Author Topic: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition  (Read 8041 times)

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41756
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #100 on: October 10, 2009, 09:55:35 AM »
Whats taking so long blacken? Scouring UTube for a video of 3 babies crying?

Take your drive by posting ass elsewhere.

I think deep down even the libs like Blacken, 240, Straw know how silly this whole charade is getting. 

At least Hugo is thinking critically about things and not going blindly off a cliff like the rest of the knee-padders.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #101 on: October 10, 2009, 09:59:52 AM »
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091008/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_us_afghanistan_112


AP source: Obama focusing on al-Qaida, not Taliban

Obama's developing strategy on the Taliban will "not tolerate their return to power," the senior official said in an interview with The Associated Press. But the U.S. would fight only to keep the Taliban from retaking control of Afghanistan's central government — something it is now far from being capable of — and from giving renewed sanctuary in Afghanistan to al-Qaida, the official said.

The official is involved in the discussions and was authorized to speak about them but not to be identified by name because the review is still under way.

Bowing to the reality that the Taliban is too ingrained in Afghanistan's culture to be entirely defeated, the administration is prepared, as it has been for some time, to accept some Taliban role in parts of Afghanistan, the official said. That could mean paving the way for Taliban members willing to renounce violence to participate in a central government — though there has been little receptiveness to this among the Taliban. It might even mean ceding some regions of the country to the Taliban.



Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #102 on: October 10, 2009, 10:00:15 AM »
You ducking me 240? See post #79, I went through all the trouble of refuting your points and your gonna do me like that?
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41756
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #103 on: October 10, 2009, 10:01:46 AM »
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091008/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_us_afghanistan_112


AP source: Obama focusing on al-Qaida, not Taliban

Obama's developing strategy on the Taliban will "not tolerate their return to power," the senior official said in an interview with The Associated Press. But the U.S. would fight only to keep the Taliban from retaking control of Afghanistan's central government — something it is now far from being capable of — and from giving renewed sanctuary in Afghanistan to al-Qaida, the official said.

The official is involved in the discussions and was authorized to speak about them but not to be identified by name because the review is still under way.

Bowing to the reality that the Taliban is too ingrained in Afghanistan's culture to be entirely defeated, the administration is prepared, as it has been for some time, to accept some Taliban role in parts of Afghanistan, the official said. That could mean paving the way for Taliban members willing to renounce violence to participate in a central government — though there has been little receptiveness to this among the Taliban. It might even mean ceding some regions of the country to the Taliban.




And Im sure you believe their promises 240 - just like NK and Iran.


Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #104 on: October 10, 2009, 10:04:34 AM »
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091008/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_us_afghanistan_112


AP source: Obama focusing on al-Qaida, not Taliban

Obama's developing strategy on the Taliban will "not tolerate their return to power," the senior official said in an interview with The Associated Press. But the U.S. would fight only to keep the Taliban from retaking control of Afghanistan's central government — something it is now far from being capable of — and from giving renewed sanctuary in Afghanistan to al-Qaida, the official said.

The official is involved in the discussions and was authorized to speak about them but not to be identified by name because the review is still under way.

Bowing to the reality that the Taliban is too ingrained in Afghanistan's culture to be entirely defeated, the administration is prepared, as it has been for some time, to accept some Taliban role in parts of Afghanistan, the official said. That could mean paving the way for Taliban members willing to renounce violence to participate in a central government — though there has been little receptiveness to this among the Taliban. It might even mean ceding some regions of the country to the Taliban.





Holy shit that is some funny stuff, the taliban denouncing violence LOL. cedeing parts of Afganistan to the Taliban, now there is good idea ::)

So now the Obama administration is saying we can't beat the taliban, so we are just going to roll over and let them have the country back. They are more inept than I realized.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #105 on: October 10, 2009, 10:09:20 AM »
1) You don't know what you are talking about, the Taliban are not going to lay down their arms and play nice with everyone else. The are hard line Islamist, sure they may play the game until NATO leaves but I can fucking guarantee as soon as the threat is gone Afghanistan will return to it's pre 9/11 self. Afghanistan is completely tribal, they have no alegence to the central government, they do what is best for their sect end of story. The only way a central government can control the country is through ruthless dictatorship thus the Taliban.

No kidding afghanistn is tribal and taleban are animals.  IMO, there's also no question they'll always be there, they'll always have a voice.  The biggest military in the history of the world couldn't kill them in 8 years.  I think taleban will control many of the warlords who contorl 90% of the country.  They aren't leaving, and we'll never end them.  Al-Q is close to being gone.

2) The POTUS is not going to attack Iran, he is to worried about public/world opinion, if anything he is going to turn a blind eye a let Isreal do it, which is going to start a giant shit storm in the ME.

letting ISR do it is the same thing - even cheney stopped that, remember?  Maybe shitstrom - they hit syria last year, didnt they?  And so what - IMO i'd rather have a quick shitstorm there, and set their program back 10 years, than a major shitstorm when they are handing out suitacse nukes to anyone with 20 mil.  let iSR cook their plants.

3) How? You seem to think you can negoatiate and trust illogical dictators to follow through? What's going to happen? The IAEA is going to do nothing as usual accept complain and pass toothless UN resolutions with harsher and harsher language until the looneys finally nuke someone.

Look , nukes aren't going anywhere.  however, if worldwide stockpiles of nukes are reduced by 30% in all nations, it's a win for Obama.  We can still cook the world 40 times over, no worries there... just not 50 times.  Is that so bad?  Nukes will never go away.  But less is better... since we are paying for them submitches.

I don't know what gives you the impression that somehow Barack Obama can just change the nature of people simply with his presence. You need to understand something about the ME they respect strenght, they see negotiation as a sign of weekness, no matter what dog and pony show that but on for the international media.

Obama still has 150k troops in iraq, and nearly 80k men in afghanistan, with 17k more coming?  I wouldn't call putting 250 men in your backyard 'soft' on terror.  the ME saw 911 as weakness on bush's part.  Obama hasn't slipped like that, he's kept troops the same... aside from the smile and happy talk, is Obama all that diff from Bush?  He actually is using MORE troops in afghanistan than bush.

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #106 on: October 10, 2009, 10:13:07 AM »

Holy shit that is some funny stuff, the taliban denouncing violence LOL. cedeing parts of Afganistan to the Taliban, now there is good idea ::)

So now the Obama administration is saying we can't beat the taliban, so we are just going to roll over and let them have the country back. They are more inept than I realized.

white house has been floating the 'taliban as part of the central govt' for 3 years now.  hell, remember that al-Sadr guy who was allowed to keep his job and area after all the troops he killed? :( :( :(

taliban isn't gonna be beaten.  They're jsut gonna hide and out-wait us.   This isn't obama, this is the reality that bush saw too.  He just waited til obama took over to let that action be taken.

blacken700

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 11873
  • Getbig!
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #107 on: October 10, 2009, 10:13:53 AM »
I think deep down even the libs like Blacken, 240, Straw know how silly this whole charade is getting.  

At least Hugo is thinking critically about things and not going blindly off a cliff like the rest of the knee-padders.

going blindly off a cliff. the birthers, 2,000,000 people protesting in D.C. the video was to show how you guys are crying not the babies, idiots, boy you guys are dumb ;D

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #108 on: October 10, 2009, 10:20:22 AM »
No kidding afghanistn is tribal and taleban are animals.  IMO, there's also no question they'll always be there, they'll always have a voice.  The biggest military in the history of the world couldn't kill them in 8 years.  I think taleban will control many of the warlords who contorl 90% of the country.  They aren't leaving, and we'll never end them.  Al-Q is close to being gone.

letting ISR do it is the same thing - even cheney stopped that, remember?  Maybe shitstrom - they hit syria last year, didnt they?  And so what - IMO i'd rather have a quick shitstorm there, and set their program back 10 years, than a major shitstorm when they are handing out suitacse nukes to anyone with 20 mil.  let iSR cook their plants.

Look , nukes aren't going anywhere.  however, if worldwide stockpiles of nukes are reduced by 30% in all nations, it's a win for Obama.  We can still cook the world 40 times over, no worries there... just not 50 times.  Is that so bad?  Nukes will never go away.  But less is better... since we are paying for them submitches.

Obama still has 150k troops in iraq, and nearly 80k men in afghanistan, with 17k more coming?  I wouldn't call putting 250 men in your backyard 'soft' on terror.  the ME saw 911 as weakness on bush's part.  Obama hasn't slipped like that, he's kept troops the same... aside from the smile and happy talk, is Obama all that diff from Bush?  He actually is using MORE troops in afghanistan than bush.

1) We could have wiped out the Taliban in short order if we approched this war like we approached WWII, instead the US didn't learn from Vietnam you can't win the hearts and minds until the enemy's will to fight is destroyed. Al Queda is not close to being gone maybe splintered and lost man power, but there are plenty of fanatics in the ME to refil the ranks

2) Syria and Iran are 2 differnet animals, you see what happens if Isreal attacks.

3) Reducing Nukes by 30 % even though the world can still be destroyed 30 times over is a win for Obama? That is almost funny. While agree that our land based missle's at this point are outdated technology and should probabaly be retired we still have plenty of subs and bombers that can more than do the job.

4) Obama has no choice but to put troops in Afganistan, he railed about how it was the good war during the campaign and Iraq was a distraction. But he has already started to waiver on this, pointed out by the article you posted and his reluctance to use the word victoy, because that reminds him of the Japanese surrender on the decks of the USS Missouri at the end of WWII ::)
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

240 is Back

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 102387
  • Complete website for only $300- www.300website.com
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #109 on: October 10, 2009, 10:30:37 AM »
1) We could have wiped out the Taliban in short order if we approched this war like we approached WWII, instead the US didn't learn from Vietnam you can't win the hearts and minds until the enemy's will to fight is destroyed. Al Queda is not close to being gone maybe splintered and lost man power, but there are plenty of fanatics in the ME to refil the ranks

I dunno.  Nobody is embedded with the 150k mercinary troops that have been there 8 years with zero accountability.  And the bad guys are still breathing.   And Russia was as brutal as they come - bomb toys, etc.  And they couldn't finish them either.

2) Syria and Iran are 2 differnet animals, you see what happens if Isreal attacks.

Of course they are.  Would you rather let Iran go nuclear?  Not me. 

3) Reducing Nukes by 30 % even though the world can still be destroyed 30 times over is a win for Obama? That is almost funny. While agree that our land based missle's at this point are outdated technology and should probabaly be retired we still have plenty of subs and bombers that can more than do the job.

I dont get why people are not content with being able to blow the world up 10 times.  We gotta be able to blow it up 50 times.  I dont follow.  Expensive shit.

4) Obama has no choice but to put troops in Afganistan, he railed about how it was the good war during the campaign and Iraq was a distraction. But he has already started to waiver on this, pointed out by the article you posted and his reluctance to use the word victoy, because that reminds him of the Japanese surrender on the decks of the USS Missouri at the end of WWII ::)

EH, I already addressed this.

PLEASE - no more 4-part posts - they're killing me! :P

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41756
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #110 on: October 10, 2009, 10:37:43 AM »
going blindly off a cliff. the birthers, 2,000,000 people protesting in D.C. the video was to show how you guys are crying not the babies, idiots, boy you guys are dumb ;D

The chorus in this video is done by Blacken, 240, Mons, Lurker and Straw.


Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #111 on: October 10, 2009, 10:42:29 AM »
I dunno.  Nobody is embedded with the 150k mercinary troops that have been there 8 years with zero accountability.  And the bad guys are still breathing.   And Russia was as brutal as they come - bomb toys, etc.  And they couldn't finish them either.

Of course they are.  Would you rather let Iran go nuclear?  Not me. 

I dont get why people are not content with being able to blow the world up 10 times.  We gotta be able to blow it up 50 times.  I dont follow.  Expensive shit.

EH, I already addressed this.

PLEASE - no more 4-part posts - they're killing me! :P

The Russians lost in Afghanistan because they started worrying about casualties, the press reported it and it didn't sit well with the people of the USSR. The Russians lost over 20 million in WWII and still drove the NAZI's out of Russia and chased them back to Berlin. The attitude of the public has changed no the ability of the soldier to do their job. It doesn't matter how good your military is, if you don't have the support of your own population you can't win.

As far as Iran is concerned, for all we know they already have a or several Nukes, and are just waiting to be attacked so they can use one. Iran should have been delt with years ago, this is just my opinion, but I believe that is the reason no one has attacked them.

Nuclear deternets are just that, over time you can't just throw a nuke away, when a newer better technology comes out.

Afghanistan i never going to be a democratic state, and most likely alway a haven for terrorist and general miscreants, so a decision has to be made, scorched earth and be done with it or just accept that it is always going to be a thorn in our side.
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Kazan

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 6799
  • Sic vis pacem, parabellum
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #112 on: October 10, 2009, 10:45:49 AM »
going blindly off a cliff. the birthers, 2,000,000 people protesting in D.C. the video was to show how you guys are crying not the babies, idiots, boy you guys are dumb ;D


Either post something relevant or go away

ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #113 on: October 10, 2009, 11:34:36 AM »
nwo agenda huh?
he's clearly talking about himself.  

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31865
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #114 on: October 10, 2009, 11:35:44 AM »
Yes, Obama is doing the bidding of the NWO globalists. 
so are you.

Soul Crusher

  • Competitors
  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 41756
  • Doesnt lie about lifting.
Re: Rooting Against America: Nobel Peace Prize Edition
« Reply #115 on: October 10, 2009, 11:43:41 AM »
he's clearly talking about himself.

Taking the name of a third world marxist dictator eclipes anything I have ever said Bitch!