8 UN employees killed as revenge for burning of Koran

#151
#151
therealUT said:
Wars should be fought purely for the defense of the country and its citizens. OEF has never been about defense, as everyone in the defense world knows that it is better intel that will prevent future terrorist attacks on American soil. So, we invaded Afghanistan: AQ and the Taliban moved to Pakistan.

Terrorism is something that the US is going to have to learn to live with. I'll take two bad days in 70 years (9/11 and 12/6) over the casualties incurred in the Pacific Theatre, the European Theatre, the Korean Peninsula, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Click to expand...
Just to clarify, what do you think should have been America's response to 911? Not arguing, I'm just not exactly sure what your stance was.
 
Last edited:
#152
#152
therealUT said:
Wars should be fought purely for the defense of the country and its citizens. OEF has never been about defense, as everyone in the defense world knows that it is better intel that will prevent future terrorist attacks on American soil. So, we invaded Afghanistan: AQ and the Taliban moved to Pakistan.

Terrorism is something that the US is going to have to learn to live with. I'll take two bad days in 70 years (9/11 and 12/6) over the casualties incurred in the Pacific Theatre, the European Theatre, the Korean Peninsula, Vietnam, Iraq, and Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

If the enemy refuses to fight face to face, than you have no choice but to seek him out and destroy him before he can gather his resources and attack again. BTW pakistan's in our back pocket, but I dont feel they do enough.

What better way to gather intel than in the enemy's back yard?
 
#154
#154
tvolsfan said:
Just to clarify, what do you think should have been America's response to 911? Not arguing, I'm just not exactly sure what your stance was.
Click to expand...

In hindsight, we should have immediately suspended diplomatic and trade relations with Saudi Arabia. At the same time, we should have opened up relations with Iran (probably would have meant ending our support for Israel-I am pretty sure they are at the point where they can fend for themselves).

Next, we should have strengthened our relationship with the Northern Alliance and worked to get some of them to infiltrate both the Taliban and AQ; at the same time, CIA recruitment activities should have focused on finding more Arabs both abroad and in Dearborn, MI, to infiltrate terrorist networks.

To show our strength (which apparently some believe is what we must do), we could have easily bombed known terrorist training camps/bases around the world. Providing us time to get up to speed, in the intel world, while they have to start back at square one.

There were certainly more viable options on the table then putting conventional troops on the ground in an effort to build a cohesive democratic government in Afghanistan.

7thgroupvolfan said:
If the enemy refuses to fight face to face, than you have no choice but to seek him out and destroy him before he can gather his resources and attack again. BTW pakistan's in our back pocket, but I dont feel they do enough.
Click to expand...

Pakistan is certainly not in our back pocket. The Pak government is riddled with officials, both civilian and military, that are more than complicit in the effort against us.

7thgroupvolfan said:
What better way to gather intel than in the enemy's back yard?
Click to expand...

You do not need conventional military troops to gather intel.
 
#155
#155
I couldn't disagree more with your thoughts about Iran.

There have been several key TB leaders arrested in Pakistan. Although some in power give shelter to them as well. They could do more, but they have supporters and family there.

Coventional units keep the security as tight as possible. Unconventional units cannot do their jobs without security or logistical support for that matter. Afghanistan isn't ready to take on that responsiblity and won't be anytime in the near future.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#156
#156
7thgroupvolfan said:
I couldn't disagree more with your thoughts about Iran.
Click to expand...

Reasons? Would you rather work with a government that is convivial toward you, while most of the subjects hate you, or a government that hates you while most of the subjects are ambivalent?

Shia Islam is much more inline with Western values than Wahabist Sunni Islam.

7thgroupvolfan said:
Coventional units keep the security as tight as possible. Unconventional units cannot do their jobs without security or logistical support for that matter. Afghanistan isn't ready to take on that responsiblity and won't be anytime in the near future.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I agree with you that Afghanistan will not be ready to take on that responsibility. So, why are we there?

Eventually, our conventional units are going to leave. We will either have to try to continue to support non-conventional teams there, or, we will have to rely on locals we have recruited to be our eyes and ears within the Taliban and AQ. The longer we maintain a large presence in Afghanistan, the more likely it is that we will continue to hurt the latter option by killing and maiming civilians as part of our "collateral damage".
 
#157
#157
therealUT said:
Reasons? Would you rather work with a government that is convivial toward you, while most of the subjects hate you, or a government that hates you while most of the subjects are ambivalent?

Shia Islam is much more inline with Western values than Wahabist Sunni Islam.
Click to expand...

Would you care to explain why the Iranian government would want to work with us on anything of substance? I think its a stretch to think they would. Short of us taking their stance toward Israel. Or are you suggesting going thru the population.
 
#158
#158
BeecherVol said:
Would you care to explain why the Iranian government would want to work with us on anything of substance? I think its a stretch to think they would. Short of us taking their stance toward Israel. Or are you suggesting going thru the population.
Click to expand...

Money talks. We proved that when we paid off Sunni insurgents in Iraq, aka "The Sunni Awakening".

If we offered to trade with Iran, I guarantee they would take us up on it.
 
#163
#163
therealUT said:
What benefits does the United States get from our current position on Israel?

What are the costs of our current position on Israel?
Click to expand...

Why would Iran be so better? Other than pure speculation on your part.

Assuming we are told who we are to pick as friends and who we can't be with.
 
#164
#164
therealUT said:
Money talks. We proved that when we paid off Sunni insurgents in Iraq, aka "The Sunni Awakening".

If we offered to trade with Iran, I guarantee they would take us up on it.
Click to expand...

Money does talk. Which means anybody can be bought, for the right price. One minute your running someone and the next his trying to run you.

We cannot have bonds with both Israel and Iran. It's one or the other, not both. I for one choose Israel and for good reason. They make awesome weapons. Their very military minded and their
soldiers are well trained and educated. They would fight with us at the the drop of a hat.

Iran on the other hand (their leadership anyway) loathe everything America stands for. Although I'm optimistic of the future of Iran, simply because their youth aren't brain washed. They still have a long way too go.

At this point, I wouldn't trust an Iranian any futher than I could throw him.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
Last edited:
#165
#165
therealUT said:
What benefits does the United States get from our current position on Israel?

What are the costs of our current position on Israel?
Click to expand...

With Israel, atleast we know the cost. What would be the cost to back Iran over Israel? I believe that would be a very costly mistake.

I really can't believe I'm having a
conversation about backing Iran over Israel. It's border line insanity.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#166
#166
BeecherVol said:
Why would Iran be so better? Other than pure speculation on your part.

Assuming we are told who we are to pick as friends and who we can't be with.
Click to expand...

With Iran, we would benefit as much as they would from the oil trade.

There is little to no economic benefit from our relationship with Israel. However, there is a high cost in terms of defense and security due to our support.

7thgroupvolfan said:
Money does talk. Which means anybody can be bought, for the right price. One minute your running someone and the next his trying to run you.

We cannot have bonds with both Israel and Iran. It's one or the other, not both. I for one choose Israel and for good reason. They make awesome weapons. Their very military minded and their
soldiers are well trained and educated. They would fight with us at the the drop of a hat.

Iran on the other hand (their leadership anyway) loathe everything America stands for. Although I'm optimistic of the future of Iran, simply because their youth aren't brain washed. They still have a long way too go.

At this point, I wouldn't trust an Iranian any futher than I could throw him.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

How does having an ally that is "military minded" help the average American citizen? How does that help us economically? Cool, they have quality Soldiers...again, how does that help us? Did Israel deploy Soldiers to help us in Vietnam? No. Will they deploy Soldiers to help us in the Middle East? Hell no, and we would not want them to. If Russia becomes malevolent again, will we accept Israel's help? Not if we do not want to fight on more than one front (Russia and the Middle East).

Israel's military in no way helps us; however, if their military is as good as advertised, then they no longer need our support in the region. I am sure they would understand why it is in our best interest to distance ourselves from Israel.

7thgroupvolfan said:
With Israel, atleast we know the cost. What would be the cost to back Iran over Israel? I believe that would be a very costly mistake.

I really can't believe I'm having a
conversation about backing Iran over Israel. It's border line insanity.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I have not stated that we should back Iran against Israel. I have stated that we should trade with Iran and adopt an ambivalent stance towards the conflicts that surround the "state" of Israel.
 
#167
#167
So you think Iran would become a economic friend as long as they think we would not back Israel if they decided to attack. You haven't stated that we should back Iran over Israel in a conflict, but thats a decision you better be ready to make.

What do you do in that situation?
 
#168
#168
BeecherVol said:
So you think Iran would become a economic friend as long as they think we would not back Israel if they decided to attack. You haven't stated that we should back Iran over Israel in a conflict, but thats a decision you better be ready to make.

What do you do in that situation?
Click to expand...

You watch from the sidelines. Why do we have to get involved in every conflict???
 
#173
#173
Fair enough.

Your entitled to your assertions and opinions no different than I.

If you ever decide to run for the highest office let me know.:)
 
#174
#174
BeecherVol said:
Fair enough.

Your entitled to your assertions and opinions no different than I.

If you ever decide to run for the highest office let me know.:)
Click to expand...

If I ever decide to run for office, go ahead and commit me.

Good discussion, though.
 
#175
#175
I'm all for letting the ME do it's thing.

I would also say that Israel would wipe the floor with the ME in seconds if it wasn't for fear of global backlash.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top