I know alot of you are going "Who gives a fuck what a Canadian thinks about our war with the Afghans" so ill clear that up right now. Canada lost 20+ of its citizens in the attacks and we took care of your people when they where forced to land their planes in Canada.

Now thats done, I have to say this war is being FUCKED UP. Dropping in Aid to the Afghans is the first stupid mistake, it might make people feel good in the US, but your helping breed new plane hijackers! Also refusing to bomb strategic people simply because a few lawyers say no? Did anyone by chance ask lawyers about dropping the bomb on hiroshima or nagasaki? This is just so stupid! I don't get what your goverment thinks it is doing but one thing for sure, its a mistake and they arent listening to Bush. Look what happened with Iraq! Liberals fucked that one up too and instead of bombing the fuck out of them you leave their leader alive so that he can help Osama bash a few planes into your buildings and send envelopes full of anthrax!

I say carpet bomb all of Afghanistan, if any country complains tell them you'll turn their country into the biggest nuclear dump the world has ever seen. Then take the country, raise the afghan children in camps without their parents (leave the older previous generation die off in labor camps) and create a new generation of intelligent worthy people who will spend the rest of their lives strip mining and sucking the Oil right out of afghanistan. Make an example out of the whole country.

If any country wishes to launch a protest the US can remind them they are lucky the US doesnt invade them.

Chill, many Americans agree with you.  We just have some retards in the wrong places in government running things.

Our real mistake was not bombing the lawyers first, then on to AfganiPansyLand.

radioman

You're absolutely right Scarecrow however we now fight politically correct wars because so many amercians have been brainwashed by the leftwing in this country for the last 35 years or so. But I am in touch with reality enough to know that we will never fight a war as you described. Hell I think we could be nuked and still not nuke the culprits. I just thank god everyday that George W. is running this show and not Klinton. Things could be much worse.

Do you know what a Monday-morning quarterback is?  If Canada was actually playing a part in this war that we Americans apparently can't fight to your approval your sentiments might be worth something.

The same attitude resulted in WW2.  The British and French decided to punish Germany for being so baaaaad during WW1 with the Treaty of Versailles.  The result?  Millions in Germany starve during the Depression and the nation goes from being a first-rate industrialized nation to a third-world nightmare in a decade.  

Not all of the Afghani people are our enemy.  These people are willing to die for their beliefs because they have nothing else to live for.  You don't see wealthy folks setting off car bombs or hijacking airplanes (Osama is a terrorist, but he doesn't do these things, he has other people do them).  

If we just bomb Afghanistan we'll be fighting this war until the end of time.  We need to punish those responsible and those harboring the terrorists and help the rest of the innocent Afghani people build a nation that will give them some reason to live, instead of having the choice between dying of starvation or dying in a holy war.





"Do what you will,
just don't offer us advice when you aren't willing to fight as well."      

Is it my fault Canada doesnt equip or pay enough saleries to its armed forces? Is it my fault the Liberal goverment trashed a aviation project that would have made Canada a major world power before I was even born? No.

I wish Canada could play a roll, so does 75% of the people here, thats why we have committed ALL our ground troups. I voted against this goverment time and time again. Rep-by-pop doesnt work.

Canada under its current Liberal/nazi goverment is content with not having a military whatsoever and depending on you, the US. We waste millions in peace keepping and doing whatever Britain tells us to.

As for attacking only the people responsible, what Bullshit are you pulling? Did they make sure they where hitting the people responsible for the shit happening in palestine? No. Why grant them something that was refused to 7000 people? People don't want to lower themselves to their level? Guess what, its too late.

And how will just bombing afganistan make the war go on forever? Last time I checked dead people have a hard time reproducing or fighting.
And you cannot blame the Treaty of Versaille for the depression, the depression was all over the world, just Germany had a harder time then other country's. If anything learnt from WW2 was that by bombing a country to hell and taking control can result in a beautiful democratic country. Just look at Germany now! Not bad for a people who's country was layed to rubble and split in two.

"I am willing to fight and die for a country that is for the people, by the people. That isnt Canada, or the US with present standing goverments intact."

Here's a thought - what if the Sept 11 attacks weren't intended to cause the most casualties possible?  

Someone associated with the terrorists seems to have some weaponized anthrax.  Given AlQueda's penchant for testing, there is no reason to assume it's not deadly.  And if they've got enough to infect a handful, surely they've got enough to infect a few hundred thousand.  Yet the attacks on media outlets seem to be positively amateurish in comparison to the Sept 11 incidents - IF the goal of their campaign at this stage is to cause maximum casualties.  If the goal is not to produce large amounts of casualties, then why would they do the Sept 11 airplane attacks?  

Taken as a whole, the attacks seem designed to earn US retaliation.  It would be hard to imagine why that might be desirable for the bomb-ees unless it has something to do with Murphy's rule of combat #13: 'If your attack is going well, you have walked into an ambush.'  A US attack, while richly deserved in this instance, could slant opinion in some normally anti-US quarters against the US and in favor of bin Laden's crew.  Which would in turn might allow bin Laden's crew more latitude to use weapons more terrible than those used in the Sept 11 attacks - weapons which if used would have hurt them politically much more than killing a few thousand innocent office workers and airline passengers.  In short, the entire purpose of these attacks might have been to provoke a carpet bombing response or similar in order to set the stage for future attacks with weapons of mass destruction, escalating the war further.

What WMD?  Nukes for instance:  [URL]http://www.washtimes.com/national/20011013-73515089.htm[/URL]

And I am willing for fight for either the US or Canada.  But you won't catch me signing up to fight and die under a gov't that doesn't recognize my right to keep and bear any and all of my firearms.  At the present time, that unfortunately includes the US (my AR is LEO-only in the US and semiauto FALs are classed as machine guns south of the border) and Canada (currently in court to recover an FN that the government took as 'evidence' then attempted to keep without payment even after ruling that no crime had been committed).

Yeah, I agree.

The world is just TOO protective of human life.

We need to OFF a few million.

Starting with all Canadians.

[rolleyes]

The IQ around here is DEFINATELY sinking.

See, here's the problem right here.  You mistake terrorists, which aren't a country, with the country of Afghanistan.  Bombing Afghanistan doesn't kill the terrorists, only inconveniences Al Qaeda, and gives other Muslim extremists martyrs and a rallying point.

Usama Bin Laden is the one responsible, and that's why we're bombing Afghanistan.  The Taliban won't give him up, and are therefore accessories in our eyes.  But The Taliban aren't the elected government of Afghanistan, and very few if any of them are Afghani.  Seeing the living conditions in Afghanistan, and what they subject their citizens to, killing the citizenry only punishes innocents.  Your failure to distinguish between the two is frightening.



As we're fond of saying here in Texas, "Remember the Alamo!"  Maybe they won't fight themselves, but others who come after them will be spurred to fight beind the phrase "Remember Afghanistan!"



That would mean we left people living.  In your previous paragraph you just said dead people don't reproduce or fight.  So do you want to kill them or do you want to give them a free society?  It sure sounds like you don't know what you're talking about or even the underlying issues.  Victimizing the Afghanis, who are already being victimized by The Taliban, isn't going to solve anything.

God Bless Texas

The food drops are actually fairly clever.

The object of war is a political end; it's never just mindless descruction of people or property. In this case the US is attempting to change the government of Afghanistan. Rather than invading a la the Soviet Union, we want elements in Afghanistan to do it themselves. To do that you want two things: something to drive the population away from the current government, and something for them to be attracted to as a political alternative.

It seems to be working fairly well so far; defections are reported in Taliban forces, and there will probably be more once ground attacks by the opposition start.

We want to kill only some of the people in Afghanistan. In this case, one of the groups of people we want to kill with enthusiasm are the "Arab Afghans", the imports from the gulf states there fighting for ideological reasons. It would be good to kill as many as possible of them while they're all in one place, and before they disperse to car bomb us a few years from now. We're allied (or want to be allied) with other elements of Afghan society, and we don't want to kill them. We want their help in hunting down the Arab Afghans, towards whom they have little love, and the Taliban, who only have the support of segments of Afghan society.

Oh GOD a Canadian who knows about the ARROW!

Meplat.

Ah, the crux of the problem!  You see contrary to what you see on TV like "America's New War", or on the main page of this site "We Are At War" we are not at war.  War demands that people die, property destroyed, and I'm not talking about a few dozen here and there and 5 or 6 airports.  America and most of the rest of the industrialized world will not fight a war, why cause people die and that is no longer acceptable to the citizens.  How many times during WW I and WW II did we air drop food to hundreds of thousands of civilians?  What is up with rebuilding Afganistan, or any other thrid world country for that matter?  Can't be done, not in a million years, if you've ever been to one you know that.  Nope, we don't have intestinal fortitude to fight.  IMO if your gov't wants to harbor terrorists or commit acts of war against other countries, you better get ready to bear the brunt of the retaliation, because I'd hammer the hell out of your government and you until you saw that you or your gov'ts actions cost way too much.  Then the people would be motivated to change the gov't.  Americans will never get through those thick skulls that those people want them dead at any price, we don't have what it takes to put a stop to it mentally.  Syria had some problems with terrorists/fundamentalists a number of year ago, mos tof the activity was based out of a town called Hama.  The Syrian gov't went in killed everyone and burned the place to the ground, then said "see what that got you?  If you want to keep it up this is what you'll get", pretty much end of problem.  That's how you get rid of terrorists.

[i]Dropping in Aid to the Afghans is the first stupid mistake,[/i]

No, it's a good military strategy: the citizens are oppressed by their own government, so when we're bombing the Taliban we simultaniously make it clear that we're siding with the oppressed citizens.

Taliban starves them, We feed them. Who's side do you think the people will end up on?

[i]I say carpet bomb all of Afghanistan, [/i]

Do you realize that the Taliban are [b]NOT[/b] Afghani, but are instead an [i]invading occupying force[/i]?!? The people of Afghanistan (what's left of them) are being oppressed by an invasion of Arabs - who are [i]not[/i] Afghanis!



Scarecrow, your post shows exactly the importance of knowing who your enemy is: you actually don't know!