Afghanistan into oblivion...
<A HREF="http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2001/09/14/afghanistan/index.html" target="_new">http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2001/09/14/afghanistan/index.html</A>
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
Good article. It does scratch upon a point though that shouldn't be overlooked. If a military assault is initiated it won't just be against afghanistan. It will be against many nations. But in the end the Taliban who that man hates so much and Bin-laden who the world now despises will be dead. Will the world be a better place then?
As far as a world war? I don't really think it will be a world war. First of all we'll dominate the skies, and the seas. I don't see how this can then spread into a world war when it will be issolated to where we decide to go. It'll be a fight against terrorism and everyone wants to get rid of that. I read today that 60 nations are potential targets in order to wipe out terrorism. 60 nations! But we pick those nations along with our allies, so we decide if this is a world war. They don't. The first step right now is freezing terrorists assets. I understand that the gov'ts of the world are working to shut off the terrorist organizations bank accounts. Nonetheless, some wars are worth fighting.
As far as the Afghans? Hopefully they'll be spared. But their gov't won't. You never know though. What if the Taliban turn Bin-Laden over to the USA?
<font color=red>Ever wonder what it would be like to be eaten alive by a Great White shark?</font color=red>
Agreed - I'm just concerned about reprisals - heard today on CNN Asia that 5 Pakistanis were detained in Macau with plans for terrorist targets in Hong Kong and instructions to execute them should Afghanistan be hit with military force.
How much has bin Laden thought this through? He obviously is smart enough to know the the US/West will come at him with everything after an attack like that. Yet he seems to already have contingency cells setup with instructions (presumebly not placed only 5 days ago) to take tit-for-tat action for any retaliation by the West.
This could get real big and real messy very quickly and I am not particularily keen to get stuck in the middle...
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
link <A HREF="http://asia.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/asiapcf/east/09/16/china.threat/index.html" target="_new">here</A> for the article on the Macau incident and the 5 Pakistani 'terrorists'
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-1><EM>Edited by PeTeB on 09/17/01 04:51 PM.</EM></FONT></P>
Let's think about this for a moment. Bin-laden wants all of the worlds big powers to be pissed off. What does he hope to accomplish? He's screwing himself.
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
While we're at it, why did Portugal give Macua back to China?
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
the lease expired - same as we (the Brits) gave HK back to China.
Anyway - the reason bin Laden wants a global Islamic/Christin war is because he truly believes that Islam would win. The author states a different sentiment but who is to say?
Like you say - the US/West has vastly superior technology and military capability, but can it be used effectively? Okay - they were not exactly front line techno-gear troops, but the Soviets had little success in Afghanistan in the years they tried and the Brits got their butts havded to them twice in the previous century. All scenarios had huge technology and training gaps between the opposing forces, the difference being that the Afghans were so tenacious they proved almost impossible to defeat.
The whole region has a history of warfare that is not geared to fight the same war. You cannot precision bomb every Afghan rifleman from 30,000ft. You have to send in ground troops.
The real key for the Afghans, and indeed the whole region, is what are weapons and ammunition stockpiles like? If they have enough to sustain a prolonged guerilla campaign then things could get very bumpy.
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
<b>12 Islamic extremists entered Japan before terrorist attacks</b>
2001-09-16 18:11 (New York)
TOKYO, Sept. 17 Kyodo
The Japanese government has received information about the possibility that some 12 foreign Islamic extremists came to Japan in early September shortly before the terrorist attacks on the United States, according to sources close to the case.
After the government got the information from a foreign intelligence agency, the National Police Agency and others directed police forces across the country to look into the matter and Japanese police beefed up security around U.S. military bases and other U.S. facilities.
Japanese immigration authorities are also looking into the arrivals and departures of the 12 suspected Islamic extremists at Narita, Kansai and other airports that handle international flights,the sources said.
-0- Sep/16/2001 22:11 GMT
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
Interesting viewpoint indeed. I'm not the biggest fan of the Taleban either, but I wouldn't compare them against the Nazi. I wouldn't say the people are in concentration camps either, but I would agree they are already suffering immensly.
Did you watch Panorama Last night? They showed the Osama Bin Laden Profile. The thing is, if he really wanted to have no visible links to any of these terrorist acts, he could have achieved it. They showed how difficult it can be to get to him. He doesn't keep any electrical equipment around him in paranoia thinking that can be used to track him. There have been five attempts to assasinate him by different organisations.
He wants a war between the muslims and the west, that is why he's doing what he's doing. If America isn't careful in its plan, that might just happen. How much are the other arab nations willing to take before they pull US support and ask them to leave. And how much before they are willing to fight back? Whats to stop the young people who'll lose loved ones join his network?
The latest (might have been updated by now) US polls show that 80% are willing to send in ground troops and 65% are willing to accept upto 1000 US military casualties. In my opinion, those figures are gonna drop radically when we start seeing blood. This isn't like the time Kuwait was being protected atall, but more of another vietnam situation, or even worse. There is nothing to arial bomb, or launch a cruise missile attack against. In the last cruise attack, The US probably lost more in terms of cost of the missiles, than the Taleban or bin ladens network.
What I find frightening is that the US President has made an impossible promise, and he's actually trying to carry it through with a refusal to look at some of the possible consequences.
<font color=red><i>Poor is the pupil, who does not surpass his mentor</i> - Leonardo daVinci</font color=red>
Wow, that's a really interesting article. I don't know if all of his conclusions and predictions would come true. I hope not, but who knows...
<font color=green>They may take our lives, but they will never take our freedom!</font color=green>
I'm not so sure that you can be so bold as to say that it's an impossible promise. If you look at this as a war on muslims, then yes it's impossible. But if you look at as a war on Terrorism, then why would a nation say no to that? I don't think any american is willing to fight a religious war (us against muslims), but we are willing to fight terrorism. Muslim nations can blame everything "as an attack on islam", but it sure won't bode well for them in the future if they constantly use that excuse. At some point the whole world needs to just say no to terrorism.
So unless a nation decides that it would rather allow terrorism, why would they refuse? Keep in mind that the first thing we will do is cut off supplies to any enemy nation as well as set up sanctions. This war will not just be a military one.
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
<A HREF="http://portal.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2001/09/17/nmus17.xml" target="_new">This pisses me off</A>
There's just so much wrong about this.
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
That's really wrong. Can't argue with the woman who wants proof though. Problem is that proof has been put forth connecting Osama Bin Laden with a number of other attacks, yet people still think of him as innocent. That man is not innocent in any way whatsoever. They've detained over 50 people. I'm pretty damn sure that the U.S. has enough proof right now to move forward with any and all plans. The investigation is still on going though and I doubt an attack will be initiated until it's almost done.
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
Reports are coming forth that Pakistani efforts have failed, but I can't find any details.
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
I'm sure it's viewed differently everywhere around the world. That's propaganda for you.
Nice <b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> <b>crunch</b> Trolls cookies.......
Yummy!!
read the same - the telegraph was carrying a story but it seems to be down right now.
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
I read that Pakistan was turned down but that Clerics will still decide what to do regarding Bin-Laden regardless. I have no idea what the difference is though. Apparently Afghanistan is calling for a Holy War.
<A HREF="http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_401337.html" target="_new">http://www.ananova.com/news/story/sm_401337.html</A>
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
just getting a run on bomb threats and evacuations in Tokyo right now. Seem to be centered on Citigroup/bank, but nothing concrete yet. Nothing against my buildings yet.
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
What I am saying is, as long as people have extreme hatred there will be terrorism. It is not at all like "you cut off the head and the body will die" as many percieve it. It is more like you cut the head off and a hundred heads rise. You simply cannot fight it by a typical military strike.
I like what this ex-CIA guy said yesterday on the BBC. He said you have to work in terms of counter intelligence, recruit some of the terrorists as informants and to sabotage their attacks if necessary. I find this approach, though infinitly more difficult, will be hugely effective, and I would dare say infinitly more effective than what is currently planned.
I see where your argument is coming from, but I honestly have to say it is slightly on the naive side of things. The world isn't made of black and white, but shades of gray. Nobody stands in the extreme ends and everybody chooses a shade which isn't as far away from the enemies shade as they think it is. Its just that they don't want to believe it.
<font color=red><i>Poor is the pupil, who does not surpass his mentor</i> - Leonardo daVinci</font color=red>
To satisfy the anger felt amongst all of us, there will be an air strike of major proportions without a doubt for all to see with full coverage from the media.
But this war against terrorist will be a long and drawn out secret affair. This man sought after is highly trained and very intelligent to the ways of US defense, have a guess which country he was in when the attack on America was taking place. Where would he be now? Certainly would be well out of Afghanistan that's for sure.
We need co-operation from every nation on earth and then some, not entirely likely is it, I'm suggesting he is back in Nth Africa or has just been through there.
Now every nation has sent their condolences and sympathies to the American people and to the other nations who lost their own citizens in the catastrophic event.
What about other terrorism actions in the world that has never affected the USA in adversity?
How about these obvious ones like:
IRA and Britain?
Tamil tigers and Sri Lanka?
Indonesian gorillas v' East Timor?
Many many more, this is why just about every Government in the world loves USA right now.
The USA is calling on the world for assistance, once they achieve what they want, will they continue with the war against terrorism to fight that crime against civilization for all the rest of the world as well?
This is the question on the world’s lips?
These are my opinions only and will die saying them in my free world!
<font color=purple>Three ways to do things, your way, my way and the right way!</font color=purple>
| Quote : Indonesian gorillas v' East Timor? |
I really hope you mean guerillas, not gorillas.
<font color=green>They may take our lives, but they will never take our freedom!</font color=green>
ok ok. sorry Mr Fatburger teacherman, been to close to home here for us .
<font color=purple>Three ways to do things, your way, my way and the right way!</font color=purple>
Maybe they used trained gorillas or trained monkeys.
Nice <b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> <b>crunch</b> Trolls cookies.......
Yummy!!
That's why I was wondering. That would be really cool...but scary.
<font color=green>They may take our lives, but they will never take our freedom!</font color=green>
that would be freaky, people would start shooting all gorillas.
Nice <b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> <b>crunch</b> Trolls cookies.......
Yummy!!
Trust you guys to trash a post.
brothers in arms ....Two of a kind!
<font color=purple>Three ways to do things, your way, my way and the right way!</font color=purple>
That's what we're here for right?
Nice <b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> <b>crunch</b> Trolls cookies.......
Yummy!!
The interesting thing is, Would the UK ever even dream of airstriking Ireland?
Not a chance!
<font color=red><i>Poor is the pupil, who does not surpass his mentor</i> - Leonardo daVinci</font color=red>
<A HREF="http://www.kcstar.com/item/pages/home.pat,local/3accfbdd.918,.html" target="_new">Here</A> is an article to read. Just some more stuff going on.
Nice <b><font color=green>Lizards</b></font color=green> <b>crunch</b> Trolls cookies.......
Yummy!!
They're working on counter-terrorist operations as well, but they first have to decide how far they are willing to go. Are American's willing to have their gov't assasinate world leaders, torture for information, and worst of all how do we infiltrate terrorist cells? We really can't so military options will be neccessary to destroy the camps and infrastructure. It's not just about Afghanistan.
I too doubt the UK would bomb Ireland. Everyone has to decide how far they are willing to go. Right now American's are about to go really far, but our allies will have to decide for themselves about their internal terrorism since we aren't about to be allowed, let alone want to bomb, in allied countries. Nato members specifically.
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
It also depends very much on the strength of the country.
Hypothetical situation:
China did something to provoke a reaction. Will the US be so enthusiastic about an attack? Will the other countries neghbouring China be willing to assist, even with an american ultimatum?
<font color=red><i>Poor is the pupil, who does not surpass his mentor</i> - Leonardo daVinci</font color=red>
Yeah, the difference would be that we would need to have a draft to get enough soldiers.
An attack is an attack.
<font color=red>God</font color=red> <font color=blue>Bless</font color=blue> <font color=red>America!</font color=red>
Yes, definitely. My proof? Pearl Harbor. It was a much more crippling attack, and Japan was very strong at that time. They had a huge navy, we had one that had just been crippled. Yet we declared war.
I know everyone is sick of comparing Pearl Harbor and 9/11, but there are similarities.
<font color=green>In memory of all the Americans that died 9/11/01
Rest in peace</font color=green>
The navy wasn't crippled at all, The Japs missed the aircraft carriers which was the primary objective. What they did sink or disable was a small portion of the fleet.
With America's ability to build ships quickly it was not a big problem to replace what they lost.
The Germans did more damage to the US merchant shipping actually.
<font color=orange>Beam</font color=orange><font color=red> me</font color=red><font color=green> up</font color=green><font color=blue> Scotty</font color=blue>.
But they still sank the support for the carriers in the Pacific. You can't really send carriers out by themselves. Unless you know you're going to fight another Midway.
<font color=green>In memory of all the Americans that died 9/11/01
Rest in peace</font color=green>
True, it was a turkey shoot in the end, but the US had plenty of other fleets around and had allied backing from Australia and NZ.
The Japanese considered sinking merchant supply ships not honorable and eventually that’s what sunk them, they also thought submarines were not honorable either and although they used the mini sub to little effect, in the main didn't capitalize with them.
Bad part was they built ships and planes from scrap metal bought from the USA up until that fateful day. Ironic that is what happened recently having your own materials used against you.
Unfortunately..
<font color=orange>Beam</font color=orange><font color=red> me</font color=red><font color=green> up</font color=green><font color=blue> Scotty</font color=blue>.
"You Have to send in ground Troops"
Interesting, the Soviets caused very heavy damage in Afganistan, I heard millions used to describe the deaths.(could be wrong there)
Now most of Afganistan is starving, the military is smaller. American bombers can kill a lot of Afgan's solders,or maybe Taliban leaders.
If the Ground forces go in it will have quite a bit more "bite" than the Soviets.
Plus it won't be just Americans, it will be multi-national forces.
Just the helocopters we have are scarry enough.
Why do you think millions of Afganistanies(spelling?) are leaving, or trying to leave?
bob
True - the Afghan people are not what they were 10 or 15 years ago, but do not overlook the fact that the Soviets were at the time a pretty well armed force. Sure they didn't have today's toys in the battlefield - but the issue for any force against the Afghans is the they are used to wars of attrition, they are relatively at one with their land and need little food or support to significantly disrupt ground operations against any force.
Sure, the Afghan people are fleeing right now - what choice do they have, but bear in mind 99% of them do not know or understand what has happened in the US. The Taliban by our standards, and I believe that of any other, is a cruel and manipulative entity, however they control the information and rigt now the Afghan people fear that the US and its 'Allies' are mounting a jihad of their own against Muslim nations, specifically Afghanistan, with no or little provocation. Sure, you and I get CNN and saw what happened, know about the Embassy bombings, the first WTC bomb, the USS Cole etc. - but they do not, and they do not understand it.
Right now they are fleeing, and they are a tired and hungry people, but they are proud and have a legendary history of resilience and success at wearing down and defeating invading forces of massively higher technology levels. Sure we can churn the rubble of their cities, we can flatten whatever remains of their economy - but at the ene it makes no difference to 95% of the Afghan people because they have little or nothing anyway. Start killing 'innocent' Afghans, who do not understand what or why this is happening and you will turn them, and most likely every neutral and possible friendly muslim nation against us.
Look at Pakistan next door. Sure the West and the US have pressured and greased enough palms to have them fall in line and agree to help us politcally and even militarily, however they have a very shaky internal balance of power and a high muslim poulation, with a very vocal and dominant fundamentalist layer at the top. If Pakistan help US attacks on the Afghan people, their dictatorship topples, the fundamentalists have an opportunity to seize power <b><i> and they are a confirmed nuclear capable nation</b></i>.
Anyone want to bet the world goes to hell in a handcart if fundamentalists get hold of nukes (advanced or otherwise) in that region? It doesn't bear thinking about. Anyway, I'm off topic from your question/response - but what I'm saying is that this is not the walk over or brute force exercise that many seem to be expecting.
Personally I hope for the least innocent casualties possible whilst the US and her allies neutralise as many pockets of terrorism throughout the globe. I fear, however that this is a very tall wish.
-* This Space For Rent *-
email for application details
There are 1350 identified and unidentified users. To see the list of identified users, Click here.
You are about to answer a thread that has been inactive for more than 6 months.
If you still wish to proceed, please ensure that your posting is original and does not duplicate or overlap any prior responses to this thread.
