um yeah sounds cool...........lol UTSA
It was payback for them doing the exact same thing to us in Vietnam. At the time the US government probably couldn't believe its luck- five years after Vietnam the Soviets were putting themselves in the same position and giving us the same opportunity to bleed them white without shedding any blood of our own.
Obviously it backfired.
To be fair it was the Carter Administration that first funded the mujahadeen. Reagan just picked up where Carter left off.
Because Israelis roll tanks and bulldozers through their neighborhood
You forget about the 2006 Israeli-Lebanon conflict where there was a 35 to 1 death ratio?
Consider how many innocent Afghan's we killed the past 6 years searching for Bin Laden while he was hanging out in Pakistan (our buddies)
Let's put this in perspective
9/11: Nearly 3,000 dead
Afghan war 2001-2004: up to 20,000 dead
2005: 1,700 dead
2006: 4,400 dead
2007: 7,700 dead
2008: over 2,000 dead
2009: over 2,000 dead
So because of the deaths of 3,000 people, America was behind and assisted (with coalition) the death of nearly 40,000
Do that math 3k vs 40k
UN-FKN-BELIEVABLE. That's 40,000+ new recruits against America
*Keep in mind these are deaths we have accounted for. The real number is probably around 50,000-100,000 dead
You'd rather it be the other way around?
Look, I'm not very keen on this war either. I felt at the beginning we should have put a multi-million dollar bounty on bin Laden's head and allowed private individuals to pursue him.
But if my country is in a war I'd sure as NOT want to be the one absorbing 95 percent of the casualties. I'd rather that be the other side, thank you very much.
The fact Bin Laden's been hiding in USA's buddies place for 6 years while we wasted American lives, Afghan civilians, & bottomless money has to be a very bitter pill to swallow
What a stupid discussions.
Nope. Anyone who believe I was stating facts when discussing my opinions and "whatifs" doesn't understand the concept of opinions and "whatifs".
lol. Indirectly. Bloody organization would likely not exist if it wasn't for the US.
Now that's just funny, considering your entire debate strategy is based on argument framing and logical fallacies.
I've never seen you participate in discussion when you weren't just stretching arguments so far into specifics that they are unrecognizable.
It's fun and entertaining at times, but leaves me not taking you seriously
If I was a soldier I'd jump into the line of fire rather than listen to some uneducated trailer park junkie sing that music. him and his exploitation of the troops.
The NFL forum can never have enough Dr. Gonzo
Just a question: Where'd you get the numbers from?
And yes, I think any unintended casualty is a tragedy, and will be used further to make new terrorists.
You're still dumb for implying that cheering for 9/11 = cheering Osama is dead.
Where were you, when they made that ladder to Heaven?
I was doing what every red blooded American should have been doing after 9/11. I was ing a Muslim from the back with her burka pulled up over her head.
Someone must've missed that South Park episode.
What's the most powerful terrorist organization in the world?
"Did it make you cry, or did you think it was kinda gay?"
I understand how you passed off your opinion as fact, whether you realize it or not.
Clear it up. Does or doesn't the US have itself to blame for 9/11?lol. Indirectly. Bloody organization would likely not exist if it wasn't for the US.
What you think about my posts from previous threads is irrelevant to the strawman you propped up in this thread.Now that's just funny, considering your entire debate strategy is based on argument framing and logical fallacies.
I've never seen you participate in discussion when you weren't just stretching arguments so far into specifics that they are unrecognizable.
It's fun and entertaining at times, but leaves me not taking you seriously
However, seeing someone get butthurt and make up something about my debate strategy instead of acknowledging the obvious fallacy they propped up in this thread is more entertaining, imo.
OK..that's fine..I don't give a what you think of his music..I think he's ok..not a big fan of his newer stuff at all..but that doesn't change his feelings about the war.
''The athletic apparel company Champion has decided it no longer wants to be associated with Rashard Mendenhall, days after Mendenhall wrote on Twitter that he didn’t believe hijacked planes caused the collapse of the World Trade Center, and that people shouldn’t celebrate the death of Osama bin Laden.''
Can't say I didn't see that one coming.
I've never talked about blame. I said we enabled them to do it via training, funding, and outfitting al Qaeda's predecessor, then pissing them off.
Actually, I have no problem admitting I toss in the occassional strawman and other logical fallacies. Never denied it was a fallacy, just that it was funny you pointing it out :pWhat you think about my posts from previous threads is irrelevant to the strawman you propped up in this thread.
However, seeing someone get butthurt and make up something about my debate strategy instead of acknowledging the obvious fallacy they propped up in this thread is more entertaining, imo.
We've had that discussion before, and we've well established I don't give a crap about the outcome of a discussion as long as it's fun for me :p
And I made up nothing about your debate strategy. I have never seen you offer one shred of information to a discussion. You're all about picking a target and trying to tear it down. I do that myself sometimes (tweaking people is fun).
That doesn't change his bank account either on all the money he got from exploiting 9/11.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
