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.

 

Get Us Out of Afghanistan NOW!!!

page: 2
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 01:29 PM
link   
reply to post by lightchild
 


Ok...did a couple minutes of research and there are tons of links talking about the alphabet soup guys and drug trafficking.

It is hard for me to believe that our own government would allow the useless killing of not only innocent civilians, but our own troops. I said it's hard for me to believe, but that doesn't mean I don't believe it. It simply means I pay a price, emotionally for that belief. I don't know why it's so hard. It's just too much like Viet Nam.

If drugs are one of the reason we are there, how do we stop it? I'm afraid that line of questioning might lead to a quick cessation of the discussion. Let's pretend that the drug issue has been resolved, they are no longer shipping out opium. What are we left with? A pipeline? For OIL??

Why are we going through so much trouble as a nation, trying to prove to the rest of the world how 'green' we can be, the whole while waging wars to secure access to oil in other countries? Didn't we just learn that we have huge oil reserves and a lot of fields that are untapped?

Is our government just incredibly multi-faced? Not faceted, but faced. It reminds me of someone trying really hard to keep a lie going....it gets more and more outlandish the longer it goes, but the person is just not willing to fess up, for whatever reason...




posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 01:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by lightchild
No one has mentioned all the drugs yet?
How many tons are the CIA shipping out?



www.globalresearch.ca...

www.wethepeople.la...

I was gonna say the very same thing.

The fact is... This war is multi-faceted. It 'has' to occur, because we need to fear a common enemy. It 'has' to occur because we need a distraction, something to root for and be patriotic. It has to occur to take the attention away from black ops and illegal drug trades.

The CIA were smuggling coc aine from Columbia, populating the masses with '___', heroin and crack...

Once you have a populus dependant on drugs then you will create money (and also problems - enabling MORE control over society as people lose rights for security).

This is untaxable and ultimately generates a huge profit for the people at the top. This money lines the pockets of a few. Those who speak out often find themselves murdered but cases don't get fully investigated because guess what.......... the dead people are only druggies / drug dealers. - who cares... This is how we have been conditioned.

Sadly our troops are dying... For drugs. Some believe this happened in vietnam too... with marajuana fields.

We have to have a war for so many reasons....

But fighting terrorism isn't one of them.



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
reply to post by lightchild
 


Is our government just incredibly multi-faced? Not faceted, but faced. It reminds me of someone trying really hard to keep a lie going....it gets more and more outlandish the longer it goes, but the person is just not willing to fess up, for whatever reason...


You make a VERY good point there.

This lie has been going on for so long (the spider spinning its web) that a few generations later, nobody really knows what they are hiding.

Agencies and agencies fight together and against each other for personal gain. The war is a game of chess and as long as our pawns keep moving forwards.... Then the other pieces can keep moving.

The spider keeps spinning its web.



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 02:06 PM
link   
War....... Irrefutable proof that the Human Race is insane.

The greatest victories in all the world, are born of battles never fought.



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 03:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen

Hey Spooks, tell your handler to get us out!



[edit on 15-7-2009 by KSPigpen]



Did anyone else notice the terminology used here ?
Am I way off base ? Am I interpreting this wrong ?
"Spooks" is an extremely derogatory expression where I come from !

Does this word have another meaning, other than a Dictionary definition or being used as an insult, that I am not aware of ???


If this is meant the way I think it is and if ALL of you saw this and did not respond in a negative manner to this person then I am truly ashamed of
ALL who responded to the post at all !!!



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 03:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by azureskys

Originally posted by KSPigpen

Hey Spooks, tell your handler to get us out!



[edit on 15-7-2009 by KSPigpen]



Did anyone else notice the terminology used here ?
Am I way off base ? Am I interpreting this wrong ?
"Spooks" is an extremely derogatory expression where I come from !

Does this word have another meaning, other than a Dictionary definition or being used as an insult, that I am not aware of ???


If this is meant the way I think it is and if ALL of you saw this and did not respond in a negative manner to this person then I am truly ashamed of
ALL who responded to the post at all !!!


No...It's not meant as an insult to any ethnicity...I'm sorry I chose that word...It's a fairly common word used to refer to members of the 'intelligence' community...some would call them 'spies', 'agents' or 'g-men'.... That's probably why no one else hit on it...

I meant offence to no one by my choice of words...except for the people killing others in foreign lands in the name of 'justice.'



posted on Jul, 17 2009 @ 03:59 PM
link   
reply to post by azureskys
 


So...the choice of ONE word in the post set you off? Man, I must really be missing my mark....out of two pages of anger and disillusionment you would prefer to pick out ONE WORD and try to turn it into bigotry?

I assure you, if my desire was to offend your racial sensitivities, I know far more unambiguous terms that would suit the purpose. Please don't insult me, or yourself.

If you find the post thought-provoking, angering, or baseless, please comment on it, and don't try to make it into something it is not. To be honest, it makes me wonder why you're here.

Do you have any opinion on the situation in Afghanistan or were just dropping by to make sure I was being politically correct?



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 02:24 AM
link   
Mayhap you did not notice that I questioned the possibility of me being wrong.
I have never heard the word "Spooks" used in reference to spies/g-men
in all of my 60 years on the planet.
If I made a wrong interpretation of your meaning-my apologies to you.


As for the OP subject matter: The Taliban had pretty much stopped production of Opium in Afghanistan before The U.S. went in.
Now the production has quadrupled with the help of the U.S.

Got to keep the drugs flowing for the Big Pharm and on the streets, to keep the populace doped up and dependant, so "we" are easier to manipulate and control.



posted on Jul, 18 2009 @ 02:41 AM
link   
We won't be leaving Afghanistan, Pakistan, or Iraq any time soon. If we left, the zionists would do the same thing they did to bush, sr. They'd crash the economy. Bernanke's already threatened the economy several times, and no one gives a freaking damn. All the politicians have pandered to him.



Not only that, but obama's so compromised, all the media have to do is play obama's birth certificate issue 24/7, and i bet a civil war would erupt here. America is so impossibly screwed. The prison system we live in isn't of bars, but it's just as deadly, if not more so in that the people willingly want this form of tyranny.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by azureskys
Mayhap you did not notice that I questioned the possibility of me being wrong.
I have never heard the word "Spooks" used in reference to spies/g-men
in all of my 60 years on the planet.
If I made a wrong interpretation of your meaning-my apologies to you.



In defence of the OP, I too have heard of the term Spooks to refer to spies and G-men, indeed, there is a British TV series glamouring SIS, better known as MI5, which is called 'Spooks'.



Originally posted by azureskys
As for the OP subject matter: The Taliban had pretty much stopped production of Opium in Afghanistan before The U.S. went in.
Now the production has quadrupled with the help of the U.S.

Got to keep the drugs flowing for the Big Pharm and on the streets, to keep the populace doped up and dependant, so "we" are easier to manipulate and control.





Don't forget also, before Dubya stole....sorry, I mean won the 2000 US Presidential election, America's UNOCAL gas company tried to cut a business deal with the Taliban to have a gas pipe running through Afghanistan for export.


news.bbc.co.uk...



The Taliban proved to be to be very shrewd businessmen, and no deal was reached, favouring the Argentine company Bridas.



news.bbc.co.uk...


But the Argentine economy collapsed shortly after.



The Taliban then also severely restricted opium growth.


And then, by luck for America, and the Drug Barons, the Taliban was toppled.


I understand the thread is focused on the loss of American life, but I will also add the loss of British soldiers in Afghanistan stands at 188, who knows how many maimed, as well as other soldiers from other countries.


And please, let us not forget the Afghans themselves. How many Afghans have been killed and maimed?

[edit on 24-7-2009 by Regensturm]



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:19 AM
link   
I feel your pain...but did you REALLY think Obama would get ous out of there?
he knew from the get go that that was another empty promise.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy

If Russia was supplying the Taliban with stinger missiles like we were with the mujahadeen we would already have lost the war long ago. Those stinger missiles were the deciding factor in the victory over the Russians.



What the Stinger missile did to the Soviets may well be what the IED does to the US and it's allies.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Regensturm
 



You're going to compare at that time what was a $183,000 state of the art weapons technology to IED's? I doubt it. Add to that fact that the Mujahadeen of the 1980's were much better equipped and armed. Do you see the Taliban using heavy artillery against our troops? And we have been there for how many years?

[edit on 24-7-2009 by Zosynspiracy]



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy



You're going to compare at that time what was a $183,000 state of the art weapons technology to IED's? I doubt it.



The IED's design has changed many times since 2001, as a response to counter-measures used by the US and it's allies. The IED gets bigger, or is made of different materials to hide detection. The Stinger on the other hand, was of one design that could not be modified without getting new shipments in.


It does not matter how much it costs, if it's effective, does the job it has been intended to do, it is value in itself to those using it.



Originally posted by Zosynspiracy
Add to that fact that the Mujahadeen of the 1980's were much better equipped and armed. Do you see the Taliban using heavy artillery against our troops? And we have been there for how many years?

[edit on 24-7-2009 by Zosynspiracy]



Arguably, the Taliban are better armed because they are without the likes of heavy artillery which can not be easily moved and will most likely be bombed from the air. The Taliban is fighting a guerilla war. Pretending to be a conventional army against the US air force without sufficient anti-air weaponry like SAMs would just be foolish.


The heavy artillery has been replaced by an IED, which when used in the favourable manner by the Taliban is just the same as a targeted artillery strike on a target: It blows up a target, it kills.


The US and it's allies have been in Afghanistan for eight years. Does not look like the Taliban are going anywhere soon either, does it?

[edit on 24-7-2009 by Regensturm]



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 06:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Regensturm
 


Well I'll agree with you that no the Taliban isn't going anywhere anytime soon unfortunately. If we stay in A'stan we will need double the troops we have there to ever fully secure that country and destroy the Taliban. But that's not our goal. Our goal is pacification through military imperialism.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 07:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Zosynspiracy


Well I'll agree with you that no the Taliban isn't going anywhere anytime soon unfortunately. If we stay in A'stan we will need double the troops we have there to ever fully secure that country and destroy the Taliban. But that's not our goal. Our goal is pacification through military imperialism.



If we look at how many troops the Soviets deployed to Afghanistan as compared to how many the US and it's allies have deployed, we can see the Soviet deployment dwarves that what the US and it's allies have deployed, and still the Soviets lost.


Military domination has not been ensured, the closest coming to it was arguably in the initial invasion and the months, which makes you wonder if the attention had not shifted to Iraq what the situation would be like now
in Afghanistan.



The Taliban is not going anywhere, as it's an ideology, one which originates in Pakistan. The Taliban simply comes back like a weed, and it can be argued the more times it is countered in combat, the more it encourages others to join it's ranks to be martyred in what is perceived to be a Jihad, such is it's nature of thinking.



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Freeborn

Originally posted by dizzylizzy

Vunerable youth from deprived backgrounds are encouraged to enlist, others do so because it is patriotic or they have no job prospects and of course there will probably be those who enjoy the 'kill'. All though are being manipulated. The warlords brainwash the Taliban fighters, and our governments do the same.



And without volunteers we would simply have a conscripted army, as in days of yore!

Comparing British soldiers to Taliban fighters is an insult.

The vast majority of Afghans support our presence and roll and appreciate our attempts at stopping the return of a most brutal and repressive regime.
That there are other reasons for our presence as well I have absolutely no doubt, but The Taliban must be stopped at all costs.


I kind of, nearly know what he means lol..

He just made the point differently to the way I might.

And it is a fair point...



posted on Jul, 24 2009 @ 05:53 PM
link   
It's a war that can never be won. The sooner we try to sort this out with diplomacy the better for all involved. It has to happen sooner or later or else we'll be chasing al qaida all around the world from Somalia to Pakistan. The US and UK are struggling to keep tiny pieces of land in Afghanistan.

Think about the size of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia, get your Atlas's out and realise the insanity of trying to fght and find all these terrorists.

I'm no apologist just a realist

[edit on 24-7-2009 by woodwardjnr]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 04:19 AM
link   
Originally posted by woodwardjnr



.....The sooner we try to sort this out with diplomacy the better for all involved.


Unfortunately diplomacy requires the willingness to compromise, something The Taliban simply will not do.
They have an 'all or nothing' mentality governed by strict interpretations of The Koran.
Even if any agreements were reached with The Taliban these would be broken immediately after our troops left Afghanistan; this would be legitamate in their eyes as The Koran allows them to lie and cheat etc in their dealings with Kaffirs if it promotes and / or advances Sharia.



Think about the size of Afghanistan, Pakistan and Somalia, get your Atlas's out and realise the insanity of trying to fght and find all these terrorists.

I'm no apologist just a realist


I understand that, but what is the alternative?
Just sit back and watch the advancement of the most repressive and barbaric belief systems mankind has ever known?

The vast majority of Afghani's support our presence and appreciate our efforts against The Taliban.
They do not support this cruel, brutal and suppressive movement.
Do we just abandon the Afgahni people?
What a feeble, pathetic and weak gesture that would be and would allow The Taliban access to further progress to Pakistan.
And then what?
Assured confrontation with India and the realistic prospect of nuclear confrontation and all the consequences for mankind as a whole that would result from that.

Without wishing to sound melodramatic it is imperative for world peace and possibly the future of mankind as a whole that The Taliban are resisted at all costs.

The biggest crime surrounding all of this is that UK soldiers are dying due to the lack of proper equipment.
The armed forces have been seriously under funded by successive governments and as a result armed personnel are suffering and some are paying the ultimate sacrifice.
We have the technology etc, if we expect our people to do a job then at least supply them with the correct equipment.

We have 8 Chinook helicopters which have been parked up in a hangar since 2001 as incorrect computer systems were installed?
Put new one's in and send them to Afghanistan.
This would double our number of helicopters and vastly improve the safety of troop movements.
But no, our forces are promise 'some' by the end of the year and 'some' next year.
Meanwhile soldiers die!
Those responsible should be tried for treason.
They just don't seem to understand the word 'urgent'.
Just #ing do it!
Simple.

To summarise it is imperative that such a repressive regime as The Taliban is opposed but it is equally impreative that our armed forces are equipped to do the job as efficiently, effectively and quickly as possible thus allowing their safe return and self government for the Afghani people.

[edit on 25/7/09 by Freeborn]



posted on Jul, 25 2009 @ 04:29 AM
link   
I agree with your sentiments regarding the Taliban, but I believe we need to sort this out with diplomacy, we need to bring in countries like Russia China and a larger commitment from the EU. Maybe the taliban can be negotiated with.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join