Afghanistan - Page 2

Jennifer23 · February 14th, 2011, 11:40 PM

All I'm going to say is that it's time for us to back off, and let other countries determine their own destinies. Just look at all the people we wanted to put in power, and how it's turned out. Let other people work it out without us meddling . It's their country, not ours.

moniker · February 15th, 2011, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elusive Unicorn

Sigh anyway you look at it getting out will not be as easy as going in. Clean up is always a b****. Just ask a maid. Sorry if I offend you in any way. I do like to debate sometimes I get carried away. If we did all that to them I do not even want to think what they would have done to us if we had lost. It is likily that we will not be out of Afghanistan for years.So we sould just suport our troops and pray they come home safe. Hopefuly when we do get out it will be a better country.

I wasn't offended at all

Please bear in mind that I do not like war. I do not like the fact that we spend billions of dollars on other countries when we need help in our own. Don't get me wrong, I do not believe we should hold the hands of other countries. I do, however, believe that we should clean up what we ruined.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jennifer23

All I'm going to say is that it's time for us to back off, and let other countries determine their own destinies. Just look at all the people we wanted to put in power, and how it's turned out. Let other people work it out without us meddling . It's their country, not ours.

It is their country, but when you're struggling to stay healthy because there's shit and piss in the street, contaminants in your water and food is scarce, it's pretty hard to think about making a proper government or protecting yourself from invaders.

Imagine if I destroyed your home...I came into your town and obliterated everything within a 500 mile radius. Your water is contaminated with dirt, sulfur and dead bodies. There's so much death you have no idea what to do with it. You can't find a steady source of food, you have no place to put your trash, your urine, your feces, you have a crumbling home (if you have one at all). Perhaps one or more people in your family have died, and the blasts may have left you without a limb.
Now imagine I say, "Well, this isn't my problem to rebuild. This is YOUR town, you guys figure it out."
With what resources? With what sanity? With what time? Your day is spent surviving, not attempting to rebuild a torn government.

It really feels like I'm the only person replying who says we have to fix the country because we destroyed the country, but everyone else thinks we just need to leave. Can you ladies tell me what you think is going on over there that it's stable and healthy enough for us to walk away?

Jennifer23 · February 15th, 2011, 08:27 PM

Hi Moniker, and we're in total agreement here. Since we destroyed these towns and cities, we have a moral obligation to the people there to rebuild them. I guess what I was talking about was more in the future. We have to learn from our past mistakes and not do the same things in the future. We can't, and shouldn't police the World.

PriscillaMS · April 17th, 2012, 03:36 PM

I know I've come late to this thread but I'd like to make a comment or two anyway. First point, following the first Iraq war (Bush elder - to liberate Kuwait) S. Hussein signed a treaty with the US to allow weapons inspections. Now we can argue whether liberating Kuwait was a "good" objective. But the Iraq leadership signed the treaty to end hostilities. Unfortunately S. Hussein reniged on the treaty. So GW Bush after getting 17 UM resolutions to authorize force and the approval of the US Congress, resumed the conflict due to the broken treaty. You can argue this war was ill-advised, fine. But either a treaty (contract) with the US means something or it does not. If countries can make binding agreements and then simply disregard them, what foreign policy will you be able to enforce at all. And as Julius Ceasar realized with a "divide and conquer approach" would it not be good to help try to establish a democratic country in the mid-east. My simple point is that the second gulf war stemmed from a broken treaty. GW felt this could not be tolerated. People may disagree but at what consequence down the road. My second point is he oil issue. Show me evidence that the US stole or took oil from any arab country. Let's not belittle the sacrifices the US and it's armed servicemen have sustained. I am for smaller government politically, but I see no evidence the government or the people of America have profited from these wars in any way.

Jennifer23 · April 17th, 2012, 07:52 PM

I support what Bush Sr. did. He was right to go in, stopped the Iraqui advance to Kuwait, and then got out. When Iraq made another threat toward Kuwait during the Clinton administration, Clinton just put tanks on the border. He stopped a war before it started. W. decided not to do that. I love this John Kerry quote: "You should only go to war when you have to go to war, not because you want to."

Wolf_angel · April 18th, 2012, 07:57 AM

Personally I believe we can assist with the rebuilding and clean up of the War Zones. Americans have done it since WWII. Germany debt to the USA was forgiven. Now look at that country. However, I believe we should strive toward a balance. While helping others we should also help ourselves. This way we are not DEPRIVING our own Country while assisting another. Just a thought. Not meant to offend. Have a great day!

Jennifer23 · April 19th, 2012, 10:06 PM

You didn't offend me, Wolfie. And balance is the key. For years I've said that we should be neutral in the Middle East and treat every country in that region the same. If an Arab country does something that is wrong, we should address that; at the same time, if Israel does something that's wrong, we should treat that country the same way.
Fair is fair.

PriscillaMS · April 23rd, 2012, 03:21 PM

I don't think any of us here are really all that far apart. I can't disagree with the Kerry quote. But I don't feel the second Iraq war was re-initiated on a "want to" basis. Again, a treaty either means something or it does not. The Iraq leaders broke the treary when they would not allow weapons inspections. Goggle the UN reports. I won't push my argument further, it is just that with diplomacy there must be a threat of the stick, especially in the middle east.

April 18th, 2012, 07:57 AM	#21
Wolf_angel A survivor of chaos Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Where my heart is Posts: 3,147	Personally I believe we can assist with the rebuilding and clean up of the War Zones. Americans have done it since WWII. Germany debt to the USA was forgiven. Now look at that country. However, I believe we should strive toward a balance. While helping others we should also help ourselves. This way we are not DEPRIVING our own Country while assisting another. Just a thought. Not meant to offend. Have a great day! __________________ May you walk in the shadow of the Great Spirit~To help others is a special gift we can either give or take~The more you give the more you receive~

February 14th, 2011, 11:40 PM	#16
Jennifer23 Jennifer23 Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,187	All I'm going to say is that it's time for us to back off, and let other countries determine their own destinies. Just look at all the people we wanted to put in power, and how it's turned out. Let other people work it out without us meddling . It's their country, not ours.

February 15th, 2011, 08:27 PM	#18
Jennifer23 Jennifer23 Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,187	Hi Moniker, and we're in total agreement here. Since we destroyed these towns and cities, we have a moral obligation to the people there to rebuild them. I guess what I was talking about was more in the future. We have to learn from our past mistakes and not do the same things in the future. We can't, and shouldn't police the World.

April 17th, 2012, 03:36 PM	#19
PriscillaMS Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: West Virginia, USA Posts: 358	I know I've come late to this thread but I'd like to make a comment or two anyway. First point, following the first Iraq war (Bush elder - to liberate Kuwait) S. Hussein signed a treaty with the US to allow weapons inspections. Now we can argue whether liberating Kuwait was a "good" objective. But the Iraq leadership signed the treaty to end hostilities. Unfortunately S. Hussein reniged on the treaty. So GW Bush after getting 17 UM resolutions to authorize force and the approval of the US Congress, resumed the conflict due to the broken treaty. You can argue this war was ill-advised, fine. But either a treaty (contract) with the US means something or it does not. If countries can make binding agreements and then simply disregard them, what foreign policy will you be able to enforce at all. And as Julius Ceasar realized with a "divide and conquer approach" would it not be good to help try to establish a democratic country in the mid-east. My simple point is that the second gulf war stemmed from a broken treaty. GW felt this could not be tolerated. People may disagree but at what consequence down the road. My second point is he oil issue. Show me evidence that the US stole or took oil from any arab country. Let's not belittle the sacrifices the US and it's armed servicemen have sustained. I am for smaller government politically, but I see no evidence the government or the people of America have profited from these wars in any way.

April 17th, 2012, 07:52 PM	#20
Jennifer23 Jennifer23 Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,187	I support what Bush Sr. did. He was right to go in, stopped the Iraqui advance to Kuwait, and then got out. When Iraq made another threat toward Kuwait during the Clinton administration, Clinton just put tanks on the border. He stopped a war before it started. W. decided not to do that. I love this John Kerry quote: "You should only go to war when you have to go to war, not because you want to."

April 19th, 2012, 10:06 PM	#22
Jennifer23 Jennifer23 Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 3,187	You didn't offend me, Wolfie. And balance is the key. For years I've said that we should be neutral in the Middle East and treat every country in that region the same. If an Arab country does something that is wrong, we should address that; at the same time, if Israel does something that's wrong, we should treat that country the same way. Fair is fair.

April 23rd, 2012, 03:21 PM	#23
PriscillaMS Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Location: West Virginia, USA Posts: 358	I don't think any of us here are really all that far apart. I can't disagree with the Kerry quote. But I don't feel the second Iraq war was re-initiated on a "want to" basis. Again, a treaty either means something or it does not. The Iraq leaders broke the treary when they would not allow weapons inspections. Goggle the UN reports. I won't push my argument further, it is just that with diplomacy there must be a threat of the stick, especially in the middle east.