English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

NATO troops stretched too thin;
Alliance nations not sending troops in adequate numbers;
The Taliban resurgence and making treaties with Pakistan;
War lords regaining power and the 60% growth in the opium poppy cultivation and trade;
Karzai's weakness and corruption and the growing lawlessness even in Kabul

2006-09-12 10:07:44 · 7 answers · asked by murphy 5 in Politics & Government Politics

7 answers

I asked a similar question last week when the Brits were getting hammered. It seemed like no one cared. It's real "cowboys and Indians" over there. Not enough "iron" is getting getting into Afghanistan for our Nato boys...Iraq is getting all the attention. I heard a couple days ago that Bush had ordered a saturation of the Border of Pakistan and Afghanistan...it's incredible that there was not already a saturation in that area...the biggest reason I was against being in Iraq (I'm not any more, because whatever crap Bush got us into and no matter how stupid it was, we have to at least get a draw in Iraq) was that it will take away from killing that "son of a flea bitten sheep" Osama...which, it looks like it has.

2006-09-12 10:17:57 · answer #1 · answered by Ford Prefect 7 · 0 0

it would not count number. no count number if we care, or do not care, this is not likely to regulate a damn difficulty. this is although contained in the magnificent interests of the u . s . govt to be over there, so the bombs will carry dropping even if we want it to or not. it would not "difficulty" me, on the grounds that I understand that warfare is a grimy, ugly and vile market, non-warring parties might want to be killed and maimed, and the media will downplay it on condition that they have got been informed to finish that...it would not count number, because of the reality it is going to all proceed except it would want to be determined that it not serves US hobbies, and then it is going to stop, and under no circumstances a second before. something suggested or finished with the help human beings voters is purely ineffective posturing. i assume some prefer to protest because of the reality it makes them sense more effective, on the grounds that the they are "Doing regardless of", and some prefer to help so that they are in a position to think about more effective about "Being Patriotic", in spite of the undeniable fact that all in basic terms comes right down to ineffective posturing that doesn't something yet make the guy posturing imagine more effective.

2016-11-26 20:13:07 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It should be alarming. What should be more alarming is that human beings can be as crazy and as dedicated to nonsense as the Taliban and alkaida

2006-09-12 10:37:25 · answer #3 · answered by kdub ken 1 · 0 1

No. You can't invade a country thinking you'll change it when you haven't even walked a mile in the shoes of a person there.

2006-09-12 10:09:56 · answer #4 · answered by Egroeg_Rorepme 4 · 1 1

I am not alarmed but I am sure liberals are delighted.

2006-09-12 10:22:06 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I pretty much expected this outcome. Not surprising.

2006-09-12 10:31:58 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I am more alarmed that the news from Iraq is worse.....

2006-09-12 10:17:57 · answer #7 · answered by mymadsky 6 · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers