Who's Online
9 registered (L1QU1D13, Malaclypse IV, geroge lenard, oldtree, DANKNUG, 1 invisible), 65 Guests and 15 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Newest Members
63666366, Exodus111, zsusu, Aravinda, TxLongHorn
22343 Registered Users
Shout Box

Top Posters (30 Days)
chrisbennett 255
kRoNiKtOkEr 230
blueridge_bandit 228
kingAmongKings 210
OCNORML 202
Forum Stats
22343 Members
56 Forums
179295 Topics
1575049 Posts

Max Online: 1054 @ 07/29/08 07:31 AM
November
Su M Tu W Th F Sa
1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 17 18 19 20 21
22 23 24 25 26 27 28
29 30
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2
Topic Options
Rate This Topic
#1589402 - 10/29/09 09:38 AM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: WhatITdo]
slartibartfast Offline
Carpal Tunnel
*

Registered: 01/04/06
Posts: 2222
"The Al-Qaeda's strategy for the presence of U.S. and Allied Forces is killing the innocent lives of their own country, you cant blame this act of violence on the U.S."

- of course the usa is not *directly* responsible for al qaida's violent acts, but it is an accepted fact among the US intelligence community that US foreign policy has increased the risk and incidence of terrorism:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0925/dailyUpdate.html



"They really dont care about their own people."

- aha! now we are getting to the crux of the matter...it's all about the people, right? imagine if these barbaric islamic extremists weren't in afghanistan, but instead, they were in san diego where they shot at a US military convoy and then disappeared into a nice neighbourhood to hide...imagine that the US troops attacked the militants by dropping bombs on the block of houses where they were last seen, killing a handful of them along with a few dozen innocent american women and children...that would never happen but if it did, it would give the impression that the US government doesn't really care about american people (at least in san diego)...that morality might be geographically based so lets move the scenario to afghanistan where the same militants fire on a US convoy, and then escape into a christian charity building filled with american civilian missionaries...do ya think the US military would bomb a building full of american civilians to kill a handful of taliban fighters? of course not: the us government cares about their own people

so why would a morally evolved military repeatedly bomb houses full of innocent people (who happen to be arab) despite demands from the government of that country to stop? they would not bomb civilian targets if they really cared about those people



"I know for a fact that there are more innocent killings on the Al-Qaeda side (intentional) than there are that on the American side(accidental)"

- that is absolutely true...everyone knows the terrorists are the bad guys who target civilians, and as the good guys, we have a legal and moral obligation to capture/kill terrorists as long as our military is occupying those countries...but sometimes we do it in a way that hurts innocent people more than the terrorists...saying "oops, sorry!" afterward works once or twice, BUT after that collateral damage is intentional because they know in advance that there will be civilian casualties...we are using tactics (bombs, kidnapping, torture) against arab civilian targets that would NEVER be accepted against american civilian targets...WACO and kent state shocked america's conscience: imagine how much more shocking it would have been if those incidents involved missiles fired from unmanned predator drones, and innocent american civilians dragged off to torture chambers without any charges or trial


we are supposed to be the good guys but sometimes we don't act like it

Top
#1589407 - 10/29/09 09:53 AM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: larrys_one]
slartibartfast Offline
Carpal Tunnel
*

Registered: 01/04/06
Posts: 2222
"It seems to me that (slartibartfast) thinks intentions are irrelevant. That a US pilot who bombs a suspected or proven target and has innocent lives lost is EQUALLY culpible (guilty) as a fucktard that targets his own Grama, or wife, or mother, or daughter."

- seems to me you've got a strawman fallacy going there...if that us pilot and his superiors repeatedly bombed suspected targets in the united states for years, killing thousands of innocent american civilians, they would spend the rest of their natural lives in leavenworth prison...intentions matter, but not as much as who the intentions hurt (ie: it's legal to bomb innocent arabs)



"i suppose that when the US troops killed some Canadians in a friendly fire incident, they should be equated the same as some insurgents that shoot down helicopters with RPG's."

- the pilot who dropped the bomb on the canadian soldiers was charged with four counts of manslaughter and eight counts of assault...he copped a plea and was found guilty of dereliction of duty, reprimanded, foreited $5000 in pay, and stripped of his status as a military pilot...if he was an insurgent, he would would have been dragged off to a concentration camp without the benefit of a trial...american citizenship has it's privileges

Top
#1589408 - 10/29/09 09:58 AM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: slartibartfast]
WhatITdo Offline
Stranger

Registered: 10/28/09
Posts: 8
slart, you make some valid points but in the end it takes a lot more intel for the U.S. to bomb some random neighborhood because a small group committed acts of violence. Im pretty sure they would just send in special ops to take care of the group instead of waisting millions of dollars worth of bombs to just kill a single target(group)

Im done talking about this.


Edited by WhatITdo (10/29/09 09:58 AM)

Top
#1589417 - 10/29/09 10:37 AM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: WhatITdo]
slartibartfast Offline
Carpal Tunnel
*

Registered: 01/04/06
Posts: 2222
occasionally airstrikes are based on the intel collected by unmanned drones armed with hellfire missiles and there isn't time to get special ops into place...it's a shoot first, don't ask questions later deal

sometimes the airstrikes are called in because US troops are under fire from civilian areas...rather than risk US troops safety by going in and picking off militants one by one, airstrikes are ordered to flatten the homes one by one until the shooting stops

the afghan people's outrage over the needless civilian casualties (in particular the ones described earlier in this thread) prompted the senior US military commander in afghanistan to restrict the use of airstrikes, and instruct his troops to care more about the afghan people than killing the taliban by walking away from a firefight if it endangers innocent civilians...it was the moral thing to do, but it was done 8 years too late:
http://www.afghanconflictmonitor.org/2009/08/policy-followed-by-decline-in-civilian-deaths-nato.html


meanwhile, president obama has *secretly* ordered over three dozen air strikes against civilian targets in pakistan (a close ally of the usa in the so-called war on terror)...this glaring moral hypocrisy was highlighted yesterday in pakistan by hillary clinton who said "I am more than willing to hear every complaint about the United States" and then refused to let anyone even ask about predator drone air strikes during an Q&A session with pakistani university students...secretary of state clinton could not allow air strike questions because the obama administration has not admitted to ordering them...this reminds me of the nixon's secret bombing campaign in cambodia and laos...the 'secret' ethic is that they can't be held responsible for what they haven't admitted to doing



Drone attacks on the rise under Obama

Published: 4:13PM Tuesday October 13, 2009
Source: Reuters

Under President Barack Obama, the pace of strikes by pilotless drone aircraft on insurgents in Pakistan is rising and could pick up further after a White House review of regional war strategy.

There have been 39 drone strikes in Pakistan since Obama took office not quite nine months ago, according to a tally of reports from Pakistani security officials, local government officials and residents.

That compares with 33 strikes in the 12 months before Obama was sworn in on January 20.

The air strikes, many using Hellfire missiles, are credited most notably with killing Pakistani Taliban leader Baitullah Mehsud in August, a much-lauded success that has stoked renewed interest in the potential of robotic warfare.

But as the White House reviews high-tech counter-terrorism options in Pakistan and Afghanistan, critics of drone technology question the effectiveness of targeted killings and the usefulness of a campaign fanning anti-American sentiment.

Henry Crumpton, a former senior official at the CIA and the State Department, called the Pakistan strikes one of the most widely known secrets that the CIA has.

The CIA and the Pentagon refuse to discuss the program, which despite successes remains highly unpopular in Pakistan.

The air strikes are seen as a violation of national sovereignty and are blamed for killing scores of civilians there.


Edited by slartibartfast (10/29/09 10:51 AM)

Top
#1589687 - 10/29/09 08:53 PM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: larrys_one]
Duffy Moon Offline
Old hand
**

Registered: 02/10/06
Posts: 1080
Loc: Saskatoon
Quote:
Hell i suppose that when the US troops killed some Canadians in a friendly fire incident, they should be equated the same as some insurgents that shoot down helicopters with RPG's. Makes absolutely NO sense to me.

It would be nice if your country admitted that it fucked up. Instead of trying to blame its allies.

Read that.
_________________________
Federal Marihuana Exemptee as of 10/31/06


Top
#1591182 - 11/03/09 06:20 PM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: larrys_one]
MrCleanscreens Offline
Old hand
**

Registered: 04/23/09
Posts: 882
Loc: USA!USA!USA!!!
Originally Posted By: larrys_one
Originally Posted By: davidmalmolevine
America's Phoney War in Afghanistan

By F. William Engdahl
.

The US military is in Afghanistan for two reasons. First to restore and control the world’s largest supply of opium for the world heroin markets and to use the drugs as a geopolitical weapon against opponents, especially Russia. That control of the Afghan drug market is essential for the liquidity of the bankrupt and corrupt Wall Street financial mafia.




Are you serious? Do you truly believe that our sons and daughters are over there fighting and dying so's the US can corner the opium market for wallstreet bankers? MAN...you really have too much time on your hands. A good imagination, david, is a double edged sword. Creative, yes, but also able to imagine ALL kinds of shit that ain't there.
How about the reason we are there is to fight, corner, and eliminate those that, just today, bombed a fucking marketplace, full of mostly women and children, who were just trying to live.
That kind of....vermin?, NEED to be chased to the most godforsaken corner of the world and hunted without relent.


It`s impossible for anyone to know exactly why we are there; war is deception, plain and simple. I do find it very interesting that the military is almost in place to wipe out heroin and coca sources at the same moment in time. Until just recently, Georgie Bush was content to have NATO in overall command of Afghan operations. Ha!!! At any rate; most of that poison is running up the arms of Russians, Iranians, and Europeans.

McClatchy Washington Bureau
Print This Article
Posted on Mon, Jun. 29, 2009

Flood of Afghan heroin fuels drug plague in Russia
Tom Lasseter | McClatchy Newspapers
last updated: June 29, 2009 12:59:44 AM

CHELYABINSK, Russia — Young men with sores on their arms shuffled up the stairs of a dark, underground shopping arcade and into the daylight to plop dingy wads of rubles into the drug dealers' hands. The dealers casually reached into their pockets or plastic shopping bags and handed over tablets of synthetic morphine, a type also used as a horse tranquilizer, and paper packets that appeared to contain heroin.

Across the street in this gray, post-Soviet industrial town, two Russian policemen sat in a faded wooden booth, and a couple more sat in a police truck outside. They didn't seem the least bit interested.

A police officer walked by but didn't interrupt the transaction. Asked whether he was worried, one of the dealers, a young man with a white driving cap tipped down over his eyes, leaned back against a railing and giggled.

In Miass, a small town west of Chelyabinsk near the foothills of the Ural Mountains, Elena Shapkovskaya wasn't laughing. She works at the No. 40 pharmacy and often has to call the police when heroin addicts crowd the shop and begin shooting up in plain view.

"Sometimes instead of calling the police, we call an ambulance, because they're lying on the floor," Shapkovskaya said, looking down at the tile floor beneath her feet.

Drugs have become yet another scourge of post-communist Russia, with millions addicted to heroin and an annual death toll reportedly in the tens of thousands from overdoses and other drug-related causes.


Russian authorities seized 2.4 metric tons of heroin in 2006, about three times the seizures in 2002, according to United Nations figures. That's a small fraction of the estimated 60 metric tons that are thought to arrive in Russia from Afghanistan each year.


In 2008, Russian officials said that the country had more than 5 million frequent drug users, up from 3 million in 2002. U.N. estimates are lower — drug usage is notoriously hard to calculate — but they indicate that the percentage of Russians who use opiates is the highest in the world for countries with populations larger than 100 million. Opiate usage in the United States, which receives very little Afghan opium or heroin, is about one-third of Russia's.


Russia had some 940,000 HIV-positive adults and children in 2007, up from 390,000 in 2001, according to the U.N., and an estimated 80 percent of Russians currently living with HIV were infected by dirty needles. AIDS killed about 40,000 Russians in 2007, but the U.N. says the toll could be as high as 71,000. It was 1,900 in 2001.

"It is difficult to be anything other than pessimistic when it comes to forecasting what the future holds for Russia vis-a-vis heroin abuse and trafficking," said a report last year by the U.N. office on drugs and crime.

Russian officials publicly blame America for the plague because almost all the heroin comes from U.S.-dominated Afghanistan, but they won't discuss in detail how drugs move through their country. They've yet to devise a comprehensive plan to address the issue. Trials of high-level traffickers are conducted in secret. Even mid level police officials usually don't talk, and when they do, it's privately and away from their workplaces.

'THE AMERICANS HAVE DONE NOTHING'

Chelyabinsk, a city of more than 1 million in southwest Russia, once was known as Tankograd — "tank city" — for its World War II production of T-34 tanks. It later gained notoriety as the center of a region swamped by radioactive waste from a nearby nuclear-weapons facility.

A different poison is spreading today: Chelyabinsk has become a major transshipment center for Afghan opium and heroin, which enters Russia from Central Asia.

The drugs usually reach Russia from Tajikistan and Kazakhstan in trucks or, in smaller amounts, tucked away in train compartments or nervous travelers' stomachs.

The trade is nothing new in Russia, but after the U.S.-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, it exploded. Afghan opium production climbed from 3,400 metric tons in 2002 to a record 8,200 metric tons in 2007, partly because U.S. and NATO-led troops put a low priority on curbing it. Heroin flooded into Central Asia, and on to Russia.

"When I heard the Americans were going to enter Afghanistan I thought they were going to solve the problem, to stop the drugs," said Yevgeny Roizman, who had connections with Russian organized crime before he became a member of parliament. He now runs an anti-drug organization in the city of Yekaterinburg, another big heroin-distribution hub north of Chelyabinsk.

"But in the period after they came, there was a big increase in the region . . . ," Roizman added. "It makes me think the Americans have done nothing to stop the drug trafficking."

Although it's an unintended consequence of the U.S. action in Afghanistan, some Russian officials trace the growing problem to an American plot.

Viktor Ivanov, the head of Russia's Federal Drug Control Service, the national drug enforcement agency, told parliament in May that it was reasonable to "call the flow of Afghan opiates the second edition of opium wars." He was referring to the 19th-century war between Britain and China sparked by exports of opium from British India to China.

Ivanov isn't alone.

"I can name you a lot of politicians in Russia who said that the Americans specially arranged the situation in Afghanistan so that we would receive a lot of drugs, and this is the real aim of their occupation," said Andrei Klimov, the deputy head of the foreign affairs committee in Russia's lower house of parliament. "I'm not sure this is true, but who knows."

The U.S. government takes no direct responsibility for fueling Russia's drug problem.

"I would say the entire international community is responsible. The U.N. Security Council looked favorably on the U.S. and NATO doing what they're doing in Afghanistan," a State Department official said, referring to the U.N. mandate backing the foreign presence in the country. "So when critics like Russia say the U.S. and NATO aren't doing enough, well, it's really the entire international community that needs to take action on this."

A second State Department official pointed to the lack of Russian effort to provide assistance in Afghanistan.

"The Russians have had opportunities to come to the table on this and to provide alternative options," the official said. "If this really was a priority for them, we could work something out."

Both officials were authorized to speak to a reporter only if they weren't identified.

In Russia, it's much easier to blame a U.S. conspiracy than to bring up the subject of corrupt officials, the Russian mafia and their involvement in the drug trade.

Russia's Federal Drug Control Service wouldn't respond to McClatchy's questions over the course of a month, nor would the Interior Ministry or the national intelligence service. The Russian government routinely suppresses basic information about drug-related trials, even the names of defendants.

Igor Khokhlov, a senior researcher at the Academy of Sciences, a government-funded research institute, has researched the drug trade and concluded that high-level authorities aren't involved.

"They have safer and better ways to benefit from their high offices," he said in an e-mail interview.

However, it's almost impossible to do business in Russia, legal and otherwise, without a "krysha" — a Russian word that means "roof" — a patron to protect a businessman from corrupt government officials, criminals and other realities of modern Russia. It seems unlikely that kryshas could operate in Russia's estimated annual $15 billion drug-trafficking industry without high-level government contacts.

A 2008 U.N. report concluded that Russian organized-crime groups "provide protection to drug trafficking networks in exchange for a share of the proceeds."

The former deputy director of the Federal Drug Control Service, Alexander Mikhailov, said that Tajiks usually ran the wholesale heroin business at the border and delivered the drugs to gypsy communities, who handled retail distribution. He acknowledged that both groups have patrons whose "job is to corrupt those who affect his business: police, customs, narco-police, the people who should be fighting drugs."

Who protects the drug dealers, and how do narcotics get from the border to places such as Moscow? Mikhailov, who served for 25 years in the KGB, the Soviet intelligence service, ignored the questions. "I don't like to give names in the drug business," he said. "Most people don't."

Sporadic news reports suggest that narco-corruption occurs at senior levels of law enforcement. In 2003, five federal anti-narcotics agents were arrested, accused of taking bribes from a drug dealer. During 2004, an Interior Ministry lieutenant colonel was charged with leading a group of former police officers who were caught selling heroin in the Moscow region. Russian news wires reported in 2006 that more than 160 staff members of the federal anti-narcotics service had been caught for drug-related crimes.

'I PAID BRIBES TO GET LET GO'

As his friends died drooling and shaking with Afghan heroin burning through their veins, Alexei knew that things were getting out of control. In 2002 or 2003, it seemed as if a dam had burst: The number of heroin dealers in his north Moscow suburb grew from three to a few dozen, and the supply was purer than anything he'd had before.

Alexei, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because of legal concerns, started shooting up heroin every day and earning cash as a drug courier.

After 2002, more than a dozen of Alexei's friends didn't survive overdoses after vomiting in nightclub bathrooms or on their apartment floors. Roman, 23, died in a hospital ward after shooting up in a stairwell. Christina, 21, overdosed at home. Pyotr, 37, went to a party, used some heroin and had a fatal heart attack at his girlfriend's apartment.

Nevertheless, Alexei, a 28-year-old with a buzz cut who favors black jeans and bright white sneakers, said he didn't worry much about getting caught ferrying packages of heroin between Moscow and outlying towns

"I was arrested in clubs and apartments, but . . . I paid bribes to get let go," he said.

A federal anti-narcotics officer who works in a region near the Kazakh border sat down recently with a McClatchy reporter for a meal of grilled pork and vodka, but agreed to an interview only if his name wasn't used; his agency had said that its agents weren't allowed to talk to journalists.

"I've heard about a lot of cases of local police taking bribes to protect drug dealers," said the agent, who had a pink face, thick shoulders and a gold tooth that shone when he smiled. Those cases, he said, are investigated by police departments' internal affairs bureaus, which aren't above suspicion themselves.

The agent said he earned $540 a month for working to control a trade worth millions of dollars in his area. Local police, he said, make even less.

A second federal officer, who met a reporter in his car in a parking lot, sighed when he talked about the subject. "I can't tell you that there's not much police corruption," said the officer, a thin man wearing a cheap brown jacket who drove up in a small white Lada, a matchbox-like Russian car.

"I can't say the situation is getting any better," he said, speaking anonymously for the same reason as the first federal officer. "The amount of heroin coming in increased a lot during the past two years."

Vladimir Bogomolov, who's run a drug treatment center in the city of Chelyabinsk for 10 years, started to describe the network to a visiting American reporter.

"The Russian (criminal) groups are above the Tajiks and gypsies; they allow them to sell drugs and take a percentage of what they make," he said between sips of coffee. The police, he said, "are extremely corrupt."

An associate who sat in on the interview interrupted Bogomolov: "We shouldn't talk about what's happening right now."

So Bogomolov, who's committed much of his life to fighting the drug problem in his city, stopped talking about it.

He had the look of a defeated man.

MORE FROM MCCLATCHY http://www.mcclatchydc.com/227/story/70851.html#


So much for the horse shit about USA guarding our bankers; if any banks profit from that poison from Afghanistan, it`s in the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain and many other money laundering centers. Unfortunately, ports of entry for heroin also have a high number of hypes also.

Quote:
The U.S. government takes no direct responsibility for fueling Russia's drug problem.

"I would say the entire international community is responsible. The U.N. Security Council looked favorably on the U.S. and NATO doing what they're doing in Afghanistan," a State Department official said, referring to the U.N. mandate backing the foreign presence in the country. "So when critics like Russia say the U.S. and NATO aren't doing enough, well, it's really the entire international community that needs to take action on this."

A second State Department official pointed to the lack of Russian effort to provide assistance in Afghanistan.


I say we ask for Russians to help out with the smuggling routes while we demand that NATO brings in the Paraquat and Round Up, and let the US Marines do the killing since NATO doesn`t seem to have the will to do anything but defensive actions. Fagging British troops were parked right next to poppy fields.

I hope my hunch is spot on and we take out the blow and horse at once.






Attachments
afraid to be red..jpg (46 downloads)

_________________________
As real as it may seem, it was only in my dreams.

Top
#1591326 - 11/04/09 08:53 AM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: MrCleanscreens]
goldpanda Offline
Stranger
***

Registered: 01/19/09
Posts: 13
history shows america has a snowballs chance in afghanistan.
the entire soviet union right next door couldn't subdue them.
a bankrupt america on the other side of the world has less chance.
every empire in history found that afghanistan,at the crossroads between europe and asia, was one tough customer.
alexander the great was the only one who had some short term success there,but it was short term as he found out.
would be good if the feds read a hstory book... or read any book period.

Top
#1591347 - 11/04/09 09:20 AM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: goldpanda]
Afka Offline
Enthusiast
**

Registered: 04/30/09
Posts: 313
Loc: Canada
Originally Posted By: goldpanda
history shows america has a snowballs chance in afghanistan.
the entire soviet union right next door couldn't subdue them.
a bankrupt america on the other side of the world has less chance.
every empire in history found that afghanistan,at the crossroads between europe and asia, was one tough customer.
alexander the great was the only one who had some short term success there,but it was short term as he found out.
would be good if the feds read a hstory book... or read any book period.



What a better place than Iraq for an endless quagmire of military complex consumption.

Endless complicated mountains seems like the best place to invade.

Top
#1591350 - 11/04/09 09:24 AM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: goldpanda]
slartibartfast Offline
Carpal Tunnel
*

Registered: 01/04/06
Posts: 2222
the soviet union might have prevailed in afghanistan if ronald reagan had not channeled billions in military aid to the islamic mujahideen...BUT the usa has already sunk $230 billion in afghanistan (not including the other NATO member contributions) and most of the country is STILL under taliban control

it must be humiliating

Top
#1591765 - 11/05/09 03:58 PM Re: America's Phoney War in Afghanistan [Re: MrCleanscreens]
energyhazard Offline
Stoner
**

Registered: 02/27/08
Posts: 664
Loc: Vancouver, BC
Originally Posted By: MrCleanscreens
I do find it very interesting that the military is almost in place to wipe out heroin and coca sources at the same moment in time.



Impossible!




Originally Posted By: MrCleanscreens
Ha!!! At any rate; most of that poison is running up the arms of Russians, Iranians, and Europeans.


Might I remind you that the USA has BY FAR the highest rates of drug abuse, and is BY FAR the major importer (black market) of illegal drugs.

Top
Page 2 of 2 < 1 2