Maybe Layton Was Right About Afghanistan

We all know that anyone right of left is bereft of ideas, until they hear something from the left. Then they let it "simmer" and "discover" it themselves...........

---
"When you change the way you look at things, the things you look at change."
-Max Planck

Wow.

Diplomacy by diplomatic means.

A truly novel concept for Harper and his crowd.

I guess this makes the point that "diplomacy by other means" was actually a bad idea.

---
The two most common things in the universe are apparently Hydrogen and stupidity.

I have a better idea than negotiating with the Taliban. Since the mass murdering criminals in charge never had a valid reason to shoot up and invade Afghanistan in the first place, we should tar and feather the lot and ship them off to the Taliban to get whatever punishment is handed out as a way of saying we're sorry for letting the war happen in our name.

As anybody who studied wars and the military, has known from the beginning, both Afghanistan and Iraq have been lost causes from the start and have no hope in hell to get better, only worse. Just saw on the news last night, that in Iraq they're now using poison gasses with the suicide bombs

It is a long known military/police fact that when terrorists are willing to die, nobody can stop them.

There we have many thousands who have nothing to lose and are brainwashed by their clergy that dying for the "cause" is counted as "defending the faith", which means an immediate jump to the Seventh Heaven, where "Bulbulvoiced houries", will pamper them to eternity.

Anybody who believes this would be a damn fool not wanting to die and get out of this Earthly mess.

The Western occupiers will ultimately be forced out anyway, meanwhile people are dying on both sides, for nothing. Of course, their departure will mean civil wars, but those will have to be solved by the locals themselves and not by installed puppet governments.

Ed Deak.

I don't believe for a minute that the Iraqi resistance is using poison gas against their own people. All we ever hear about on western media is "suicide bomber" even in cases where it made no sense at all for anyone to suicide themselves to effect the attack. The Iraqi resistance is anything but stupid, but only an idiot would send in their troops to die for no reason, since reusing the same people more than once is a much better tactic - for one, your troops gain experience making them more effective, the cost is cheaper, and you can perform much more damage against your enemy quicker, cheaper, and more effectively.

So what's going on with all these idiotic suicide bombings that target the Iraqi people that any effective resistance would need on their side to survive?

The obvious answer is ....

"I don't believe for a minute that the Iraqi resistance is using poison gas against their own people."<br />
<br />
Radicals cannot be predicted. except that they will become more and more radical, eventually self-terminating.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/3997436a12.html">http://www.stuff.co.nz/3997436a12.html</a><br />
<br />
That is why discussion with the baby-eating Talib cannot have any other outcome than an axe in the forehead for our efforts. They have shown that time and time again. All we can do is make life better for everyone else, and the Taliban will cease to have relevance.<br />
<br />
Those of us on the right know the idea of negotiating is flawed in many ways. They wouldn't have any reason to live up to their agreement; they see agreements with infidels as null and void. We have no right to negotiate on behalf of another free government; and the Afghan Government is constantally in talks with the Taliban. <br />
<br />
I know, I always write pretty much the same reply to this subject. It just seems like no one ever reads it.<p>---<br>The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.<br />

"Those of us on the right know the idea of negotiating is flawed in many ways. They wouldn't have any reason to live up to their agreement; they see agreements with infidels as null and void."

I disagree.

You just have to be willing to speak a language they understand.

This is going to sound counter-productive, but the point is valid.

There was a reason there was relative peace in Iraq during the reign of Saddam Hussein.

He spoke their language more fluently than they did.

---
The two most common things in the universe are apparently Hydrogen and stupidity.

DC wrote: <br> "Radicals cannot be predicted. except that they will become more and more radical, eventually self-terminating." <br><br> OK, but when you speak of radicals, which group are you talking about, the American invaders or the indigenous people of Iraq? From my perspective, the more radical aggressor is clearly on the American side, and the use of false flag suicide bombings and gassing of innocent people is something they have proven to be more than capable of AND have been caught red handed doing. <br><br> <a href="http://benfrank.net/blog/2005/09/29/car_bombers_caught_red_handed/">Undercover British soldiers caught red-handed: Dressed as Arabs in a car full of explosives with a remote detonator</a> <br><br> When you try and assign a logical reason behind the seemingly illogical behavior of suicide bombings, the automatic answer, and the one that the mass media parrots to us on a daily basis, is that the "terrorists" are crazy - and that's the reason, i.e., there is no reason. <br><br> However, if you open your mind just a little and ask "who gains from the bombings" then a frighteningly cold and calculating logic does become apparent. The ONLY group that benefits are the aggressors, i.e., the American forces and their puppet allies. <br><br> The bombings serve a few clear advantages (albeit psychopathic ones): <br><br> 1) It gives the Americans a reason to stay in Iraq. They say that if they leave, the country will break out in civil war, resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths and chaos for many years. <br> 2) If a civil war breaks out between Sunni and Shia, the Iraqi people become fragmented into at least 2 different groups, each fighting against the other instead of against a common invader. Divide and conquer 101. <br> 3) The constant terror against civilians gives the Iraqi people a willingness to accept peace at *any cost*, and that includes accepting a puppet government ruled by the American invaders, who the Iraqi people must know plan on turning Iraq into come kind of oil pumping slave colony. <br><br> Now, if we ignore all logic and ignore all the lies, such as Saddam's mythical WMD claims that were proven to have been intentionally falsified, and assume instead that the US government and their parrots are telling the truth - i.e., the suicide bombers are Iraqi terrorists, then the ONLY reasons we can come up with for the bombings is this one: <br><br> 1) They are crazy! <br><br> Yeah, sure.

And from this We are to learn ....??



Odd who gets targeted to interfered with


---
"And God said: 'Let there be Satan, so people don't blame everything on me. And let there be lawyers, so people don't blame everything on Satan."

* George Bu

"Radicals cannot be predicted. except that they will become more and more radical, eventually self-terminating."

in which case, oughtn't we had stand back? or is that hadn't we oughta?

Reading and agreeing are quite separate, are they not?



as sam Kinison is rumoured to have sais,"I do not condone spousal abuse, but I certainly Understand it!"

---
"And God said: 'Let there be Satan, so people don't blame everything on me. And let there be lawyers, so people don't blame everything on Satan."

* George Bu

"They are crazy!"


Our "they" is their "they"

Mirror images
Pot vs. Kettle
and back again
He They Them
Like musical notes
from a xylophone.

Trance like.


---
"And God said: 'Let there be Satan, so people don't blame everything on me. And let there be lawyers, so people don't blame everything on Satan."

* George Bu

For some reason suicidal Muslim terrorists seem to be the neocon's best friend. Either they need each other, or they are each other.

<a href="http://www.uruknet.de/?s1=1&p=31479&s2=19">The Americans planned to make him a suicide-bomber</a>

"You just have to be willing to speak a language they understand."

Not so. You can speak their 'language', but you are still an Infidel unworthy of their respect, and the respect nessecary to honour any agreement made. It is in the Quran, promises made to infidels need not be honoured. Which is why one Canadian soldier ended up with an axe in his head, even when honoured with the ritual of the carpet.

"There was a reason there was relative peace in Iraq during the reign of Saddam Hussein.

He spoke their language more fluently than they did."

Yes, when Hussien found a terrorist, he put them up against the wall and had them shot. Canadians do not speak that language, and when we turn prisoners over to people who do speak that language, our public cries 'foul!'. I have seen the comments on threads when there is implied 'prisoner abuse', so don't claim to respect Hussien's way of weeding out the radicals.

"OK, but when you speak of radicals, which group are you talking about, the American invaders or the indigenous people of Iraq?"

I did not specify, because radicals tend to polarize, and sooner or later other radicals are not 'radical' enough and become the enemy. It is the same pattern througout history, and it can be seen recently in Egypt, many Muslim countries and even in the US.

---
The preceding comment deals with mature subject matter, however immaturely presented. Viewer discretion is advised.