USA why?



Because bin Laden wasn't acting on behalf of the Saudi government, while Mr. Rogers was.
 
jonas33h said:
oh he was ordered to do that?
Click to expand...
Are you retarded? He's a US soldier, he follows orders, he serves his government, he fights on their behalf. If he fucks up the government can't say 'oops sorry' - they are held accountable. Alqaida/taliban/bin laden were also held accountable for their actions, which is why we're there killing them.
 
WTF at this 50k out of billions wasted stoking outrage. if you ask your military to be police men instead of warriors, this is what happens. 50k for a family who had their loved on killed, dunked in acid, raped, etc is not even a drop in the bucket, its a drop in an ocean of waste.
 
but we received no form of payment for the deathes they caused. The Taliban is a political group what's the difference? are you retarded? He wasn't ordered to do that. He did it on his own accord. The Taliban has not sent us money. So again if we are punishing the guy why send money too? they wouldn't. And it's war anyway if you can't handle the consequences of it don't be so quick to send troops over seas.

We need to end these wars not send money to these people.
 
jonas33h said:
but we received no form of payment for the deathes they caused. The Taliban is a political group what's the difference? are you retarded? He wasn't ordered to do that. He did it on his own accord. The Taliban has not sent us money. So again if we are punishing the guy why send money too? they wouldn't. And it's war anyway if you can't handle the consequences of it don't be so quick to send troops over seas.

We need to end these wars not send money to these people.
Click to expand...

Unlike the country of Afghanistan, we have no diplomatic relations with the Taliban.

We don't take money from the Taliban, we take their lives.

Fuckin fundamentals of international politics here.

I swear this country is going to hell in a handbasket if you are allowed to vote.
 
Ar Scion said:
Unlike the country of Afghanistan, we have no diplomatic relations with the Taliban.

We don't take money from the Taliban, we take their lives.

Fuckin fundamentals of international politics here.

I swear this country is going to hell in a handbasket if you are allowed to vote.
Click to expand...

Really is that why the obama administration is negotiating with them because we "just kill them" ? ? ?
 
King. said:
Are you retarded? He's a US soldier, he follows orders, he serves his government, he fights on their behalf. If he fucks up the government can't say 'oops sorry' - they are held accountable. Alqaida/taliban/bin laden were also held accountable for their actions, which is why we're there killing them.
Click to expand...


Why not, iran, afghanistan, and pakistan harbor terrorist and make no effort in stopping them so indirectly and even directly through financial donation support these terrorist. stop being a faggot liberal sympathizer and pull your head out of your ass. They don't give a fuck when a terrorist kills an american, why should we compensate more than the law requires when a marine goes nuts?
 
jonas33h said:
Why not, iran, afghanistan, and pakistan harbor terrorist and make no effort in stopping them so indirectly and even directly through financial donation support these terrorist. stop being a faggot liberal sympathizer and pull your head out of your ass. They don't give a fuck when a terrorist kills an american, why should we compensate more than the law requires when a marine goes nuts?
Click to expand...

So they calm the fuck down, and allow the US to continue occupying their country without too much of a fuss. Let's them think they got fair compensation, so they will quit rioting, while the US continues on its mission. It's not meant as an apology or compensation fee. It's a "shut up, and settle down" fee. Otherwise, the US would be stuck paying $5+ mil over the next 12 months in security due to rioting idiots, and more than likely, a few US lives would be lost as well.

Sheesh...
 
jonas33h said:
Really is that why the obama administration is negotiating with them because we "just kill them" ? ? ?
Click to expand...

Negotiating with whom?

There is always a risk of terrorists gaining political power in a democracy and thereby forcing themselves into diplomatic relations with the US. This happened in Palestine with Hamas, and is likely to happen in Egypt if it hasn't already.

This isn't Obama's fault, it's the nature of democracies where the barrier to entry is very low for political parties and these terrorist groups manage their image better.

Hamas, for instance, despite being a terrorist group, is believed to do more humanitarian work for the Palestinians than Fatah, which is far more moderate, favorable to west, but has a reputation for being rife with corruption, bureaucracy, political infighting and the like.

It's pathetic that extremist groups gain more votes than moderates. But such is the nature of a democracy, when extremists have better PR than moderates.
 
First of all, the taliban is not al qaeda. The taliban had nothing to do with 9/11.
 
In 2000, British Intelligence reported that the ISI was taking an active role in several Al Qaeda training camps.[83] The ISI helped with the construction of training camps for both the Taliban and Al Qaeda.[83][84][85] From 1996 to 2001 the Al Qaeda of Osama Bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri became a state within the Taliban state.[86] Bin Laden sent Arab and Central Asian Al-Qaeda militants to join the fight against the United Front among them his Brigade 055.[86][87]
After the 9/11 attacks, Pakistan claimed to have ended its support to the Taliban.[88][89] But with the fall of Kabul to anti-Taliban forces in November 2001, ISI forces worked with and helped Taliban militias who were in full retreat.[90] In November 2001, Taliban, Al-Qaeda combatants and ISI operatives were safely evacuated from Kunduz on Pakistan Army cargo aircraft to Pakistan Air Force bases in Chitral and Gilgit in Pakistan's Northern Areas in what has been dubbed the "Airlift of Evil"[91] Former Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf wrote in his memoirs that Richard Armitage, the former US deputy secretary of state, said Pakistan would be "bombed back to the stone-age" if it continued to support the Taliban,[92][93][94][95] although Armitage has since denied using the "stone age" phrase.[96]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#cite_note-Riedel-95

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#cite_note-Riedel-95
My understanding is they are kind of inter-related but either way the taliban has killed americans so apart from 9/11 or not it was a political fact of a country that killed americans and money was not paid to us.




but again all of this is just another reason to end the war and gtfo and mind our own business.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#cite_note-Riedel-95

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#cite_note-Riedel-95
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom