Afghanistan War – The Crime of the Century

Posted by Ron Paul: ronpaulinstitute.org...

It would, in my opinion, require a level of violence the US has no stomach to take down Afganistan which has been run by murderous warlords for centuries. The people will not respond to a foreign invasion without total domination by a powerful and cruel dictator in charge. This leader would have to rule with an iron fist to have the required level of respect to maintain power in my opinion. If the US does not have the stomach to engage in that level of brutality then they should just leave.

a reply to: machineintelligence

If Afghanistan didn’t have billions in resources nobody would touch it, money grab

Oops my mistake, trillions

www.cnbc.com...

a reply to: machineintelligence

ah - afghanistan - the country where everyone believes they will suceed - despite watching the last failure

the brittish attempted conquest in the 19th century - it went baddly

they fared slightly better during the 20th - mostly by having a far better plan - that did not involve likking people - but still it was not a sucess

the soviets attempted conquest - 1979 onwards - it was an unmittigated failure

now the US and UK [ plus others ] - have a new plan - what can possibly go wrong ?

apart from what has gone wrong 2001 > present ?????

If it wasn't for Asskrackistan the 3-letter agencies would probably dry up and blow away!

We should have never gone to Asskrackistan in the first place, we shouldn't be there now and the whole endeavor was a colossal waste of taxpayer dollars!

Leave Asskrackistan NOW!

a reply to: machineintelligence

It was a hideous waste of life,money and resources,and the engineers of the war knew it could not be "won"-but they got what they wanted,an ongoing war making vast amounts of money for arms companies and control of the heroin revenue for black projects.

Horrible yes,but crime of the century?
I doubt that.
The century is young.

What are you talkin about this war has been an absolute success for those who planned it.
Halliburton setup all sorts of illegal CIA bases over there where they do all sorts of crazy human experimentation they set up the first heroin Surplus in world history human trafficking is going on there completely unabated and the MiC is profiting hand-over-fist.

And it's all on the taxpayer dime.

It's free money!

USA USA.

the good guys March on. we're writing history, so no war crimes has ever been committed by the US, if so which and what was the punishment

a reply to: dashen

Don't forget about opium and lithium.

a reply to: odzeandennz

My legal counsel informs me that there is no statute of limitations on war crimes.

a reply to: machineintelligence

Forever Warfare – The Crime of the Century

There, fixed it for you. Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia, Yemen, Ukraine, Syria, Libya. Nice trackrecord of forever warfare you have going there, and I'm sure I forgot something already.
Soon to be on the list: Bolivia and Venezuela.

Hail Otan! Odin must be very amused about this oh-so christian crusade for the freedom of our free markets and unlimited growth.

a reply to: Silcone Synapse

Yes, and the larger crime, the predicate act for the GWOT occurred on 11 September 2001

a reply to: machineintelligence

The Afghan war was the mistake of the Century the crime of the Century was the Iraq war which was based on lies and a desire for revenge in my opinion.

Lame Excuses: WaPo’s Afghanistan Papers
www.winterwatch.net...

So...

The Taliban didn't deny hosting the 9-11 terrorists, as their support for global Jihad against the Great Satan of America.

And everyone universally agrees that that invading Afghanistan was a mistake.

So enlighten me, poor naive sucker that I am,

what should the US have done instead?

originally posted by: Graysen
So... what should the US have done instead?

Not invade Afghanistan?

The CIA told us Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was the principal architect behind the 9/11 attacks, not Bin Laden. He was born, lived in and arrested in Pakistan (2003). Bin Laden, we're told, was killed there. This did not 'require' the invasion of Pakistan.

You might argue that Afghanistan was shielding Bin Laden while Pakistan's ISI worked with the CIA to capture Khalid Sheikh Mohammed. But you may wonder why Pakistan apparently shielded Bin Laden until 2011. He was less than a mile from the Pakistan Military Academy and, as investigative reporter Seymour M. Hersh asserted (citing U.S. sources), had been a prisoner of the ISI at the Abbottabad compound since 2006.

originally posted by: Graysen
So...

The Taliban didn't deny hosting the 9-11 terrorists, as their support for global Jihad against the Great Satan of America.

And everyone universally agrees that that invading Afghanistan was a mistake.

So enlighten me, poor naive sucker that I am,

what should the US have done instead?

The US should have refused to allow the bad guys to hijack the government on that day.

If the good guys were in charge in Washington, that would have happened, they would have disallowed the acts of 911.

It seems the good guys are not in charge of the government, our government abandoned us and the constitution at least with the patriot act, if not before.

Is it even possible to have good guys running the government? Am I an idealist?