posted on Sep, 1 2013 @ 01:46 PM
reply to post by MrWendal
I have one simple question.....
If US troops were not in Afghanistan, would that IED have still gone off?
I don't know. I can't give you an answer to a hypothetical. All I can give you is the answer to what is.
With all due respect, nothing the OP listed for why they are the "bad guys" gives the US military any reason to be at War.
We didn't decide to go to war unilaterally. The president, the congress, and the American people approved of action in Afghanistan. We did exactly
what the military is supposed to do.
If it did, why have we not invaded India where women are treated like pieces of meat and raped left and right? What about the Congo? No shortage of
dead children there.
I'm not sure what relevance the comparison has to what I conveyed in my OP. Perhaps you are asking a legitimate question, but would there be a
legitimate answer to it? If I said we should go and stop the slaughter of children in Africa would you stand behind me? Or would you condemn the
action as simply war mongering?
No one questions if the military is doing some good things there, but that still does not justify being there.
We are doing a lot more good today than we were. I fear that for whatever damage is done, what good we do, whether it outweighs the bad or not, will
never be enough. So I agree with you.
The Taliban did not attack us.
No, they just harbored the net work leaders who did. And please, I know this is simply an assumption, but spare me the inside job stuff. I simply
don't buy it and never will.
They did not fly planes into a building on 9/11. The whole reason we went into Afghanistan to begin with was to capture or kill Osama Bin Laden and
that mission is accomplished.
Agreed. And we should have called it quits then. I am not a fan of nation building.
I won't even get into the fact that the Taliban offered to give up Bin Laden but the US declined and opted to remain in combat instead.
The Taliban represented a secure haven. Giving up one guy and leaving the network intact there was not an option.
Want to know who I blame for that injured 6 year old? The US Government. Why? Simple. If troops were not there, that IED would not have been set up or
She is 6 MONTHS old. Her parents are dead. And as much disapproval as I have for the US government the insurgent that planted that IED and the
insurgent who set it off are to blame. They hurt those people. THEY made the decision to hurt civilians to get to us. There is no justification for
that at all.
Even the OP him/herself suspected that it was done to suck troops into the area. If those troops are gone, there is no explosion and no injured 6 year
old girl with her leg blown off.
It's speculation on my part and not fact. I am not an expert on IEDs. I only know the effects they have on 6 MONTH OLD BABIES.
1-9-2013 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)