topic by
Barb
10/23/2001 (2:06)

I often wonder IF the US had talked with the Taliban what the Taliban would have said? Just to talk with them wouldn't have meant we're 'negotiating'.

reply by
Robert Keady
10/23/2001 (10:29)

reply top

The US did talk with the Taliban. Their response was that Bin Ladin is a guest in their country and by their laws and custom they could not turn him over.

While I respect that, their guest attacked a soveign nation and declared war against that soveriegn nation.

For example, if the KKK in the US attacked Iran and declared war on Iran, the US would no longer house them and would turn them over to authorities.

Unluckily for the Taliban, Bin Ladin is a major supporter both money and military wise. They could never have turned him over. Bin Ladin has over 3000 top trained elite arab guards that would decimate the Taliban.

Unluckily the Taliban decided to play with a loaded gun (Bin Ladin).

The US had no choice or other options.

reply by
Someone
10/23/2001 (10:51)

reply top

I would like to add few more things here:

- Taliban also asked for proof. We never gave it. In fact, Colin Powel is on record saying that we do not have proof that can withstand a court of law.

- Our CIA has worked hand-in-glove in over throwing governments but are we ready to hand over any one of ours?

- While KKK never attached Iran, Iraq did. What was our role? We supplied intelligence and arms to Baghdad. According to one estimate, the permanent members of UN security council (We are one of those members) sold around $5 Billion worth of arms to Iran and Iraq. Where was UN then?

- Also, who groomed Bin Ladin? Our own CIA. Who supported Taliban to come to power? Our own CIA.

Dear friends, the list is long. While we can argue and try to improve our understanding there are innocent people dying in Afghanistan. One estimate 7.5 millions are at danger.

Lets make sure that somewhere along the line we do not convert ourselves from victim to aggressor.

reply by
Robert Keady
10/23/2001 (11:19)

reply top

Please in no way refer that I propound violence. I do not. Violence is the final means of the incompetent.

UN, Palestine, Saudi Arabia, Iran etc etc etc.. all have been shown the proof and have said there is sufficient proof to arrest Bin Ladin of this crime. Among many of his crimes.

Your correct about the CIA, and thus Iran Contra, etc etc hearings where we tried to find the truth. No country also, to note, has asked or pressed charges against our country, nor have they shown damages to us such that we could turn people over to them.

We did not support the Taliban, sorry that is incorrect. The Afghans created that mess by fueding after the beating of the Soviets. We did fund the battle yes. To prevent Soviet occupation of a soveirgn country by another. (yes our goals were served in this)

CIA never groomed Bin Ladin either. Sorry that is also a common misconception.

We are sending humanitarian aide to Afghan. The Talban though are now looting the supplies.

reply by
Barb
10/23/2001 (18:41)

reply top

If we ask a criminal organization outside the US to give up 'one' of theirs, should we have to supply evidence? Are there int'l. laws relevant to this?

reply by
Rick
10/23/2001 (24:08)

reply top

A little clarity is required here. Pakistan is the the 'Taliban'. History and intel reveals this blatantly. Secondly, liberalism is virtually non-existant in the mid-east and surrounding areas. People in these areas recognize the following; Victim or Aggressor. Choose one! There is also the failure for recognizing human nature as well. Survival of the strong. Never say that you are beyond this instinct, 'too educated to resort to this animalistic behavior'. Really!! I know exactly what the reaction would of been if those 3 aircraft had crashed in the San Francisco/Berkeley/L.A area. Liberalism would of ceased to exist at that point. You can only be kicked in the head so many times before you decide it's time to take an overwhelming stance for self preservation. It is a terrible thing that those refugees are sufferring in Afghan and I pray for their relief. I see alot of suggestions on how to meet the needs of those sufferring but realistic recommendations on how to do it and still defeat terrorism and the Taliban/Al-Qaida at the same time are yet to be provided. The military has a saying when faced with similar situations where there may in fact be sufferring regardless of the decision made, 'The greatest good for the greatest number'. I know this and believe it wholeheartedly. Hard decisions and committment need to be made ASAP, and if the right ones are not made, more than 7.5 million Afghans will pay! What is the entire population of the U.S right now? Our population can be decimated within 14 days with the proper dispersal of weapons of mass destruction. It is time to think long and hard about how many in this country are expendable before we make the decision to survive or die. How close we are!!!!!!!

reply by
Barb
10/24/2001 (14:12)

reply top

what do you mean 'our population can be decimated within 14 days?'

I agree wholeheartedly that if the planes had crashed into the University of Berkley those leftists would be certainly singing another tune! They are living in a fantasy world over there! Hate to say it, but maybe that would have been good if the planes had crashed there instead of the WTC. Not that I advocate violence at all!! But if the only choice was the WTC or Berkley, I know which I'd choose.

reply by
Joe Bob
11/6/2001 (2:10)

reply top

If KKK attacked Iran, I doubt the US gov would hand any KKK members to Iran. What a joke. If anything at all, they would prosecute them in the US and Iran would undoubtedly provide evidence of their crimes to support the case. Well guess what? Taliban offered to place Bin Laden under a trial (for the embassy attacks of 98)! Even under these circumstances (despite being asked to do so) the US still offered no evidence. And they are doing the same thing now.

Why should we believe the 'proof' that Bin Laden is involved that 'justifies' these attacks on Afghan PEOPLE? I doubt Bin Laden is involved. They have no evidence and it doesn't matter how many leaders of other countries (muslim or not) claim Bin Laden was involved. Any evidence they do have is purely circumstantial: ' 'suspected' hijacker was in the same country as bin Laden's best friends mother-in-law...', etc.

We need to think rationally here. If America wants to be just, it should pursue a criminal case, not start carpet-bombing an already devastated people. Otherwise, it is proving that it has alterior motives in this 'war'.

reply by
Barb
11/6/2001 (20:50)

reply top

To clarify, I think most rational people realize the U.S. is not 'carpet bombing' civilians. We are 'carpet bombing' the Taliban's military infrastructure to destroy it.

Do we have proof of the Taliban's guilt in the terrorist attacks on the U.S.? I'm not sure. Maybe, maybe not. O.K. that being said, at worst, the U.S. is said by its detractors to have the 'gall' (opportunity) to 'unilaterally' (with supporters) take out an extremely abusive, oppressive, and torturous regime that has had its grip on the Afghan people since the Soviets left. It seems we're just now 'cleaning up' the mess that's been made there to make room for a peaceful and lasting civil government, something that's been torturously lacking.