It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


West cannot beat Taliban

page: 2
<< 1    3 >>

log in


posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:12 PM

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
Maybe we can start with the Heroin trade that they use to Poison our children and undermine our society ?

You mean the one that was populated with the Taliban, and currently being destroyed by the Afghan government?

They are using us and trying to destroy us.

No one is forcing you or "children" to use heroin. If you want to blame someone, blame the one who is buying it, or the parents who won't do anything about it.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:16 PM
LOL blame the person buying not the person supplying it ?

If there was no supply there would be no one hooked on it.

But i dont care man all i know is that Islam just blames EVERYTHING on Everyone else like your doing now.

Whatever anyone says against Islam or Islam countrys no matter how henious you will turn it around, Muslims can never take responsibility for there own actions, its just something we have to accept.

May Peace Be With You.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:17 PM

Maybe we can start with the Heroin trade that they use to Poison our children and undermine our society ?

They are using us and trying to destroy us.

Yeah... who helped planted it after the Talibans banned it? The ``liberation`` forces... And who brings it to the US? The CIA! So sorry, but blame your government agencies.

If the Talibans were left alone, there wouldn't be anymore heroin by now.

[edit on 20-11-2006 by Vitchilo]

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:21 PM
No blame your goat Farmers for growing it and forget your lies and conspriacy theorys.

And if Taliban was left alone everyone would be there slave in Afgahnistan, and women would be treated like trash, but thats how you like it?

[edit on 20-11-2006 by NumberCruncher]

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:25 PM

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
No blame your goat Farmers for growing it and forget your lies and conspriacy theorys.

What would a goat farmer need opium plants for, when farming goats?

And if Taliban was left alone everyone would be there slave in Afgahnistan, and women would be treated like trash, but thats how you like it?

Surely, US wouldn't leave its creation alone to wreak havoc on a country.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 07:43 PM

Originally posted by DJMessiah

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
No blame your goat Farmers for growing it and forget your lies and conspriacy theorys.

What would a goat farmer need opium plants for, when farming goats?

I think its so they can keep there wives stoned so they can never get an education just like the Taliban had hoped huh ?

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 08:39 PM

Originally posted by NumberCruncher
No blame your goat Farmers for growing it and forget your lies and conspriacy theorys.

Yeah. Conspiracy Theories... Sorry but it is well know that they are in the drug industry so they can have a black budget. CIA violate at least 10.000 times a year laws in countries in which they operate, they need to violate laws to get informations, and they need money to operate. They protects the dealers from police officer here in the USA. If you can't face the facts, it's your problem.

And if Taliban was left alone everyone would be there slave in Afgahnistan, and women would be treated like trash, but thats how you like it?

[edit on 20-11-2006 by NumberCruncher]

They are still treated like trash. It's not because the US is in the country that it's better, it's a mindset... womans are still raped everyday and the US forces does nothing to stop it, it's not part of their job. Yeah, good excuse.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 09:23 PM
Proof of the CIA running the Heroin cartels ?

SO Afghan Woman had same life/rights etc under Taliban
youd have to be a Woman hater to believe that tripe.

posted on Nov, 20 2006 @ 10:18 PM

As for the UN, that incompetent mass of morons couldn't find their behinds with both hands and a floodlight.


I couldn't agree more Grady. Say it again!

posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 01:10 PM
We have lost in Afghan and Iraq because an org that is now what 60ish years old and has done nothing of importance said so?

We kicked ass in Afghan in a matter of weeks which the USSR couldnt do in 7 years. The Taliban is putting up some hard fights and likely will for many years to come but they are done as a major influence in the country.

And as with Afghan, Iraq has a new govt and they will have to get it set up and IN POWER unlike they are now. They have power but their is too much tribal warring right now. Its the way all countries have gone down in history as a new govt is formed. The US and its allies have won and terrorists have lost.

posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 01:14 PM
I'll say it again, the coalition is not fighting talibans, they are fighting the people resistance. The talibans are still in the government, why they would fight if they have what they want? The country haven't changed since the invasion, yes, there's some womans in the government, more opium and a lot of infrastructured was bombed to hell... but hopefully, it will change for the good, but it will take at least 20 years.

posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 03:15 PM
What do you mean by "peoples resistance"? The main reason we were able to overthrow the Taliban is because we had the people of Afghan willing to fight with us. They did a lot of the ground fighting while we supported them from the air.

And of course there are still Taliban members in the govt. There are still Ba'ath party members in the Iraqi govt and they are trying to get more. You want some of these people in there because they know how the govt works in that country even if it has changed, they know people, they know the country and its resources....etc. These parties or whatever you want to call them represnt part of the countries ideaoligy so you want them represented or they will only cause trouble.

The opium problem is one that needs to be addressed though.

posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 06:47 PM

Originally posted by JBurns
-We took out Saddam.
-We occupy the country.
-We removed the old regime.
-They have their own Government.
-They have their own laws.
-They have their own military force.
-They have their own police force.
-We have killed numerous key players, and thousands of pawns.
-We have driven the terrorists out of Iraq (at least out of CONTROL of Iraq).
-The death count of those "people" is much higher than ours.

Tell me again how we're losing the war?

About the only thing you have said thats pretty accurate is that we took out Saddam Hussein , but what was put back in its place is worse, if not 10x worse.

They are finding 100's of Sunni bodies mutilated, tied up and tortured all over the place. many bodies they are finding have drill holes in their heads. It is coming from the Shia's and its supposedly the police force that is behind a lot of it. As far as the government being their own, well give it a while and lets see what ends up being what.

Democracy cannot be forced upon. It must be willingly accepted and agreed upon from within. Its not an overnight process either. Its something that takes time to develop , and especially in an environment such as Iraq where religion holds most of the power.


posted on Nov, 21 2006 @ 08:29 PM

Originally posted by mr conspiracy
US has messed up big time.

Perhaps wishful thinking on your part?..

Not only Taliban, US now knows that even Iraq in unwinnable.

Unwinnable from what viewpoint?

Old US Secretary of State, Henry Kissinger think Iraq war lost.
It cannot be won now.

The war has already been won. The conventional forces of Iraq have been taken out. Iraq has a government though it might not be stable at the moment. It is improveing.

In fact, its impossible for US to achieve victory in Iraq.
Iraqis have defeated the superpower.

In your mind they have. In a sane persons mind they havent. If anything they are winning the media war. The battle field is another story. In order to defeat a superpower one needs to strip it from everything it has. The insurgants have not done that. And we havent used everything that is in a superpowers arsenal. Therefore to say a superpower has been 'defeated' would mean that every thing we've tried has failed, both militarily and economically. The enemy would also have had to destroy us in order for them to be the 'winner'.

posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 04:32 AM

To replace it with another puppet.

Uh, he wasn't a puppet, and atleast he won't be one which gases his own population.

Yep. Certains areas are very dangerous.


so hard to do... lol:


A puppet one, just like Saddam.

Uh, he wasn't a puppet, and atleast he won't be one which gases his own population.

Yeah. Until you leave.

What if we DON'T leave?

How could you kick them out if there wasn't any in the first place? I'll remind you that there was no such thing as an Al-Qaeda relation with Iraq nor terrorists camps.

Change Al-Qaeda to Taliban / Saddam followers / people in power.

As in Vietnam, did you win Vietnam? And how is it a victory? Over 600.000 deads in 3 years.. is it a victory? Like the 2 millions in Vietnam... yeah victory for contractors, not the human race.

Vietnam was diferant. In Iraq WE are in contol, not them, and we have ALREADY taken out the worste part of there army, unlike Vietnam.

Apples and Oranges.

It depends on your criterias... If you want to bring peace and saves lives, you failed.

If you wanted to make $$ and install a puppet government, you won.

How could people be grateful when you place in power people like Saddam and the Talibans?

America put them people in power? when?

We are not losing the war. I'd say it's fairly even meaning that Taliban won't beat USA and USA won't beat Taliban. Kinda like a Stalemate with USA in control of the actual show.

However in the end, in a war, NO ONE WINS!

posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 06:55 AM
So what is the discussion about? Is it a discussion at all or merely hate-speach?

Whatever it is, glorification or sheer ignorance, maybe just mean old patriotism, is hard for me to tell. But the indifference concerning political facts and mechanisms it displayes, makes me obliged to try and shed a little light in the darkness.

I don't have to say I'm not American, but like other non-Americans on this board I have great veneration for the culture and respect for the ideals the country was build on, and like many of them deep frustrations over what's going on today.

I think the most important thing for Americans today, is to come to terms with their distorted view of the outside world.
All the mess the White House gangsters have created have only been possible, because the ignorance about the world as such is non greater than in the US.
It's a common perception, but also a fact. Thus the corporate criminals can do their spin, screew you so easily, that I'm quite sure they laugh all the way to the Swiss banks.

Also you oughta know, outside the obesity-striken US there are people who take responsibility for their actions - and they are not all goat keepers.

What made it all possible was - an important part of the foundation for this board - 9/11 and the conspiracies it begot. So let's start there.

The Bush administration, led by the Vice-President and de facto head of state, shamelessly used the 9/11 tragedy to stage a power-grab coup d'etat against free people everywhere. They declared war on the world for imperial gain and strangled a republic already on life support to establish a national security fascist police state in America signed into law in a contemptible act of lawlessness by George Bush on October 17 - a day that will live in infamy. He did it with little fanfare, public awareness or consent giving himself the power to rule like the dictator he once "jokingly" said he'd like to be.

The script in Washington today is eerily similar to the 1930s in Germany where there, like here, it happened with a whimper, not a bang, only much quicker then. On March 23, 1933, less than two months after Hitler became Reichschancellor, the German Reichstag allowed the democratic Weimar Republic to pass into history by enacting the Enabling Act or Law to Remedy the Distress of the People and the Empire that legally established a Nazi fascist dictatorship. It gave Adolph Hitler absolute power and the right to enact laws and changes to the constitution without public consent and with little more than rubber-stamping from a now impotent Reichstag.

On October 17, the Congress of the United States gave George Bush similar power.

Note the date, and remember to lower your grand flag every year on that date, until these shameless laws are cancelled.

Before we go on, I should say the quotes are those of a senior American citizen, in his own words "a 71 year old, retired, progressive small businessman concerned about all the major national and world issues, committed to speak out and write about them". His name is Stephen Lendman.

Both countries [Iraq and Afghanistan] have a long history of successfully expelling invaders which is why GHW Bush and Brent Scowcroft, his National Security Advisor, warned the younger Bush about the perils of his agenda that included invasion and occupation. They feared the Iraq adventure was unwinnable and could have easily discovered the futility of the Afghan one by talking to the Russians and Brits who learned that lesson the hard way as the US is finding out now in both countries.

...Prime Minister Lloyd George (the Tony Blair of his time) invaded Iraq in 1917 and claimed, like George Bush, we (the UK) come "not as conquerors but as liberators." After the war, the Brits arbitrarily carved out the territory they called Iraq from the former greater Mesopotamia that was under Ottoman rule for almost 400 years until the war ended it. They told Iraqis they would have "democracy," held a referendum to prove it, and "elected" a puppet monarch who understood who was really in charge. In 1920, there was an insurrection, and Fallujah was the first town bombed followed by a siege against Najaf. Lloyd George defended his actions ...and claimed "if British troops leave Iraq there will be civil war." Sound familiar?

Winston Churchill was Secretary for War and Air for a time under George in the 1920s and thought it was a waste of British soldiers putting down tribal or sectarian revolts. Instead he advocated using the new Royal Air Force to bomb villages and was unconcerned if it targeted innocent civilians along with the legitimate resistance struggling (like today) to be free from a repressive occupation. He also authorized what Saddam was condemned for - using poison gas for the first time ever against a civilian population and at the time wrote: "I am strongly in favour of using poison gas against 'uncivilised' tribes."

You don't have to tell me some of you would like to do the same (or worse) - which would make you none better than Saddam.

By the way, it is not him who should be on trial in Baghdad. No, it's Poul Bremer and Tommy 'we-dont-do-bodycounts' Franks.

The little of hope I have left in America lies with people like Stephen Lendman - and some of you on this thread - and quite a few on the board in general, I should say.

But as to why 1600 Pensylvania Avenue haven't been raided yet, it just surpasses my mind.

[edit on 22-11-2006 by khunmoon]

[edit on 22-11-2006 by khunmoon]

posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 06:57 AM
I dont believe the US will win IN Iraq..
simply because theres to much regional influence against them...
They were never going to succeed..

But Afghanistan?
They had a chance their..
if they had of put the proper troops in from the would be over..

but the Taliban have had enough time to regroup, rearm, learn and influence pakistan and other regional ties to assist.

The USA has the ability to beat the taliban..

Also something i wanna ask..

Its no longer.

US Airstrikes kills xxx in afghan


US soilders murderd..

its all NATO this NATO that.

what percentage of nato forces in afghan are american?

posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 10:15 AM

by NumberCruncher
Proof of the CIA running the Heroin cartels ?

Google has 965,000 sites for "cia heroin". Most of course about the heroic fight against the menace. But a good deal is about the agency's involvement in clandestine operations where the horse itself becomes the deal.

Didn't have time to look more than three, but do yourself explore.

For a general reliable source, we have Wiki. They have an article based on a book "The Politics of Heroin; CIA Complicity In The Global Drug Trade" by Alfred McCoy.

Although it was beginning to become more prevalent by the 1930s, Asian historian and drug traffic expert Dr Alfred W. McCoy reports that heroin trafficking was virtually eliminated in the U.S. during World War II due to temporary trade disruptions caused by the war. McCoy contends the Mafia was able to gain control of the heroin trade thanks in large measure due to the unintended consequences of a covert deal between top Mafia leader Lucky Luciano and American military intelligence. The deal resulted in a large increase in Mafia influence in Sicily after the 1943 American invasion.

In southeast Asia, the governments of most countries and many colonial officials had been involved in the opium trade for a very long time. Thanks to Corsican Mafia connections in the former French colony of Vietnam, Luciano was able to begin to develop Southeast Asia as a new source of Opium even as Iranian production declined. The Vietnam War and CIA operations in Laos had the unintended consequence of first opening up many areas of Southeast Asia to modern transportation and then presenting a ready-made market for the drug among the U.S. military personnel stationed in the region.

The turning point came in 1970-71 when the first high-grade heroin laboratories opened in the Golden Triangle. Prior to this, the chemical skills for refinement had existed only in Europe. This gave the opium producers control over the creation of the final product. The hundreds of thousands of American servicemen in Vietnam provided a perfect market for the heroin producers, and heroin use among soldiers rapidly increased.

Dr. Alfred W. McCoy has claimed that the C.I.A. secretly collaborated with Asian drug syndicates and was complicit in the expansion of the global heroin trade from 1970 to 1973 in order to prosecute the Cold War. While the Vietnam War brought modern transportation to remote opium areas, McCoy himself does not claim that the CIA set up the drug labs in Southeast Asia or created the trade.

Now, this McCoy isn't just anybody, so I guess you can count his words trustworthy.

Interview with Alfred McCoy

Alfred W. McCoy is professor of Southeast Asian History at the University of Wisconsin, Madison. Educated at Columbia and Yale, he has spent the past twenty years writing about Southeast Asian history and politics. Dr. McCoy participated in Causes and Cures: National Teleconference on the Narcotics Epidemic Saturday, November 9 1991, at Marble Collegiate Church in Manhattan.

PD: How did you come to write The Politics of Heroin; CIA Complicity In The Global Drug Trade?

AM: In 1971 I was a graduate student doing Southeast Asian History at Yale University. An editor at Harper & Row, Elisabeth Jakab, read some articles in a volume I had edited about Laos, which made some general references to the opium trade in Laos.
She decided this would be a great idea for a book and asked me to do a background book on the heroin plague that was sweeping the forces then fighting in South Vietnam. We later learned that about one third of the United States combat forces in Vietnam, conservatively estimated, were heroin addicts.

I went to Paris and interviewed retired general Maurice Belleux, the former head of the French equivalent of the CIA, an organization called SDECE [Service de Documentation Exterieure et du Contre-Espionage]. In an amazing interview he told me that French military intelligence had financed all their covert operations from the control of the Indochina drug trade. [The French protected opium trafficking in Laos and northern Vietnam during the colonial war that raged from 1946 to the French defeat in 1954 at Dien Bien Phu.]

The French paratroopers fighting with hill tribes collected the opium and French aircraft would fly the opium down to Saigon and the Sino-Vietnamese mafia that was the instrument of French intelligence would then distribute the opium. The central bank accounts, the sharing of the profits, was all controlled by French military intelligence.

He concluded the interview by telling me that it was his information that the CIA had taken over the French assets and were pursuing something of the same policy.

So I went to Southeast Asia to follow up on that lead and that's what took me into doing this whole book. It was basically pulling a thread and keep tugging at it and a veil masking the reality began to unravel.

So as to why the Taliban is winning, I would say they got morals on their side.
Taliban eradicated opium growing from Afghanistan. Maybe that's the true reason for the US war. Income loss.

Do I need to add, it's common knowledge to any candidate of conspiracy-cracking, that all state-orchestrated clandestine operations are financed by drug dealing.
That's why they took Afghanistan first, to re-establish the opium production so the funding wouldn't be broken.

posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 12:27 PM
This is only my opinion... But Screw off! I'm sick of spending US Dollars and US servicemen and women's lives to enrich the rest of the world. Forget it! No more aid for ANYONE! If they want to live and die at the hands of tyrants - I NO LONGER CARE!
If they want zero GDP, zero standard of living, zero jobs, zero technology and zero medical care - FINE! Let them have it! Why do we, the U.S., continue to put up with these ingrateful cretins!?!? The UN should be thrown out of the US; they're completely worthless and expensive anyway.

As far as your claim, "The Iraqis are winning the war"... um, WRONG! It's not really the Iraqis that we are fighting - it's insurgents from OTHER COUNTRIES! But then to ackowledge that would be to admit that there IS a war on terror and that would be too big a dose of reality for you!

Yeah, we ought to cut and run and allow these people to have EXACTLY what they are asking for - the US to leave them alone. Then we'll see exactly how long before they start whining about needing our help.
SCREW OFF, I say, let them be on their own!

posted on Nov, 22 2006 @ 01:21 PM
Kozmo for President

You have voted kozmo for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have used all of your votes for this month.

I agree time to make these nations that just sponge from US genorosity appreciate what they now take forgranted!~

Im just praying for the day that we make Oil virtually obsolete, then we need to rely on no body!

new topics

top topics

<< 1    3 >>

log in