US Attacks Commence Against Afganistan
- Thread starter Diesel
- Start date
Personally, I believe this is the beginning of the end for ..
(a) the Taliban
-or-
(b) Terrorism in the world
-or-
(c) the world itself
-or-
(d) United States domination of the world (which is a bad thing, in all honesty without the US dominating the world would be a shambles. - I know this is a bit dramatic, but if the US slips up and gives the Taliban a chance they could very well lose this war.)
-or-
(e) Not much will be different this day next year, this 'war' will have blown over and not affected a lot of people.
There are just my opinions, please don't flame me, if you would like me to explain any of them or give you my reasoning behind them then please ask. But don't flame me, they are my opinions and I am allowed have them. If, however Alien feels these opinions should not be displayed for any reason then he is perfectly within his rights to delete this post.
(a) the Taliban
-or-
(b) Terrorism in the world
-or-
(c) the world itself
-or-
(d) United States domination of the world (which is a bad thing, in all honesty without the US dominating the world would be a shambles. - I know this is a bit dramatic, but if the US slips up and gives the Taliban a chance they could very well lose this war.)
-or-
(e) Not much will be different this day next year, this 'war' will have blown over and not affected a lot of people.
There are just my opinions, please don't flame me, if you would like me to explain any of them or give you my reasoning behind them then please ask. But don't flame me, they are my opinions and I am allowed have them. If, however Alien feels these opinions should not be displayed for any reason then he is perfectly within his rights to delete this post.
Bob> No need to be so defensive. You're entitled to your opinions, and this is the place to post them.
IMHO, you should probably post your reasons up front. It gives everyone a little more understanding of where you're coming from than just saying "if you want me to explain...".
IMHO, you should probably post your reasons up front. It gives everyone a little more understanding of where you're coming from than just saying "if you want me to explain...".
Dan: I was just being defensive because for some people this is a very sensitive subject and I wanted them to know that I did not want to cause any offence etc etc.
Right, here goes .. (In this little bit of literature, anywhere I refer to the 'Coalition' I am referring to the United States of America and the United Kingdom[/i].)
It could be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The end of the Taliban because ...
... well, if the Coalition destroy the Taliban then they have a number of options regarding Afghanistan, they could either try and setup a democracy there and in all likelihood that democracy would be very friendly with the US and UK and give them a nice little place to keep an eye on Iran, Iraq etc etc.
The end of Terrorism in the World because ...
... bank accounts have already been frozen on quite a number of terrorist organisations that have ansolutely nothing to do with these strikes and therfore the Coalition might not stop at just getting rid of Osama Bin Laden, they might try and rid the world of terrorism because in the next few years terrorists will become more and more well equipped and could conceivably launch nuclear or biological attacks on the world.
The end of the World itself because ...
... erm, can anyone say Nuclear? The World can be destroyed in a split second if the Taliban become desperate enough to strike at a nuclear installation in the US or the UK. I doubt this will happen though.
The end of United States domination in the world because ...
... well, if the Taliban do bring the Coalition to its knees then the US' domination of the world could end, and that would be a very very bad thing for people all over the world. No matter how much people say they dislike it, when you get down to it without the United States the world would not be nearly as great as it is today.
This war will not change much because ...
... not many countries in the world depend on Afghanistan so if the country is brought to irs knees or even destroyed then not much across the world will change.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, there we go .. they are just 5 things that could happen, I amn't saying they will .. but in my mind one of those 5 things will happen.
Right, here goes .. (In this little bit of literature, anywhere I refer to the 'Coalition' I am referring to the United States of America and the United Kingdom[/i].)
It could be:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The end of the Taliban because ...
... well, if the Coalition destroy the Taliban then they have a number of options regarding Afghanistan, they could either try and setup a democracy there and in all likelihood that democracy would be very friendly with the US and UK and give them a nice little place to keep an eye on Iran, Iraq etc etc.
The end of Terrorism in the World because ...
... bank accounts have already been frozen on quite a number of terrorist organisations that have ansolutely nothing to do with these strikes and therfore the Coalition might not stop at just getting rid of Osama Bin Laden, they might try and rid the world of terrorism because in the next few years terrorists will become more and more well equipped and could conceivably launch nuclear or biological attacks on the world.
The end of the World itself because ...
... erm, can anyone say Nuclear? The World can be destroyed in a split second if the Taliban become desperate enough to strike at a nuclear installation in the US or the UK. I doubt this will happen though.
The end of United States domination in the world because ...
... well, if the Taliban do bring the Coalition to its knees then the US' domination of the world could end, and that would be a very very bad thing for people all over the world. No matter how much people say they dislike it, when you get down to it without the United States the world would not be nearly as great as it is today.
This war will not change much because ...
... not many countries in the world depend on Afghanistan so if the country is brought to irs knees or even destroyed then not much across the world will change.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, there we go .. they are just 5 things that could happen, I amn't saying they will .. but in my mind one of those 5 things will happen.
Granted, but I think I speak for everyone here that, if you back up your opinions with clear and intelligent examples, no one will fault you for holding those opinions.
And while people may disagree with your opinions, voicing their disagreement in the same manner as you've presented your views is not flaming, but rather debate.
Again, everyone is entitled to their opinions, so don't be afraid to post them. Just be prepared to illustrate why you feel the way you feel, and to defend your views in response to a civilized disagreement. No one will fault you or look badly upon you for disagreeing with them, as long as you present it in a mature fashion.
In response to your opinions:
1) In all likelihood, the Coalition will simply restore the form of government that was there before the Taliban took over.
2) Unfortunately, although they've managed to freeze the financial input, the network of terrorists around the world is just too widespread, and the cashflow can simply start again to the new groups. I really wish it were as easy as freezing their current funds, but it's not.
3) Chances are very good that the Taliban does not have any nuclear weapons in their arsenal. Despite what movies may lead us to believe, it's just not that easy to acquire. Not many countries even have nuclear weapons, which is why it hasn't been brought up as a serious threat.
In that area of the world, other than the super-powers, the only countries with nuclear weapons are India and Pakistan, and both have allied with the U.S. on this matter.
And if the Taliban, or terrorists should strike at a nuclear facility in another part of the world, while the destruction would be massive, it would devastate that region, and not the entire world. Saying that "The World can be destroyed in a split second" by this action just isn't the case.
4) Think Vietnam. While the US suffered a terrible defeat, it's not like they lost their position in world politics. I don't think this scenario is likely enough to worry about.
5) I think the bigger issue is the stability in the region, and not just Afganistan. If the Coalition should be successful in removing the Taliban from power, the more likely impact is that the region could either strengthen politically, or destabilize due to different factions fighting for power. This then brings into question where allegiances lie in neighboring countries. That's where the real issue lies, IMO.
Well! That has just pretty much blown away all my opinions.
Anyways, you deserve a response:
1. Now that you mention it, that is probably the most likely outcome.
2. The thing that I thought about was, if they could freeze the funds within days of an attack, why not just freeze them before any attack could have taken place?
3. Hmm, I was being a bit dramatic on that one .. I doubt they have nuclear weapons and if they do strike at a nuclear installation then it won't end the world. But, I am a bit worried because a nuclear installation on the UK called Sellafield is quite near here (here being Dublin), its on the UK coastline that runs parrallel to the Irish coastline.
4. It could still happen though, nothing is certain .. especially not in this situation! It is quite unlikely though.
5. I totally agree.
Anyways, you deserve a response:
1. Now that you mention it, that is probably the most likely outcome.
2. The thing that I thought about was, if they could freeze the funds within days of an attack, why not just freeze them before any attack could have taken place?
3. Hmm, I was being a bit dramatic on that one .. I doubt they have nuclear weapons and if they do strike at a nuclear installation then it won't end the world. But, I am a bit worried because a nuclear installation on the UK called Sellafield is quite near here (here being Dublin), its on the UK coastline that runs parrallel to the Irish coastline.
4. It could still happen though, nothing is certain .. especially not in this situation! It is quite unlikely though.
5. I totally agree.
I don't think that it necessarily did that. I merely responded to your possible scenarios with possible alternatives.
Especially with #2. While I don't think that just stopping their financial flow will end terrorism, it does make it pretty difficult for terrorists to organize, purchase weapons and training, etc.
I just don't necessarily feel that doing that, alone, will end terrorism around the world.
With #3, I do agree with you that it's nervewracking to think that they could resort to that, and I mentioned that it would devastate the area where the attack would take place, but it just wouldn't "destroy the world".
In responce to the bank freezing accounts. there is alot of illegal ways of exchanging money and making money that the bank has nothing to do with. When Osama's accounts were frozen he already stated that he had a few other means of getting money and he is not concerned. In the news recently there was some kind of report about the money being exchanged illegally and that those peopel involved are making tons of money doing that. Freezing the bank accounts sounds like it's a mere nuisance to the Taliban but not necessarily going to stop them from attempting their goals.
I think what the US is doing now is a good thing. By taking out their hardware and important buildings and such, that is only allowing us to have a better chance of being able to do some kind of ground strike without getting hit from above and fewer chances of attacks on US soil.
I agree with taking time before striking because it's best to get as much support from surrounding areas and countries as possible. Another thing the waiting has done is actually make the Taliban assume we won't do anything so this attack from us was a bit of a surprise to them and caught them off guard as their attack did to us. Waiting also helped us proove to other countries why we thought Osama was to blame and get as much info about his where-abouts as we can so we know where to look or at least have a better idea where.
I hope I didn't just ramble off topic, this was just somethign on my mind and I'd been talking about it all day.
I think what the US is doing now is a good thing. By taking out their hardware and important buildings and such, that is only allowing us to have a better chance of being able to do some kind of ground strike without getting hit from above and fewer chances of attacks on US soil.
I agree with taking time before striking because it's best to get as much support from surrounding areas and countries as possible. Another thing the waiting has done is actually make the Taliban assume we won't do anything so this attack from us was a bit of a surprise to them and caught them off guard as their attack did to us. Waiting also helped us proove to other countries why we thought Osama was to blame and get as much info about his where-abouts as we can so we know where to look or at least have a better idea where.
I hope I didn't just ramble off topic, this was just somethign on my mind and I'd been talking about it all day.
Interesting comments about the attack. I find it interesting that no one has mentioned that the Northern Alliance will most likely take advantage of our bombing campaign in order to attempt to overrun the Taliban. We shall see....
What I wonder is....what will happen if the terrorists strike the U.S., again? Will our response be more widespread...or will we keep our calm, cool, collected approach to eliminating terrorists?
Bob, I would worry less about a nuclear strike and more about a biological/chemical strike..... Even though the technical documentation on construction of the A-bomb is out there on the net, acquiring the materials will be quite difficult....
What I wonder is....what will happen if the terrorists strike the U.S., again? Will our response be more widespread...or will we keep our calm, cool, collected approach to eliminating terrorists?
Bob, I would worry less about a nuclear strike and more about a biological/chemical strike..... Even though the technical documentation on construction of the A-bomb is out there on the net, acquiring the materials will be quite difficult....
Don't assume for a second that they didn't know what was coming and when it was coming. Waiting added no element of surprise to our attack.
The Taliban has an intelligence community as well as the other countries of the world, and I have no doubt in my mind that they knew the military attack was coming before it hit. However, it's not like they could really do anything to prevent for it.
They knew the US would attack... they did everything to antagonize us into doing it. They took every step they could to ensure that we'd attack so that they could attempt to put the propogande machine into high gear and present it as an attack against Islam instead of an attack against terrorism and Afganistan.
About **** time.
It really looked like this wasn't going to go past diplomatic posturing. I was reading an interesting article in the paper this morning or yesterday, can't remember when, but it was saying that if the Northern Alliance gain power, Afghanistan will fall to pieces, because they don't have the support of the ethnic majority, who live in the south. So maybe direct action is the best course after all.
It really looked like this wasn't going to go past diplomatic posturing. I was reading an interesting article in the paper this morning or yesterday, can't remember when, but it was saying that if the Northern Alliance gain power, Afghanistan will fall to pieces, because they don't have the support of the ethnic majority, who live in the south. So maybe direct action is the best course after all.
I'm not sure I'm too pleased with my country's stance right now.
I can't figure out why we were supporting bin Laden and his ilk 20 years ago, and calling them "Freedom Fighters" when they stood up against the Soviets, but now, we call them "terrorists" and have to bomb the hell out of their entire country.
Heck, I can't figure out why we bombed Iraq when a few scant years before, we supported them in their stance against Iran.
I'm not sure we have the right to bomb the heck out of anybody when 2 of the 3 top people in our government are war criminals.
I'm hoping this will be resolved quickly, that aggressions from both sides will cease, and that every party involved will sit down and actually try to come up with a peaceful solution.
I can't figure out why we were supporting bin Laden and his ilk 20 years ago, and calling them "Freedom Fighters" when they stood up against the Soviets, but now, we call them "terrorists" and have to bomb the hell out of their entire country.
Heck, I can't figure out why we bombed Iraq when a few scant years before, we supported them in their stance against Iran.
I'm not sure we have the right to bomb the heck out of anybody when 2 of the 3 top people in our government are war criminals.
I'm hoping this will be resolved quickly, that aggressions from both sides will cease, and that every party involved will sit down and actually try to come up with a peaceful solution.
I only say that cause that was in the news report that the taliban started ordering people back into towns cause they actually said they did NOT believe the US would actually start attacking them. Just before the attack, some people actually started to move back home.
...However, if looking at it in another perspective, thinking about the kind of stuff the taliban is willing to do, they may have lied to their own people and told them to move back home cause they think we'd not fight them if innocent people were in the area. It was just a last attempt at avoiding getting bombed or something.
There are many ways to guess why they do what they do, but you can bet it's for their own interest and no to little concern for anyone else. :no: