It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What to do about Afghanistan?

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:09 AM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

Trump cannot even say the words "United States" perfectly, every time, without slurring on occasion. He cannot sort ANYTHING out.




posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:15 AM
link   
If that's the case maybe the answer lies with his big red button?



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:29 AM
link   
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

I am not sure to whom you were responding during your last post, but let me make something completely clear.

There are only a very few circumstances, in which use of nuclear weapons is even remotely understandable, leave alone justifiable.

One of them is in the event that another nation launches their nuclear weapons. Another would be, being invaded by an actual military force, with tanks, planes, warships and the necessary resources to successfully crush and subjugate the nation. Those are it, those are all, the only scenarios in which use of nuclear resources can ever be understood or justified. In EVERY other circumstance, their use should be totally and utterly off the damned table. There is no nation or terrorist faction which, by its very existence, legitimises the use of a weapon of mass destruction, in order to eradicate. Not a single one.

Since America cannot be threatened with military might, because its own prowess in that regard is too large to make military invasion possible, and because no one has launched nuclear weapons at it, its nuclear weapons must remain in their silos, and any activation of those weapons in any but the two situations I mentioned, should, in fairness, lead to the total decimation of America by the rest of the world, as punishment for what amounts to deliberate, and unwarranted mass murder.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit


So you are saying that mass murder should be punished by even greater mass murder, and in all likelihood pretty much the end of life on Earth?

Shome mishtake, shurely?



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   
The situation in Afghanistan is an intractable mess and cannot be fixed by anyone but the Afghans themselves.

Your chart plainly shows the war on opioids to be a carpetbombing response. Overdose deaths due to heroin and synthetics (mostly from China) like Fentanyl are far and away the leading causes. Why they are forcing the medical profession to curb patient use when it does nothing but hurt the patients?



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:46 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: ufoorbhunter

I am not sure to whom you were responding during your last post, but let me make something completely clear.



Of all President's alive in my life tiim Trump seems to be the one top of the table for shooting from the hip without too much consideration. I wouldn't be surprised if he gets into a situation where he shoots first and thinks later



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

I am saying that if America decides to violate proper ethics for no reason, it will GIVE a reason to other nations to take it from the face of the Earth, to protect whatever remains of the world afterward, from the worst excesses of a nation which will have finally shown itself openly, to be what it has been becoming for decades, a rogue state with a national God complex and a corporatist, fascist back bone.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:51 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit


I get that you don't like Americans or capitalism that much, but that is not much of a justification for genocide, is it?

Who is being the fascist here?



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 10:55 AM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

I find your OP very well thought out.

Personally, I find it a waste of time, and perhaps deliberate in some cases, in going back to the usual finger pointing of who started it or whether we should have been there in the first place...blah, blah, BLAH.

It really doesn't matter! It's a done deal. What matter is the point of the OP.

How do we fix it!! How do we mitigate it if not fix it!

Lord love a duck. Let it go!



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 11:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: oldcarpy

I am saying that if America decides to violate proper ethics for no reason, it will GIVE a reason to other nations to take it from the face of the Earth, to protect whatever remains of the world afterward, from the worst excesses of a nation which will have finally shown itself openly, to be what it has been becoming for decades, a rogue state with a national God complex and a corporatist, fascist back bone.


I must rebut. I can only conclude you fear the current President, his rhetoric and the increased 'potential' such rhetoric produces.

Outstanding!

Here's hoping others around the world, albeit with less intelligence than yours, also respond with fear. Preferably, fear of consequence. Thus the potential of a nuclear war is reduced.

Perhaps this will allay your fears somewhat, especially your 'fascist/Corporate targeting.

The US is no where near the readiness to use nuclear weapons as in the past.

The Cuban missile crisis. Th B-52s flying 24/7 loaded with 50 mega-ton Hydrogen bombs just waiting for go codes? Perhaps your too young to remember those times.

I would also point out that there was far less of your fascist-corporate issues then, perhaps, with far more resolve to use those weapons. Those weapons have not only decreased in sheer numbers, they are far smaller in yield/destructiveness with far better targeting.

Allay your fears.

As far as your arbitrary ethics in use of nukes, it is also flawed. Set parameters and adversaries find ways around them. Obviously WMD are far wider than merely nukes. Even 'UN economic sanctions' flirt with the potential of being a 'weapon of mass destruction' to the nation targeted.

China has threatened war on numerous occasions in response to economic efforts by the west.

The greatest ethical choice is the one that decreases the potential of nuclear war the most!

"No option is off the table" offers the widest deterrent to the broadest number of scenarios. Therefore, is the most 'ethical' route.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 12:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

With respect, no.

First of all you state that the US (with assistance from elsewhere, including my own nation) effectively created the cartels involved in opium production.

This is misleading. They did not effectively create those groups, they FACTUALLY created those groups, funded them, equipped them, trained them, and handled them, and as far as anyone knows, still do.


I havent seen that they had intel + plan to make the place the new opium propduction mecca of earth, ahead of time, while it didnt turn out that way until about the time the war was over and the land was otherwise wrecked. So I'm cautious with my Absolutism Terminology in that specific part of the timeline.


Therefore, it really does not matter what anyone thinks needs doing in Afghanistan, because the only things that OUGHT to be done, involve removing any and all troops from the region entirely, having any and all intelligence assets on the ground removed root and branch, ceasing and desisting all attempts to enforce western morality on the region more broadly, as well as arresting and publicly trying (without the merest hint of secrecy, or any respect paid to National Security concerns) cases against those who have, for decades, controlled, manipulated and created the situation in Afghanistan.


So we leave Al Qaeda's drug supply chain intact, leave the people of Afghanistan addicted to supplying it?



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 01:05 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Well it started with certain agencies controlling the "farms" in the "farming" region called "the golden triangle" What with their own aircraft doing better than Amazon at deliveries, but, bbuuuttt, they lost the "franchise" when the US went tits up in Vietnam.
So they had to look for another "farming" community to carry on the "franchise". Step forward Afghanistan. They have to keep a presence in the region to protect the line of supply.
Now just because you think it's a fighting war is neither here nor there.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 02:25 PM
link   

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Trump and Putin can sort it out.


Russia should be paying for the recovery program too. And they have incentive as they hate the drug flow. Sounds like a god cause for olive branches instead of the Neocon / Neolib agenda to keep US at odds with Russia.


a reply to: TrueBrit

He is the first POTUS in history to order the the DOD to attack Taliban / Al Qaeda drug labs.

Good thing, no??



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 03:13 PM
link   
Note to self: start talking about Personal Responsibility, fixing stuff we break, people scatter.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 03:47 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

I'm pointing out how we helped cause something, just pulling out wont fix the total modern global implications of the fallout from it, while neither will if not being fully conscious of the entirety of said fallout if we are staying put.

Now Trump has DOD going for the labs, so now is the time to go heavy handed in transitioning the commoners to new / the old crops.

I dont know that this is happening beyond the usual efforts that havent done much.

I dont know that Trump is being advised on such.

He needs to be.


edit on 4-1-2018 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 03:52 PM
link   

originally posted by: Asktheanimals
The situation in Afghanistan is an intractable mess and cannot be fixed by anyone but the Afghans themselves.

Your chart plainly shows the war on opioids to be a carpetbombing response. Overdose deaths due to heroin and synthetics (mostly from China) like Fentanyl are far and away the leading causes. Why they are forcing the medical profession to curb patient use when it does nothing but hurt the patients?


I get all that but in doing my Wars of Drugs Report this week I saw tons of data about how in local settings when the street heroin gets shut off for even short periods of time the crime skyrockets, the junkies start scouring up those other exotic, unfamiliar forms of opiods thus leading to more OD deaths than otherwise. Picture the male cat in rutt, out far and away from home for days roaming looking for 'some'. You get junkies crawling out of the woodwork looking for scores (snip to steal) they wouldnt normally, because they need mroe money, int heir pursuits to find other junkie elements that might have something to suit them. When normally they'd probably be in something of a stable pattern of daily expenditure and source, get high, nodd out, rinse repeat each day.

Now imagine this on a something global scale in a year. Well Trump bombing the labs, meaning a year from nwo we could have a major social crisis if not braced for an overt mass scale detox campaign in major cities...


edit on 4-1-2018 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 04:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: IgnoranceIsntBlisss
a reply to: nwtrucker

I'm pointing out how we helped cause something, just pulling out wont fix the total modern global implications of the fallout from it, while not being fully conscious of the entirety of said fallout if we are staying put.

Now Trump has DOD going for the labs, so now is the time to go heavy handed in transitioning the commoners to new / the old crops.

I dont know that this is happening beyond the usual efforts that havent done much.

I dont know that Trump is being advised on such.

He needs to be.



I wasn't referring to you. Just the predictable debate and finger pointing in the posts.

Fair enough, we helped cause something. Got it....
It implies a moral responsibility to 'do' something to repair/undo the damage. Fine.( Not that anything that can be done, couldn't be done without that assumed responsibility.)



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 04:37 PM
link   
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Russia and USA working together to help cure Afghanistan what a wonderful idea. If only the world can hope for this, thing is USA needs to pull back from supplying Ukraine with weapons otherwise Russia will just do the same and fill Afghanistan with the same. If only they could back from playing their games in other lands then we might see increasing peace in the world.



posted on Jan, 4 2018 @ 08:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: ufoorbhunter
a reply to: IgnoranceIsntBlisss

Russia and USA working together to help cure Afghanistan what a wonderful idea. If only the world can hope for this, thing is USA needs to pull back from supplying Ukraine with weapons otherwise Russia will just do the same and fill Afghanistan with the same. If only they could back from playing their games in other lands then we might see increasing peace in the world.



So your solution would sacrifice the Ukraine to Russian re-incursion to save Afghanistan..

Have you ever considered working for the Diplomatic Corp??



posted on Jan, 5 2018 @ 04:07 AM
link   
a reply to: oldcarpy

Actually, you could not be more wrong.

I have a deep respect for many American people, both historically speaking, and currently. Further to that, I believe the principles upon which the nation was founded, the spirit of those principles, to have been noble, righteous, just and decent, which not many nations can say for themselves or their founding.

However, the era of the founding is long past, and the only people in your country who are still expressing in their words and deeds, their love for that era and its promise, are considered by your President and most of his supporters, to be communists, socialists, enemies of the state, traitors.

People who insist on freedom and liberty for ALL people, not just some, are not being supported, but vilified. Corporatism, a state of society considered by the founders of your country to be utterly unacceptable in any of its many forms, has been welcomed with the most open of arms, such that the power in your nation does not lay with either the people or their elected representatives, but with unaccountable billionaire elitists, who effectively get to change the law when it does not suit them, or ignore it, well aware that their lawyers are so expensive that their employer need never concern himself with the threat of jail, no matter what he does.

And finally...

Fascism, lets address that shall we?

It is fascistic in the most extreme manner possible, to try to justify using nuclear weapons on a target which has no defense against said weapon, nor any particular military might at all (which is something Afghanistan specifically has none of), for the mere purpose of correcting a foreign policy failure that has been decades in the making.

It is NOT fascistic in the least, to suggest the total termination of a fascist and violent regime, which is not only nuclear capable, but has just used said nuclear armament, to obliterate a totally defenceless population, whose people are not actually responsible for either their lot, or what they have become under the tutelage of the very nation which is seeking their thermonuclear oblivion.



new topics




 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join