Afghanistan

Why?

Tommy Monk wrote:Why?

That question should have been asked when Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney started that war.  The perps of 9-11 didn't come from Afghanistan...they were Saudis who departed from Hanover, Germany.

Yet, we didn't start a war with Germany, or Saudi Arabia.  Why?  UBL was long gone to Pakistan.  Republicans just had a hard-on for Muslims, and they knew they could beat up on the poor dirt farmers of Afghanistan.

Original Quill wrote:

Tommy Monk wrote:Why?

That question should have been asked when Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney started that war.  The perps of 9-11 didn't come from Afghanistan...they were Saudis who departed from Hanover, Germany.

Yet, we didn't start a war with Germany, or Saudi Arabia.  Why?  UBL was long gone to Pakistan.  Republicans just had a hard-on for Muslims, and they knew they could beat up on the poor dirt farmers of Afghanistan.

Democrats supported that invasion too.

All but one voted in favor..

Then there were dozens of other countries that went in too.

As usual, you're analysis and commentary is idiotic..

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That question should have been asked when Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney started that war.  The perps of 9-11 didn't come from Afghanistan...they were Saudis who departed from Hanover, Germany.

Yet, we didn't start a war with Germany, or Saudi Arabia.  Why?  UBL was long gone to Pakistan.  Republicans just had a hard-on for Muslims, and they knew they could beat up on the poor dirt farmers of Afghanistan.

Democrats supported that invasion too.

All but one voted in favor.

Then there were dozens of other countries that went in too.

Ahhh...Democrats and other nations supported it, but based upon Republican lies, promulgated by Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney.  They had control of intelligence and lied about it.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Democrats supported that invasion too.

All but one voted in favor.

Then there were dozens of other countries that went in too.

Ahhh...Democrats and other nations supported it, but based upon Republican lies, promulgated by Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney.  They had control of intelligence and lied about it.

They knew all about OBL and his terrorist group.

Per as usual, you're making shit up derailing any possible chance for a decent conversation.

You're fucking pitiful old man.

“What you had is — you had entire brigades breaking through the gates of our embassy — six, if I’m not mistaken,” Biden said. “The Taliban is not the south — the North Vietnamese army. They’re not remotely comparable in terms of capability. There’s going to be no circumstance where you see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy of the United States from Afghanistan.  It is not at all comparable.” 

Maddog wrote:“What you had is — you had entire brigades breaking through the gates of our embassy — six, if I’m not mistaken,” Biden said. “The Taliban is not the south — the North Vietnamese army. They’re not remotely comparable in terms of capability. There’s going to be no circumstance where you see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy of the United States from Afghanistan.  It is not at all comparable.” 

So?  The strategic mistake was when we went into Afghanistan.  The rest is aftermath and consequence.  The lesson to take home for Republicans is, don't start fights you can't finish.

Give it up and move on.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:“What you had is — you had entire brigades breaking through the gates of our embassy — six, if I’m not mistaken,” Biden said. “The Taliban is not the south — the North Vietnamese army. They’re not remotely comparable in terms of capability. There’s going to be no circumstance where you see people being lifted off the roof of an embassy of the United States from Afghanistan.  It is not at all comparable.” 

So?  The strategic mistake was when we went into Afghanistan.  The rest is aftermath and consequence.  The lesson to take home for Republicans is, don't start fights you can't finish.

Give it up and move on.

Mistakes can be made going in, while there and while leaving.

We are discussing the leaving part.

Though Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, criticized the Trump administration's agreement with the Taliban as "wholly inadequate," he also didn't spare Biden.



"I am disappointed that the Biden administration clearly did not accurately assess the implications of a rapid U.S. withdrawal," Menendez said.

Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.), a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a blistering rebuke of the U.S. withdrawal under Biden, calling it a "catastrophe."

"At minimum, the Biden administration owed our Afghan allies of 20 years a real plan," Langevin wrote.

Fuck off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

Maddog wrote:Though Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.), the chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, criticized the Trump administration's agreement with the Taliban as "wholly inadequate," he also didn't spare Biden.

"I am disappointed that the Biden administration clearly did not accurately assess the implications of a rapid U.S. withdrawal," Menendez said.

Rep. Jim Langevin (D-R.I.), a senior member of the House Armed Services Committee, issued a blistering rebuke of the U.S. withdrawal under Biden, calling it a "catastrophe."

"At minimum, the Biden administration owed our Afghan allies of 20 years a real plan," Langevin wrote.

What Menendez is referring to is the February 2020 meeting of the Trump Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, with the Taliban…directly!  In doing so, the Trump administration bypassed the provisional Afghan government, and its military, virtually assuring with that snub that they would give up all hope...and abandon their posts.  That consequence was a foregone conclusion.

No amount of planning could undo Trump's insult to the Afghan troops and people.  They gave up with nary a tear.  Biden sent in 6,000 troops to facilitate the evacuation.  Any more, and it would look like a build-up.  The Taliban would have restarted hostilities.    Likewise, any extension of the August 31st deadline might also extend the hostilities, and we might find ourselves in a situation where we could not extricate.

In delicate times, you have to take into consideration appearances, as well as military force.  The last thing we want is another 20-years, and a $-trillion wasted, in a useless cause of some old, out-of-office Republican liars, who once tried to take over the ME oil fields.

Let's not forget that subtle tactic the Republicans deployed in the run-up to both wars, in which any Democrat who expressed doubt about the invasions was constantly branded in the media as being a secret member of al-Qaeda

eddie wrote:Fuck  off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

They did the same thing at Pearl Harbour. IMHO.

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:Fuck  off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

They did the same thing at Pearl Harbour.   IMHO.

I don’t know enough about that topic to make any valuable comment (wouldn’t surprise me though) but 9/11.....pretty obvious in my opinion.

I don't think the Americans did either 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, and it's not just because I'm American, as I'm one of the most critical-of-America Americans you're likely to meet. It's also not because I'm brainwashed, blindly believe whatever I'm told by the media, or anything else anybody cares to offer along those lines.

Ben Reilly wrote:I don't think the Americans did either 9/11 or Pearl Harbor, and it's not just because I'm American, as I'm one of the most critical-of-America Americans you're likely to meet. It's also not because I'm brainwashed, blindly believe whatever I'm told by the media, or anything else anybody cares to offer along those lines.

But, as you’ve said before, you have some serious doubts about it too.
And that’s enough.

I think al Qaeda did 9/11 but that the Bush administration probably knew it was going to happen and didn't act to prevent it, so that it would give cover to an oil-motivated war. I don't know that and I won't assert it as fact, but that's my instinct, informed by what I've learned.

I don't think America did Pearl Harbor in the slightest, though I have heard some say that the U.S. government might have known the attack was coming and did nothing to prevent it. That may be true, but I don't think it's a slam-dunk.

eddie wrote:Fuck  off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

Who is America?

Who got what oil?

For the record, I think the lizard people in conjunction with Elvis and Bigfoot did 911.

It's obvious to anyone who is paying attention.

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:Fuck  off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

Who is America?

Who got what oil?

She obviously means the U.S. government and Iraqi oil. Do you have a learning disability that makes it hard to decipher the meaning of what people say, or are you just being a knobhead?

Maddog wrote:

eddie wrote:Fuck  off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

Who is America?

Who got what oil?

Work it out. You’re smart and independently-minded.

Ben Reilly wrote:

Maddog wrote:

Who is America?

Who got what oil?

She obviously means the U.S. government and Iraqi oil. Do you have a learning disability that makes it hard to decipher the meaning of what people say, or are you just being a knobhead?

Who in the US government was responsible? Who all knew? Did Biden know? Either Clinton? Johns McCain? Nancy Pelosi?

Why blame OBL if you wanted Iraqi oil. Why not blame Saddam?

BTW, why didn't we get Iraqi oil?

I'm far from a knob head when I expect crazy, unsubstantiated claims to be backed up by something along the lines of facts, evidence and proof.

Otherwise, my lizard people theory is equally as believable.

I have a better theory. Was Trump's building in NYC hit? It's obvious he was in on it. That's why he made that deal with the Taliban last year. His real name is Ali Bin Trumpi.

I'm one of those who thinks the US may have made moves to provoke the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor, in order to get into Europe's war.

Initially, throughout the 30's Congress had past four Neutrality Acts, and was bound and determined to not get involved in Europe's war.  FDR stood no chance entering the war, but he provoked the hell out of the Japanese.

First, he moved the Pacific Fleet from San Diego to Pearl, which was viewed as a highly aggressive move.  Second, he started the Essex class carrier, anticipating a Pacific war.  Finally, the US had broken the Japanese code and they knew when the attack was coming.

The carrier had become the capital ship of the day, as the battleship had become passé - particularly in the largest ocean in the world.  It happens that FDR had kept the carriers out at sea on that particular occasion, when the entire fleet usually docked for liberty on a normal weekend.  Why that weekend?  Why anywhere but Pearl?

I think Roosevelt knew what was coming, and he wanted to save the carriers because the US would need them.  Four days later, in accord with the Rome-Berlin pact, of which Japan was a signatory, Hitler declared war on the US.  The US got involved in Europe's war, despite the Neutrality Acts.

I dont think the American government was behind 9/11.

But, what I did find incredibly odd, Bin Laden was the most wanted man in the world, yet when they found, captured and killed him, there was no evidence of that.
Just a room full of bigwigs on camera, oohing and ahhing as his capture was visible or audible only to them.

And then.....no body to show that he was dead. Just here say that he had been tipped into the sea or some such nonsense.

Proof...none.

The evidence that the US had alternative motives (oil) comes from the fact that the US never attacked any nation that was involved in any aggressive action against the US - in particular, 9-11.

Only the briefest argument was made against Afghanistan, because they had allowed al-Qaeda camps to exist in the caves to the north.  There was absolutely no argument for entering Iraq...only the oil.

What else was the US trying to achieve, except to possess the oil fields?  It's the only thing that would justify the expenditure of $17-trillion in wars.  And remember, they lied to get in there.

eddie wrote:Fuck  off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

Grow up

1) Al Qaeda carried out 9/11

2) A civil war was already in progress in Afghanistan, of which the US, Europeans sent special forces to assist, air support and arms. To support the factions standing up to the Talban. Who refused to hand over Bin laden. There was a legitimate aim to take down the terrorist training camps. Of which 9/11 was just one of many successful terrorist attacks carried out by Al Qaeda. Unless of course you hold a xenophobic view that Muslim terrorist are incapable of carrying out coordinated terrorist attacks? Even though there has been literally thousands. So which is it?

3) Over 20 years, where is the money profited from this untapped oil in Afghanistan Eddie, by the US?


You have not the first clue what you are talking about and as per usual fail to look at the facts

The world supported intervention in Afghanistan, they never did with Iraq, hence your confusion

HoratioTarr wrote:

eddie wrote:Fuck  off.
America did 9/11.
They did 9/11 to start the war.
The war over oil.

They did the same thing at Pearl Harbour.   IMHO.

No they never

Original Quill wrote:

I think Roosevelt knew what was coming, and he wanted to save the carriers because the US would need them.  Four days later, in accord with the Rome-Berlin pact, of which Japan was a signatory, Hitler declared war on the US.  The US got involved in Europe's war, despite the Neutrality Acts.

Man alive, how many times have we had this debate were you reinvent history to back your conspiracy theory, which I have debunked so many times?

Before pearl harbour, the carriers were not classed as capital ships in the US Navy

The US could have gotten involved in the war with Germany based on u-boat attacks

Nobody could have predicted Hitler would have joined Japan, after its attack

Your view every time on this is absurd to say the least

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/how-almost-everyone-failed-prepare-pearl-harbor-1-180961144/

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/pearl-harbor-conspiracy-bunk-1173728.html

https://www.historyextra.com/period/second-world-war/pearl-harbor-advance-knowledge-conspiracy-theory-debunked-did-america-predict-attack-date-day/

Syl wrote:I dont think the American government was behind 9/11.

But, what I did find incredibly odd, Bin Laden was the most wanted man in the world, yet when they found, captured and killed him, there was no evidence of that.
Just a room full of bigwigs on camera, oohing and ahhing as his capture was visible or audible only to them.

And then.....no body to show that he was dead. Just here say that he had been tipped into the sea or some such nonsense.

Proof...none.

It would require too many people to go along with it, that don't like each other..

That's the problem with conspiracies. They can't withstand time as that many people won't stay quiet that long when they could use that knowledge for power.

It's why Bill Clinton couldn't get away with a blow job in Washington.

If 911 were an inside job, folks would have used that knowledge to crush Bush, or whomever was supposed to be the mastermind. Same as with getting OBL. You would never get the SEALS and everyone else involved to play along with the charade. The truth always comes out. That's one of the great things about Snowdens information dump. It silenced a lot of conspiracies as it showed exactly what was going on behind the scenes..

Ben Reilly wrote:I think al Qaeda did 9/11 but that the Bush administration probably knew it was going to happen and didn't act to prevent it, so that it would give cover to an oil-motivated war. I don't know that and I won't assert it as fact, but that's my instinct, informed by what I've learned.

I don't think America did Pearl Harbor in the slightest, though I have heard some say that the U.S. government might have known the attack was coming and did nothing to prevent it. That may be true, but I don't think it's a slam-dunk.

The hijackers were already here before there was a Bush administration. Are you saying Clinton wanted a war for oil too?

Maybe Clinton and Bush are both lizard people?.

Maddog wrote:

Ben Reilly wrote:I think al Qaeda did 9/11 but that the Bush administration probably knew it was going to happen and didn't act to prevent it, so that it would give cover to an oil-motivated war. I don't know that and I won't assert it as fact, but that's my instinct, informed by what I've learned.

I don't think America did Pearl Harbor in the slightest, though I have heard some say that the U.S. government might have known the attack was coming and did nothing to prevent it. That may be true, but I don't think it's a slam-dunk.

The hijackers were already here before there was a Bush administration. Are you saying Clinton wanted a war for oil too?

Maybe Clinton and Bush are both lizard people?.

This is what gets me. Those prosing a cover up, would have to include all those in the Democrats as well. Which would be absurd

As do people not realise that the democrats would jump at the chance of exposing such a crime. If created by Bush.

The fact is they do not, because like most people, they know Al-Qaeda had carried out this attack. Who were responsible for many attacks

Are people claiming these were all set up by the US?

People need to simple look at the facts and understand that Al-qaeda was well funded and organised

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_al-Qaeda_attacks#1998

Didgee wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

I think Roosevelt knew what was coming, and he wanted to save the carriers because the US would need them.  Four days later, in accord with the Rome-Berlin pact, of which Japan was a signatory, Hitler declared war on the US.  The US got involved in Europe's war, despite the Neutrality Acts.

Man alive, how many times have we had this debate were you reinvent history to back your conspiracy theory, which I have debunked so many times?

Many times.  And it's not reinvention...it's reinterpretation.  The problem, didge, is you are too willing to accept the company line when it comes to geopolitical moves.  They don't always tell the truth.

Didgee wrote:Before pearl harbour, the carriers were not classed as capital ships in the US Navy

A detail they overlooked.  The battle of Taranto, which proved the aircraft carrier in battle, only took place in November, 1940.  Just a year later, they hadn't had time to reclassify...but they knew.

Didgee wrote:The US could have gotten involved in the war with Germany based on u-boat attacks

Except for the four Neutrality Acts.  Congress forbade the US from entering Europe's war each time.  This was back in the days when the executive government listened to Congress.

Didgee wrote:Nobody could have predicted Hitler would have joined Japan, after its attack

That's what Hitler said he would do via the Rome Accord.  No reason not to take him at his word.  And lo...he did what he promised, only four days later.  How's that for linear reasoning?

Didgee wrote:Your view every time on this is absurd to say the least

I disagree.

Didgee wrote:

Maddog wrote:

The hijackers were already here before there was a Bush administration. Are you saying Clinton wanted a war for oil too?

Maybe Clinton and Bush are both lizard people?.

This is what gets me. Those prosing a cover up, would have to include all those in the Democrats as well. Which would be absurd

As do people not realise that the democrats would jump at the chance of exposing such a crime. If created by Bush.

The fact is they do not, because like most people, they know Al-Qaeda had carried out this attack. Who were responsible for many attacks

Are people claiming these were all set up by the US?

People need to simple look at the facts and understand that Al-qaeda was well funded and organised

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_al-Qaeda_attacks#1998

I don't know what's wrong with people. Do they not remember the first attack on the WTC?

Who do they think did that?

I guess the bigger the event like Pearl Harbor or 911, the bigger folks imaginations grow. Maybe it's some sort of coping mechanism?

Original Quill wrote:


Many times.  And it's not reinvention...it's reinterpretation.  The problem, didge, is you are too willing to accept the company line when it comes to geopolitical moves.  They don't always tell the truth.

No Quill, your claims have been easily refuted by the evidence

Your reinterpretation is not based on any facts. 

Its as simple as that

I have researched this extensively and you always continue to falsely claim the carriers were capital ships previous to Peral harbour

Even after showing you the evidence

So its got nothing to do with accepting the company line

Its looking at the evidence which you always fail to do

How many times are you going to come out with the fucking The battle of Taranto in hindsight. When no documents showed from the US or had them change the carriers to capital ships. After this attack by the British?


The only thing you can ask is why they never took more interest in the attack at the time and take contingencies from this


That is a hindsight question, but your revisionist history is not based on facts but hindsight and a poor one at that


I have said my peace, but please continue to make up history as you always do


Laters

Maddog wrote:

Syl wrote:I dont think the American government was behind 9/11.

But, what I did find incredibly odd, Bin Laden was the most wanted man in the world, yet when they found, captured and killed him, there was no evidence of that.
Just a room full of bigwigs on camera, oohing and ahhing as his capture was visible or audible only to them.

And then.....no body to show that he was dead. Just here say that he had been tipped into the sea or some such nonsense.

Proof...none.

It would require too many people to go along with it, that don't like each other..

That's the problem with conspiracies. They can't withstand time as that many people won't stay quiet that long when they could use that knowledge for power.

It's why Bill Clinton couldn't get away with a blow job in Washington.

If 911 were an inside job, folks would have used that knowledge to crush Bush, or whomever was supposed to be the mastermind. Same as with getting OBL. You would never get the SEALS and everyone else involved to play along with the charade.   The truth always comes out.  That's one of the great things about Snowdens information dump. It silenced a lot of conspiracies as it showed exactly what was going on behind the scenes..

I certainly don't believe the conspiracy theories about 9/11, I dont believe the cover up stories, I just never understood why the body of Bin Laden, the most wanted man in the world, the mastermind behind 9/11 and so many other atrocities, was simply buried at sea before anyone had a chance to actually see his body.

Maddog wrote:

Didgee wrote:

This is what gets me. Those prosing a cover up, would have to include all those in the Democrats as well. Which would be absurd

As do people not realise that the democrats would jump at the chance of exposing such a crime. If created by Bush.

The fact is they do not, because like most people, they know Al-Qaeda had carried out this attack. Who were responsible for many attacks

Are people claiming these were all set up by the US?

People need to simple look at the facts and understand that Al-qaeda was well funded and organised

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_al-Qaeda_attacks#1998

I don't know what's wrong with people. Do they not remember the first attack on the WTC?

Who do they think did that?

I guess the bigger the event like Pearl Harbor or 911, the bigger folks imaginations grow. Maybe it's some sort of coping mechanism?

Agreed

I know, you do not see the claims on any of the other attacks, even the one with the US warship

It could be a coping mechanism, but to me it boils down to a view they are downplaying the capabilities of Al-Qaeda. They simple do not want to believe how well funded and organised they actually were

This maybe due to a poorly preconceived view they hold of people from that part of the world. As if they are not smart enough to pull this atrocity off

Maddog wrote:

Didgee wrote:

This is what gets me. Those prosing a cover up, would have to include all those in the Democrats as well. Which would be absurd

As do people not realise that the democrats would jump at the chance of exposing such a crime. If created by Bush.

The fact is they do not, because like most people, they know Al-Qaeda had carried out this attack. Who were responsible for many attacks

Are people claiming these were all set up by the US?

People need to simple look at the facts and understand that Al-qaeda was well funded and organised

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_al-Qaeda_attacks#1998

I don't know what's wrong with people. Do they not remember the first attack on the WTC?

Who do they think did that?

I guess the bigger the event like Pearl Harbor or 911, the bigger folks imaginations grow. Maybe it's some sort of coping mechanism?

Well, the 9-11 attack didn't come from Afghanistan or Iraq. They were Saudis, from Hanover, Germany. Yet neither Saudi Arabia nor Germany was attacked by the US. Instead, the US went after the countries that had oil fields.

That's proof that the US makes up stories, and people like you are gullible enough to swallow it. Southerners!

Didgee wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I don't know what's wrong with people. Do they not remember the first attack on the WTC?

Who do they think did that?

I guess the bigger the event like Pearl Harbor or 911, the bigger folks imaginations grow. Maybe it's some sort of coping mechanism?

Agreed

I know, you do not see the claims on any of the other attacks, even the one with the US warship

It could be a coping mechanism, but to me it boils down to a view they are downplaying the capabilities of Al-Qaeda. They simple do not want to believe how well funded and organised they actually were

This maybe due to a poorly preconceived view they hold of people from that part of the world. As if they are not smart enough to pull this atrocity off

I don't believe the 9-11 attacks were staged by the US, either. But I do believe that Bush, Rumsfeld and Cheney took advantage of them to whip up anti-Muslim sentiment, and thus go after the oil fields.

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:

I don't know what's wrong with people. Do they not remember the first attack on the WTC?

Who do they think did that?

I guess the bigger the event like Pearl Harbor or 911, the bigger folks imaginations grow. Maybe it's some sort of coping mechanism?

Well, the 9-11 attack didn't come from Afghanistan or Iraq.  They were Saudis, from Hanover, Germany.  Yet neither Saudi Arabia nor Germany was attacked by the US.  Instead, the US went after the countries that had oil fields.  

That's proof that the US makes up stories, and people like you are gullible enough to swallow it.  Southerners!  

Afghanistan was the base of operations for al-Qaeda, with their terrorist training camps

Doh

Have a good evening everyone

Didgee wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Well, the 9-11 attack didn't come from Afghanistan or Iraq.  They were Saudis, from Hanover, Germany.  Yet neither Saudi Arabia nor Germany was attacked by the US.  Instead, the US went after the countries that had oil fields.  

That's proof that the US makes up stories, and people like you are gullible enough to swallow it.  Southerners!  

Afghanistan was the base of operations for al-Qaeda, with their terrorist training camps

Doh

Weak to unbelievable. UBL hid out there, while passing through to Pakistan...where, incidentally, he was found. There was no reason to invade Afghanistan.

Original Quill wrote:

Didgee wrote:

Afghanistan was the base of operations for al-Qaeda, with their terrorist training camps

Doh

Weak to unbelievable.  UBL hid out there, while passing through to Pakistan...where, incidentally, he was found.  There was no reason to invade Afghanistan.

Revisionist history again Quill

"The U.S. military, with British support, begins a bombing campaign against Taliban forces, officially launching Operation Enduring Freedom. Canada, Australia, Germany, and France pledge future support. The war’s early phase [PDF] mainly involves U.S. air strikes on al-Qaeda and Taliban forces that are assisted by a partnership of about one thousand U.S. special forces, the Northern Alliance, and ethnic Pashtun anti-Taliban forces. The first wave of conventional ground forces arrives twelve days later. Most of the ground combat is between the Taliban and its Afghan opponents."

https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan

Night

Syl wrote:

Maddog wrote:

It would require too many people to go along with it, that don't like each other..

That's the problem with conspiracies. They can't withstand time as that many people won't stay quiet that long when they could use that knowledge for power.

It's why Bill Clinton couldn't get away with a blow job in Washington.

If 911 were an inside job, folks would have used that knowledge to crush Bush, or whomever was supposed to be the mastermind. Same as with getting OBL. You would never get the SEALS and everyone else involved to play along with the charade.   The truth always comes out.  That's one of the great things about Snowdens information dump. It silenced a lot of conspiracies as it showed exactly what was going on behind the scenes..

I certainly don't believe the conspiracy theories about 9/11, I dont believe the cover up stories, I just never understood why the body of Bin Laden, the most wanted man in the world, the mastermind behind 9/11 and so many other atrocities, was simply buried at sea before anyone had a chance to actually see his body.

People had a chance to see his body, but making a spectacle out if it would only inflame people.

There is little doubt, even in the Islamic world, that the body that slid off the USS Vinson was that of OBL.

He's not the only high profile target who was buried in the same manner. That way folks can't do pilgrimages to their burial sites. Great care is also taken to bury these people according to Islamic protocol, even if they are human trash. No need to rile up followers or sympathizers.

Didgee wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Weak to unbelievable.  UBL hid out there, while passing through to Pakistan...where, incidentally, he was found.  There was no reason to invade Afghanistan.

Revisionist history again Quill

"The U.S. military, with British support, begins a bombing campaign against Taliban forces, officially launching Operation Enduring Freedom. Canada, Australia, Germany, and France pledge future support. The war’s early phase [PDF] mainly involves U.S. air strikes on al-Qaeda and Taliban forces that are assisted by a partnership of about one thousand U.S. special forces, the Northern Alliance, and ethnic Pashtun anti-Taliban forces. The first wave of conventional ground forces arrives twelve days later. Most of the ground combat is between the Taliban and its Afghan opponents."

https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan

Night

He's a fantasist.

It's waste of time with him.

Just troll him and wait for someone else to have a conversation with.

Didgee wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Weak to unbelievable.  UBL hid out there, while passing through to Pakistan...where, incidentally, he was found.  There was no reason to invade Afghanistan.

Revisionist history again Quill

"The U.S. military, with British support, begins a bombing campaign against Taliban forces, officially launching Operation Enduring Freedom. Canada, Australia, Germany, and France pledge future support. The war’s early phase [PDF] mainly involves U.S. air strikes on al-Qaeda and Taliban forces that are assisted by a partnership of about one thousand U.S. special forces, the Northern Alliance, and ethnic Pashtun anti-Taliban forces. The first wave of conventional ground forces arrives twelve days later. Most of the ground combat is between the Taliban and its Afghan opponents."

https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan

All for fossil fuels. The irony is that the US doesn't even need oil...it has its own reserves. It's all for Europe.

Maddog wrote:He's a fantasist.

It's waste of time with him.

Just troll him and wait for someone else to have a conversation with.  

That's not the reason why you are a quitter. You quit because you run short of arguments. Being a southerner, you are usually on the wrong side of whatever argument - guns, race, violence - to begin with, and you're usually not quick to grasp any advantage that may arise.

So you cop out of the discussion, pleading you want to talk to someone more agreeable. What you really mean is, you've lost!

Original Quill wrote:

Maddog wrote:He's a fantasist.

It's waste of time with him.

Just troll him and wait for someone else to have a conversation with.  

That's not the reason why you are a quitter.  You quit because you run short of arguments.  Being a southerner, you are usually on the wrong side of whatever argument - guns, race, violence - to begin with, and you're usually not quick to grasp any advantage that may arise.

So you cop out of the discussion, pleading you want to talk to someone more agreeable.  What you really mean is, you've lost!  

I see no value in a very tiny number of humans.

Congratulations,
You made that cut.

Maddog wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

That's not the reason why you are a quitter.  You quit because you run short of arguments.  Being a southerner, you are usually on the wrong side of whatever argument - guns, race, violence - to begin with, and you're usually not quick to grasp any advantage that may arise.

So you cop out of the discussion, pleading you want to talk to someone more agreeable.  What you really mean is, you've lost!  

I see no value in a very tiny number of humans.

Congratulations,
You made that cut.

And you made the cut and run. I only pointed it out. Proud to be of service.

Original Quill wrote:

Didgee wrote:

Revisionist history again Quill

"The U.S. military, with British support, begins a bombing campaign against Taliban forces, officially launching Operation Enduring Freedom. Canada, Australia, Germany, and France pledge future support. The war’s early phase [PDF] mainly involves U.S. air strikes on al-Qaeda and Taliban forces that are assisted by a partnership of about one thousand U.S. special forces, the Northern Alliance, and ethnic Pashtun anti-Taliban forces. The first wave of conventional ground forces arrives twelve days later. Most of the ground combat is between the Taliban and its Afghan opponents."

https://www.cfr.org/timeline/us-war-afghanistan

All for fossil fuels.  The irony is that the US doesn't even need oil...it has its own reserves.  It's all for Europe.

How was it for fossil fuels, when in 20 years they never benefited from any of Afghanistan's oil? ?

"In December 2011, Afghanistan signed an oil exploration contract with China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) for the development of three oil fields along the Amu Darya river.[53] Afghanistan will have its first oil refineries within the next three years, after which it will receive 70 percent of the profits from the sale of the oil and natural gas.[54] CNPC began Afghan oil production in October 2012, extracting 1.5 million barrels of oil annually."

Stop smoking the crack quill, as oil was not discovered in the country until 2010, nearly a decade after the Taliban fell

Didgee wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

All for fossil fuels.  The irony is that the US doesn't even need oil...it has its own reserves.  It's all for Europe.

How was it for fossil fuels, when in 20 years they never benefited from any of Afghanistan's oil? ?

"In December 2011, Afghanistan signed an oil exploration contract with China National Petroleum Corporation (CNPC) for the development of three oil fields along the Amu Darya river.[53] Afghanistan will have its first oil refineries within the next three years, after which it will receive 70 percent of the profits from the sale of the oil and natural gas.[54] CNPC began Afghan oil production in October 2012, extracting 1.5 million barrels of oil annually."

Stop smoking the crack quill, as oil was not discovered in the country until 2010, nearly a decade after the Taliban fell

And everyone but the US got Iraqi oil.

"War for oil" is a dumb trope.

The war may have been dumb, but it wasn't for oil.