Afghanistan

#1
Sea Ray

Sea Ray

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
7,704
Likes
10,578
#1
I'm sure this will get criticized by the left in this country 'cause that's what they do but if Trump brings home thousands of soldiers from Afghanistan, that'll be huge for his re-election:

US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said on Friday that upon successful implementation of this agreement, the US would move to sign a peace deal with the Taliban on February 29...The two sides have been wrangling over the US demand for a ceasefire before the final peace agreement is signed. The deal is expected to outline the withdrawal of American troops and a guarantee that Afghan soil will not be used as a launchpad to conduct attacks on foreign countries.

The talks were launched in 2018 as part of a push by US President Donald Trump's administration to strike a deal with the Taliban, which has been fighting the US-led forces in Afghanistan since it was toppled from power.
Click to expand...

US-Taliban truce begins, raising hopes for a peace deal

The far left liberal media is not giving this enough play. NBC spent all kinds of time tonight on this new Russian collusion story, but if Trump ends this nearly 20 yrs war, the impact of his re-election cannot be overstated. This would be huge.

Imagine the commercials: "while Democrats were arguing in Nevada (show scene from Wednesday's debate) Pres Trump's team was negotiating a withdrawal from Afghanistan" (show soldiers coming home to the waiting arms of their wives and kids.)
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols, McDad and lukeneyland
#3
#3
It always cracks me up when someone slams Bush for kicking the ants nest at the beginning of the century ( rightly so our involvement has been a catastrophe) but will then slam Trump for not getting involved in Syria.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40 and Rickyvol77
#4
#4
lukeneyland said:
It always cracks me up when someone slams Bush for kicking the ants nest at the beginning of the century ( rightly so our involvement has been a catastrophe) but will then slam Trump for not getting involved in Syria.
Click to expand...
How can you say "rightly so" when we attacked the wrong country?
 
#5
#5
Rasputin_Vol said:
How can you say "rightly so" when we attacked the wrong country?
Click to expand...
I think your misunderstanding my comment. I'm saying it is correct to hate Bush for what he did in the middle east. But using the same logic it would be unfair to criticize Trump for not intervening in Syria
 
#10
#10
Rasputin_Vol said:
Bin Laden along with about fifteen 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia.
Click to expand...
Yeah. And? Did the Saudi Government fund their entire operation? No. Bin laden had been out of Saudi since the 70's..Their funding was minimal and from no known state. Not gonna argue that Saudi is a sh!thole that should burn (been there). No offense but your knowledge of all things 9/11 comes from the internet and tv and zero first hand experience.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ETV, InVOLuntary and Rickyvol77
#11
#11
FLVOL_79 said:
Yeah. And? Did the Saudi Government fund their entire operation? No. Bin laden had been out of Saudi since the 70's..Their funding was minimal and from no known state. Not gonna argue that Saudi is a sh!thole that should burn (been there). No offense but your knowledge of all things 9/11 comes from the internet and tv and zero first hand experience.
Click to expand...
Entire?

If they had a penny involved in it all the more reason to strike the KSA. Thanks for making my point.
 
#12
#12
FLVOL_79 said:
Yeah. And? Did the Saudi Government fund their entire operation? No. Bin laden had been out of Saudi since the 70's..Their funding was minimal and from no known state. Not gonna argue that Saudi is a sh!thole that should burn (been there). No offense but your knowledge of all things 9/11 comes from the internet and tv and zero first hand experience.
Click to expand...
No offense taken. And likewise, I would assume that all of your information about the region comes with a US military slant/bias. Some from your own experiences there which I do not have, but also from the "information" or "intelligence" that was briefed to you about the region.

But again, even in your own words, you were still able to validate what I said with regards to Saudi involvement in 9/11 by saying they did not fund the "entire" operation. That is an admission that KSA at least had a hand in it, which would therefore justify my position that at the very least, the Saudis should have been attacked.
 
#13
#13
Rasputin_Vol said:
No offense taken. And likewise, I would assume that all of your information about the region comes with a US military slant/bias. Some from your own experiences there which I do not have, but also from the "information" or "intelligence" that was briefed to you about the region.

But again, even in your own words, you were still able to validate what I said with regards to Saudi involvement in 9/11 by saying they did not fund the "entire" operation. That is an admission that KSA at least had a hand in it, which would therefore justify my position that at the very least, the Saudis should have been attacked.
Click to expand...
No. The only Saudi involvement was the fact the dudes were all Saudis. Saudi Arabia had zero to gain and everything to lose by being behind that. IF there was a foreign intelligence service behind anything, outside of our own, it would most likely have been the Pakistani ISI considering they were hiding Bin laden for years after 9/11.

That being said, I'd love to see a carpet bombing of Mecca where the Kaaba is destroyed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40 and hog88
#14
#14
FLVOL_79 said:
No. The only Saudi involvement was the fact the dudes were all Saudis.
Click to expand...
Isn't that enough? And why did we allow the Bin laden family members here in the US to return to Saudi Arabia within 2-3 days of 9/11? We should have been keeping them here and asking them questions.
 
#15
#15
Rasputin_Vol said:
Isn't that enough? And why did we allow the Bin laden family members here in the US to return to Saudi Arabia within 2-3 days of 9/11? We should have been keeping them here and asking them questions.
Click to expand...
To start a war? Jesus. No. As far as the bin laden family members go not sure why you detain them if they didn't have involvement with the attack.
 
#16
#16
FLVOL_79 said:
To start a war? Jesus. No. As far as the bin laden family members go not sure why you detain them if they didn't have involvement with the attack.
Click to expand...
Nor do you make special provisions to escort them out of the country, either.
 
#18
#18
All that stuff is water under the bridge. Isn't it a good thing that we have a President now who is (might) bring our boys home? Does anyone support keeping them there? Seems to me this is an easy one politically
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rasputin_Vol
#19
#19
Rasputin_Vol said:
This coming from the guy that just said 10 minuets ago he wanted to carpet bomb Mecca.

Can you make up your mind?
Click to expand...
Just because I want to see mecca carpet bombed doesnt mean that I want us to go war. Damn. Anyone can do it besides the US.

I'd prefer an asteroid so we can blame allah.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickyvol77, NorthDallas40, ETV and 1 other person
#20
#20
Sea Ray said:
All that stuff is water under the bridge. Isn't it a good thing that we have a President now who is (might) bring our boys home? Does anyone support keeping them there? Seems to me this is an easy one politically
Click to expand...
I'm all for bringing the troops home. But if we are going to send troops halfway around the world, we at least need to attack those that attacked us... not Afghanistan and Iraq.
 
#22
#22
Sea Ray said:
All that stuff is water under the bridge. Isn't it a good thing that we have a President now who is (might) bring our boys home? Does anyone support keeping them there? Seems to me this is an easy one politically
Click to expand...
Do you believe this?

 
#24
#24
Rasputin_Vol said:
I'm all for bringing the troops home. But if we are going to send troops halfway around the world, we at least need to attack those that attacked us... not Afghanistan and Iraq.
Click to expand...

Once again that's water under the bridge. I see no reason to re-litigate it now. The reason we went into Afghanistan was to punish the people who were harboring the terrorists. Now a better question is why we're spending billions building infrastructure in that country. Why build roads and bridges there when we have our own roads and bridges that need repair?

In hindsight, it was an enormous mistake to ever go into Iraq. It would have been much more practical to leave Sadam there as a counterbalance to Iran. But GW Bush famously stated "I believe it's our duty to free people." It was a noble goal but the blood and treasure was not worth it
 
  • Like
Reactions: vols40 and Big Al Orange
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top