us, besides waging a war based on false pretences: A Shite domminated government with Iranian ties, that is a gateway for Iran to take over the whole Middle East!
They estimate the wealth for Afganistan's diamonds, gold, copper and uranium at 1 trillion dollars; and that will make the Taliban fight so much harder.
"Afganistan is the graveyard of empires"
great, now we're into "bush lied and people died"
the hits just keep on coming.
next is "bush stole the election"
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.3 Copyright © 2025 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.