Iraq and Afghanistan .

It is a well known fact that NATO allies are fast losing their appetite for Afghanistan and Iraq . The casualties, scandals, low public support will make the U.S. request for 10, 000 more troops from Nato a hard sell .
In Germany, top military and defence resigned after a German ordered air strike left about 100 Afghans dead including innocent civilians .
In Canada, accusations are flying that troops handed over prisoners to face torture in Afghanistan jails . Most of the tortured are innocent people .
It is a terrible time for Obama to be stumping up support for the Afghan war .
More than 400 NATO soldiers were killed in Afghanistan this year .
Britain is adding 500 troops to Afghanistan while France and Germany are adding zero . Canada vowed to pull its trops from Afghanistan in 2011 .
Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen is touring capitals urging leaders to add more troops to Afghanistan . Polls in Britain show that 70% believe in troops withdrawal .The Netherlands, Tiny Estonia rae planning their troops withdrawal .There are troops from 43 countries in Afghanistan .
 
otheadp said:
You make it sound as if there was no conspiracy to rig the US intelligence reports - did you miss all of that coming out?
”
Oh yes, how could I have missed it...
Click to expand...
Dunno. It was on the front pages of most major papers, various times and events. The major media even in the US covered it. Fox News spent some effort on lying about it. Maybe you just took a few years off from political stuff ?

You can start catching up here, and go on to review the journalism career of Judith Miller, the political career of Karl Rove with reference to Valerie Plame, etc.:

The original "Downing street memo": http://www.afterdowningstreet.org/?q=node/1
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Downing_Street_memo
A couple of others in the category, just tracking through Wiki - no big search required:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dossier (David Kelly's suicide referenced here)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iraq_document_leak_18_September_2004
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush-Blair_memo
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush-Aznar_memo
 
The Downing Street memo, which like a lot of other Leftists you continue to misapply, is not a smoking gun. And on top of this, we get wikipedia. Great....
 
What did you learn if anything at all from Wikipedia vis a vis the manipulation and deception over the two crazy wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ?!!.
 
You misused vis a vis, but leaving that aside for a moment, you need to quit parroting yourself and make an argument for why you think the wars are "crazy." That is, you need to quit stating your opinions as facts and believing that they require no supporting evidence and argument. Maybe then people won't look on you as a troll.
 
When millions of INNOCENT lives are destroyed by a war obviously this war is more than crazy . As far as trolling .....it is your way to try to silence those who say the truth as it is .
 
Millions of innocents died in the Second World War. Was that war crazy, too?

I mention trolling, because you constantly exhibit signs of behaving like one. See the following link for what I am talking about.:

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=95476

Pay particular attention to "Posting the same quote, statement over and over." You constantly flirt with this when you serenade us all with your bursts of unsupported propaganda.

To refer to that post again, you are supposed to "Use the scientific method and support your claims with verifiable facts and references. Making claims that cannot be supported or using work that is not properly sited will be deleted. Violators will be towed at owners expense." You've been asked, pointedly, several times to back your claims up. You never do. Instead, you drone on about the "truth" and those who would "silence" it. Not to mention your personal attacks, both public and private. It's laughable. You should be banned.
 
You are not a mod to tell me what I do and what I do not . Add to that, this is MY thread . You are harassing me bastard .
Provocation and harassment are illegal acts . Swearing in anger is not illegal .
 
Last edited:
mike47 said:
It is a well known fact that NATO allies are fast losing their appetite for Afghanistan and Iraq . The casualties, scandals, low public support will make the U.S. request for 10, 000 more troops from Nato a hard sell .
In Germany, top military and defence resigned after a German ordered air strike left about 100 Afghans dead including innocent civilians .
In Canada, accusations are flying that troops handed over prisoners to face torture in Afghanistan jails . Most of the tortured are innocent people .
It is a terrible time for Obama to be stumping up support for the Afghan war .
More than 400 NATO soldiers were killed in Afghanistan this year .
Britain is adding 500 troops to Afghanistan while France and Germany are adding zero . Canada vowed to pull its trops from Afghanistan in 2011 .
Nato Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen is touring capitals urging leaders to add more troops to Afghanistan . Polls in Britain show that 70% believe in troops withdrawal .The Netherlands, Tiny Estonia rae planning their troops withdrawal .There are troops from 43 countries in Afghanistan .
Click to expand...

Please make more posts like this in the future. You'll be more likely to catalyze serious responses, and more of an asset to these forums.
 
countezero said:
Post something that proves how you know this. And please don't waste our time with your misunderstanding of the Downing Street memo, which you have already misquoted on at least one occasion.
Click to expand...
Already, the inquiry has provided us with devastating details of events in the run-up to Iraq.

Sir William Ehrman, former Director of Defence and Intelligence at the Foreign Office, told it this week that British spies reported ten days before the invasion that Iraq had 'disassembled' what chemical weapons it had. Yet Tony Blair nevertheless pressed ahead with the war.

Then came former Washington ambassador Sir Christopher Meyer's claim that Tony Blair and George W. Bush had signed a secret deal 'in blood' to topple Saddam Hussein almost a year before Iraq was invaded, and that officials found themselves scrabbling to find 'a smoking gun' to justify going to war.

But, despite these compelling accounts of what happened, the truth is that we already know the main lessons of Iraq: Britain was taken unprepared into war on false grounds, and the inevitable result was the destruction of Iraq, enormous loss of life and continuing political turmoil in the Middle East. Worse, the war has radicalised Muslim opinion against the West throughout the world, even spawning terrorism on the streets of London.
Click to expand...

Rotten to the core.
 
I have no doubt Blair went along with Bush, but that does not prove his intelligence services lied and fabricated information, which was the original claim.
 
countezero said:
I have no doubt Blair went along with Bush, but that does not prove his intelligence services lied and fabricated information, which was the original claim.
Click to expand...
No, they said quite clearly that the alleged WMD`s and Chemical weapons had been dissembled and were not a threat.
 
Obama saying that the troops start pulling of Afghanistan in 2011 is a complete contradiction with adding 35, 000 troops at the start of 2010 .
With troops from 43 countries in Afghanistan fighting and killing the poor, the weak and those who can not defend themselves, one just wonders what the world did come to : insanity ? genocide, religious cleansing....what ?!!.
 
mike47 said:
Obama saying that the troops start pulling of Afghanistan in 2011 is a complete contradiction with adding 35, 000 troops at the start of 2010 .
Click to expand...
You clearly have comprehension problems if you believe that's a contradiction.
A pull out in 2011 does not preclude increasing numbers (or maintaining or reducing, or even dressing troops in pink tutus) prior to that date.
 
The fact that Obama left secretary of defence Robert Gates means that he did not change the policies of his predecessor .
This is the first time in the US history that a secretary of defence was not changed when a new president is elected .
 
mike47 said:
The fact that Obama left secretary of defence Robert Gates means that he did not change the policies of his predecessor .
Click to expand...
Is that what it means?
Same guy MUST equal same policy?
No chance of leaving a guy in office with new instructions then?
 
The new instructions are very clear : what Robert Gates wants and asks for he gets it and gets it fast.........:shrug::shrug: .
 
Er, instructions to the SecDef, not about him.
E.g. "Gates, you can stay on but here's the new policy. If you can't carry it out there's the door".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top