Taliban, terrorist or self-defense?

R

Reaper

New Member
Well I've noticed that the taliban really had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks except having Osama bin laden in their country, they were willing to give him to the United States when they asked but they for some reason refused to provide evidence. Furthermore, on the FBI site Osama Bin Laden is not wanted for the September 11th attacks, and when asked why he wasnt on the list is because "lack of evidence". So why the hell did the United States invade Afghanistan in the first place and why did Brittain, Australia, Canada and several European NATO countries even follow?

Anyways, this is my perspective of the subject of what I've read. Not to mention now that Obama got into the seat, there just happened a raid on a compound with only civilians (including children and a pregnant mother) that were killed by US Special Operation Forces (or some joint force, not sure, I can dig the link up). At first the story was being covered up that they werent civilians but insurgents but later US admitted that they were infact civilians.

What're your thoughts about this? I dont really mean to sound like Anti-American or Anti-NATO, so maybe you people could explain what is going on?
 
Reaper said:
Well I've noticed that the taliban really had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks except having Osama bin laden in their country, they were willing to give him to the United States when they asked but they for some reason refused to provide evidence. Furthermore, on the FBI site Osama Bin Laden is not wanted for the September 11th attacks, and when asked why he wasnt on the list is because "lack of evidence". So why the hell did the United States invade Afghanistan in the first place and why did Brittain, Australia, Canada and several European NATO countries even follow?

Anyways, this is my perspective of the subject of what I've read. Not to mention now that Obama got into the seat, there just happened a raid on a compound with only civilians (including children and a pregnant mother) that were killed by US Special Operation Forces (or some joint force, not sure, I can dig the link up). At first the story was being covered up that they werent civilians but insurgents but later US admitted that they were infact civilians.

What're your thoughts about this? I dont really mean to sound like Anti-American or Anti-NATO, so maybe you people could explain what is going on?[/QUOTE]

Gee, don't mean to sound like military bashing. Where have I heard that before? Oh yes the last thread that started with. "not bashing the military but they kill kids"

Apparently, the FBI can't put Osama Bin Laden on "the list" because of "lack of evidence" but some nimrod can accuse troops of "killing babies" with an equal "lack of evidence".

This thread rates 5 Zssss :sleep::sleep::sleep::sleep::sleep:
Click to expand...
 
As near as I can make out the Taliban are a group of fundamentalist Muslims who use the West's support of oppression of Muslims to gain votes.

Originally I think that all they wanted (and got) was political power in Afghanistan so they could declare it a caliphate, but because of our continued fight against Muslim countries and interference in their affairs, they are slowly transforming into an anti Western alliance because they can see that this will get them the support they need.

Trace this problem back to it's primary cause,..... it's not hard if you take off the blinkers.
 
Last edited:
Chukpike said:
What're your thoughts about this? I dont really mean to sound like Anti-American or Anti-NATO, so maybe you people could explain what is going on?[/QUOTE]

Gee, don't mean to sound like military bashing. Where have I heard that before? Oh yes the last thread that started with. "not bashing the military but they kill kids"

Apparently, the FBI can't put Osama Bin Laden on "the list" because of "lack of evidence" but some nimrod can accuse troops of "killing babies" with an equal "lack of evidence".
Click to expand...


Mr Chupike, would you for once stop trolling?

The gentleman has clearly and unequivocally stated what he meant, no reason for you to say he "meant" ... "something else...bla bla bla". Trolling, and off topic.

Your other contributions, as so often, have nothing to do with what this gentleman stated (where did he mention babies killing?), i.e. are off topic and obviously so with evil intent.

Stop baiting or learn to read.

Rattler
 
I'd say they're just on the defensive.
It may NOW be self-defense but they brought it on themselves. Let's say some guys were holding some people hostage and they were stormed by the SWAT team and they fought back... that doesn't really qualify for self-defense even though their action at that point in time may have been.
 
Reaper said:
Well I've noticed that the taliban really had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks except having Osama bin laden in their country, they were willing to give him to the United States when they asked but they for some reason refused to provide evidence. Furthermore, on the FBI site Osama Bin Laden is not wanted for the September 11th attacks, and when asked why he wasnt on the list is because "lack of evidence". So why the hell did the United States invade Afghanistan in the first place and why did Brittain, Australia, Canada and several European NATO countries even follow?

Anyways, this is my perspective of the subject of what I've read. Not to mention now that Obama got into the seat, there just happened a raid on a compound with only civilians (including children and a pregnant mother) that were killed by US Special Operation Forces (or some joint force, not sure, I can dig the link up). At first the story was being covered up that they werent civilians but insurgents but later US admitted that they were infact civilians.

What're your thoughts about this? I dont really mean to sound like Anti-American or Anti-NATO, so maybe you people could explain what is going on?
Click to expand...


Have you ever looked into the history of Afghanistan mate ???

I know there has been a lot of talk about the British' wars in Afghanistan and so on, but I what I am referring to is post WW2 and pre Soviet Invasion.

If you had taken the time to research a little about the history of the country, you would have found that Afghanistan, in that period of time was perhahs the muslim country, closest to Western society.

After ten years of war with the Russians, Russia finally didn't feel welcome anymore, and left in 1989. The country was left decimated and utterly in chaos.
During the period of Russian occupation between 600.000 and 2.000.000 Afghans were killed. Over 5.000.000 fled to Pakistan and Iran.

Does this alone not justify an intervention by Western society???
We've done it in Africa, The Balkans etc.. - no one complained then ...


Then followed a period of civil war - which didn't really help the country out of its decayed state.

Then came the Taliban - they did indeed instill some sort of law and order.
Problem was the issue with the whole human rights thing...
Why can't you execute people publicly in the following way; halftime at football matches, hang them from the few still standing street signs, execute them in the Olympic pool in Kabul, etc. etc. etc.

Oh btw. did I mention the ban of alcohol, music, singing, dancing, kite-flying, women holding jobs, girls going to school etc. etc. etc.

Do any of these facts justify an intervention by the rest of the world ???
I believe so - I take it you are not going to agree with me - but just as you are entitled to state you opinion - so am I.

Good luck on this site - I am not sure why or what reasons you have for joining Military Forum, seing as you have a clear Anti-Military message you want to express. But anyway - that is your right.

-KV.
 
Reaper said:
Well I've noticed that the taliban really had nothing to do with the September 11th attacks except having Osama bin laden in their country, they were willing to give him to the United States when they asked but they for some reason refused to provide evidence. Furthermore, on the FBI site Osama Bin Laden is not wanted for the September 11th attacks, and when asked why he wasnt on the list is because "lack of evidence". So why the hell did the United States invade Afghanistan in the first place and why did Brittain, Australia, Canada and several European NATO countries even follow?

Anyways, this is my perspective of the subject of what I've read. Not to mention now that Obama got into the seat, there just happened a raid on a compound with only civilians (including children and a pregnant mother) that were killed by US Special Operation Forces (or some joint force, not sure, I can dig the link up). At first the story was being covered up that they werent civilians but insurgents but later US admitted that they were infact civilians.

What're your thoughts about this? I dont really mean to sound like Anti-American or Anti-NATO, so maybe you people could explain what is going on?
Click to expand...
Even the most idealistic of people think the Taliban is a rotten organization that needs to go. While they may not have done 9/11, their close ties to the organization that caused it was a warrant for concern and their attempts to force a fundamentalist Islamic government in the middle east must be stopped. They are a vehemethly anti-progressive entity and a violent one at that.
 
KV. said:
Then came the Taliban - they did indeed instill some sort of law and order.
Problem was the issue with the whole human rights thing...
Why can't you execute people publicly in the following way; halftime at football matches, hang them from the few still standing street signs, execute them in the Olympic pool in Kabul, etc. etc. etc.

Oh btw. did I mention the ban of alcohol, music, singing, dancing, kite-flying, women holding jobs, girls going to school etc. etc. etc.

Do any of these facts justify an intervention by the rest of the world ???
I believe so - I take it you are not going to agree with me - but just as you are entitled to state you opinion - so am I.
-KV.
Click to expand...
I detest the Taliban as I do any religious nut cases, but I notice that we have not invaded other countries that commit similar serious crimes against humanity, like China and North Korea, Iran and probably a dozen other places,... did you ever ask why this is so?

I think your view is simplistic to say the least,.... and we are certainly not there to bring democracy to the people or to bring about personal freedoms as you seemingly suggest.
 
Governments tend to play fast and loose with the definition of "terrorist." Just among U.S. agencies and organizations, different definitions are in use that essentially allow these different agencies to stay relevant in contemporary times. That said, I'm a big advocate of looking to academia as a source of clear-headed and logical approaches to terrorism, the first of which is developing a working definition that is neither too specific nor too broad.
Here is what I believe to be the best working definition of terrorism out there today, taken from Dr. Craig Stapley of Kansas State University:
(paraphrased)
"Terrorism is politically or ideologically-motivated violence or the threat of violence against non-combatants or property with the purpose of influencing a larger audience than the target."

Do the Taliban kill civilians to influence populations to abandon support of NATO forces? Yes. Ergo, they are terrorists.
 
senojekips said:
I detest the Taliban as I do any religious nut cases, but I notice that we have not invaded other countries that commit similar serious crimes against humanity, like China and North Korea, Iran and probably a dozen other places,... did you ever ask why this is so?

I think your view is simplistic to say the least,.... and we are certainly not there to bring democracy to the people or to bring about personal freedoms as you seemingly suggest.
Click to expand...


What crimes, in the cases of China and North Korea, are you referring to if I might ask??

Sentecing criminals to the death - and executing them - is that it ?
Last time I looked, the US still use the death penalty in several states too - why haven't you "invaded" those states and set things straight ?

Anyway I personally don't think you can compare, sentecing a murderer to death in China, and making a spectacle at halftime of a football match, of the execution of a woman accused (never tried in court - because - well there were no courts) of adultry, or hanging a man for not having a long enough beard.

Oh and last time I looked China and North Korea didn't have any plans of outlawing everyday things like music, tv, etc.
I know they use a lot of censorship, but there is a big difference from only being able to see "National tv" to being executed for owning a radio or a tv...

Well my opinion might be simplistic to you - but let me ask you this - ever been to Afghanistan mate ? Have you seen what it is like and what it was like before ?

In the mind of this Veteran of OEF/ISAF we ARE bringing personal freedom and democracy. We ARE making a difference - it might be slow, and painful, but we do good things.
I have seen it with my own eyes - I have heard Afghans telling how the Taliban killed their village' only teacher for teaching girls. How they killed their village elders for not giving them any food.
I have seen how schools have been rebuild, and how girls have started going to school - That is how I know we make a difference.

I cannot see how you can compare Afghanistan with China or North Korea in any way. Tell me why and how you can compare Afghanistan to those countries ?? Two communist countries still living in the cold war, and afghanistan who have been bombed back to the middle ages by 3 decades of war.
Seriously mate - I don't see the links.

I appreciate the first part of your answer on the subject, SENOJEKIPS, but we do obviously not agree.
But I do NOT appreciate you calling my opinion simplistic - yes we have different opinions - but why attack mine ?
Tell me mate - what experience do you have to back up your accusation ???

If you wanted to point out the difference in our opinions, then use some decent, useful and facts to back it up - that would make your statements make sense and make it more understandable.
But in this case it, to me appears - your opinion is, to be perfectly honest, bordering childish.

If you want to take this any further I suggest you PM me instead.
Let the people read factual things in this thread instead of the ramblings of two guys arguing and getting personal (Usually the way this turns out isn't it) in the open forum.

-KV.
 
Last edited:
rattler said:
Mr Chupike, would you for once stop trolling?

The gentleman has clearly and unequivocally stated what he meant, no reason for you to say he "meant" ... "something else...bla bla bla". Trolling, and off topic.

Your other contributions, as so often, have nothing to do with what this gentleman stated (where did he mention babies killing?), i.e. are off topic and obviously so with evil intent.

Stop baiting or learn to read.

Rattler
Click to expand...

I think he meant me. I showed a picture where the word RPG was written under a child. This was regarding the 2007 helicopter shooting.... anyway that post was locked. Chupike reads picture of child+ the word RPG = accusing the military of child murder.....

Sorry for the off topic, just explaining some other off topic thing in this topic...
 
Reaper said:
Anyways, this is my perspective of the subject of what I've read. Not to mention now that Obama got into the seat, there just happened a raid on a compound with only civilians (including children and a pregnant mother) that were killed by US Special Operation Forces (or some joint force, not sure, I can dig the link up). At first the story was being covered up that they werent civilians but insurgents but later US admitted that they were infact civilians.
Click to expand...

rattler said:
Mr Chupike, would you for once stop trolling?

The gentleman has clearly and unequivocally stated what he meant, no reason for you to say he "meant" ... "something else...bla bla bla". Trolling, and off topic.

Your other contributions, as so often, have nothing to do with what this gentleman stated (where did he mention babies killing?), i.e. are off topic and obviously so with evil intent.

Stop baiting or learn to read.

Rattler
Click to expand...

Yes Rattler, Stop baiting or learn to read.

(where did he mention babies killing?), quote Rattler

In the second paragraph: "only civilians (including children and a pregnant mother)."

May be you believe different, but the last time I checked pregnant women are considered to be carrying babies.

You are the one trolling as you add nothing to the topic, just a personal attack toward me.

I am entitled to express my opinion the same as Reaper.

Why do I believe he just wants to flame the military? Because he states it:
"So why the hell did the United States invade Afghanistan in the first place and why did Brittain, Australia, Canada and several European NATO countries even follow?"

"this is my perspective of the subject." quote Reaper

As far as Ted's post goes, there was a similar topic that was locked. So we have Reaper starting another one? Coincidence?

To me these threads are tired old reruns. I think Ted and Rattler agree, as they never bothered to address the topic in their post.
 
China isn't overly oppressive. It's not an ideal government but it is by no means a government of pure evil. North Korea however, is most definitely in the deep end of the moral pool and needs to step down and let Korea be one again.

Of course, all the mines, Automated turrets, and other traps in the NK and SK border may make the initial korean reunion very messy.
 
well. . .

it might have something to do with massive amounts of oil "recently discovered" in the area, if nothing else.

i did notice that soon after similar "recent discoveries" were made in Africa, after years of neglect the government decided to launch AFRICOM.

and, with the arctic ice cap melting and discoveries of oil there, Russia, the US and other countries made their rush to claim a stake in it.

of course, i will be the first to admit that i am going by memory. i can't give quotes; at least, not now.

but that is how i remember it.
 
KV. said:
What crimes, in the cases of China and North Korea, are you referring to if I might ask??
Click to expand...
This is not a serious question, is it?

Tibet, anyone? (just to menton somethn in case it was a serious question, the list could go on, and on, and on)

Rattler
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top