RE: Oh what the fucking fuck???

Join Our Community

Collarchat.com

Home Login Search

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck???

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Oh what the fucking fuck???

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Login

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 2:34:42 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

I'd have had our troops out by the 2010 elections and along the southern border.

How's that grab ya?

Like the rantings of a bigot.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 2:35:35 PM

Posts: 60698
Joined: 11/3/2004
Status: offline

and someone who hasnt much legal knowledge or constitutional cares.

_____________________________

Have they not divided the prey; to every man a damsel or two? Judges 5:30

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 2:59:54 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Quite the lengths of misrepresentation and bold faces lies ya'll are prepared to go, to steer clear of the President telling the troops they can't do what works anymore, because the people they are fighting don't like it.

He is the commander and chief...if you do not like that replace him.

(in reply to TheHeretic)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 4:22:38 PM

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
The mangling in Afghanistan was not particularly unilateral: you'll find that the Muhajadin were not being funded by the evil imperialist Soviets.

not particularly unilateral!!! The socialist government was a puppet to the USSR, and when the people went into open revolt, the USSR went in and fucked the place over for eight years killing in excess of one million people, and displacing a third of the nation...

So the Americans had no hand in any of the bad shit bin Afghanistan because they didn't want the Russians in the country, then.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 4:28:31 PM

Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
The mangling in Afghanistan was not particularly unilateral: you'll find that the Muhajadin were not being funded by the evil imperialist Soviets.

not particularly unilateral!!! The socialist government was a puppet to the USSR, and when the people went into open revolt, the USSR went in and fucked the place over for eight years killing in excess of one million people, and displacing a third of the nation...

So the Americans had no hand in any of the bad shit bin Afghanistan because they didn't want the Russians in the country, then.

Of course not, those anti-air rockets the locals used on the Russki helicopters were locally made, The Afghans are known for their avionics expertise and weapons development skills...

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 4:34:01 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

Of course not, those anti-air rockets the locals used on the Russki helicopters were locally made, The Afghans are known for their avionics expertise and weapons development skills...

Perhaps they all had h 1 b visas and went to texas to work for raytheon?

(in reply to SoftBonds)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 4:50:53 PM

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
The mangling in Afghanistan was not particularly unilateral: you'll find that the Muhajadin were not being funded by the evil imperialist Soviets.

not particularly unilateral!!! The socialist government was a puppet to the USSR, and when the people went into open revolt, the USSR went in and fucked the place over for eight years killing in excess of one million people, and displacing a third of the nation...

So the Americans had no hand in any of the bad shit bin Afghanistan because they didn't want the Russians in the country, then.

Its well known the Americans helped arm the local warlords after the Soviet invasion. At first the sums were relatively modest before circa 1983 they started arming the Mujahideen in a more dramatic way. This wasn't a clean war - the Russians were treating the Afghani's very brutally so I can't really see a problem with that.

quote:

The Soviet invasion and occupation killed up to 2 million Afghans.[54] Brzezinski defended the arming of the rebels in response, saying that it "was quite important in hastening the end of the conflict," thereby saving the lives of thousands of Afghans, but "not in deciding the conflict, because actually the fact is that even though we helped the mujahideen, they would have continued fighting without our help, because they were also getting a lot of money from the Persian Gulf and the Arab states, and they weren't going to quit. They didn't decide to fight because we urged them to. They're fighters, and they prefer to be independent. They just happen to have a curious complex: they don't like foreigners with guns in their country. And they were going to fight the Soviets. Giving them weapons was a very important forward step in defeating the Soviets, and that's all to the good as far as I'm concerned." When he was asked if he thought it was the right decision in retrospect (given the Taliban's subsequent rise to power), he said: "Which decision? For the Soviets to go in? The decision was the Soviets', and they went in. The Afghans would have resisted anyway, and they were resisting. I just told you: in my view, the Afghans would have prevailed in the end anyway, 'cause they had access to money, they had access to weapons, and they had the will to fight."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mujahideen#US.2C_Pakistani_and_other_financing_and_support

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 5:03:43 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

the Russians were treating the Afghani's very brutally so I can't really see a problem with that.

And now that it is we who are" treating the afghani's very brutally" what problem do you see with that?

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 5:19:08 PM

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

the Russians were treating the Afghani's very brutally so I can't really see a problem with that.

And now that it is we who are" treating the afghani's very brutally" what problem do you see with that?

I wasn't in favour of a ground invasion in Afghanistan, and was against any war with Iraq but the US has in no way treated the Afghani's even remotely as savagely as the USSR did. The USSR systematically put down the civilian populace - almost all the 1 to 2 million people dead were civilians, displacing 1/3 of the populace internally, and pushing around five million out of the nation. By contrast the Taliban are responsible for most civilian deaths in the current conflict:

quote:

There is no single official figure for the overall number of civilians killed by the war since 2001, but estimates for specific years or periods have been published by a number of organizations. According to a report by the United Nations, the Taliban were responsible for 76% of civilian casualties in Afghanistan in 2009.[43] A UN report in June 2011 stated that 2,777 civilians were known to have been killed in 2010, with insurgents being responsible for 75% of the civilian casualties.[386] Another United Nations report issued in July 2011 said "1,462 non-combatants died" in the first six months of 2011, with insurgents being responsible for 80% of the deaths.[387] In 2011 a record 3,021 civilians were killed in the ongoing insurgency, the fifth successive annual rise.[388]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)#Civilian_casualties

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 5:24:50 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

the Russians were treating the Afghani's very brutally so I can't really see a problem with that.

And now that it is we who are" treating the afghani's very brutally" what problem do you see with that?

I wasn't in favour of a ground invasion in Afghanistan, and was against any war with Iraq but the US has in no way treated the Afghani's even remotely as savagely as the USSR did. The USSR systematically put down the civilian populace - almost all the 1 to 2 million people dead were civilians, displacing 1/3 of the populace internally, and pushing around five million out of the nation. By contrast the Taliban are responsible for most civilian deaths in the current conflict:

You would not happen to have any validation of the two million dead afghani's would you?

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 5:29:31 PM

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

the Russians were treating the Afghani's very brutally so I can't really see a problem with that.

And now that it is we who are" treating the afghani's very brutally" what problem do you see with that?

I wasn't in favour of a ground invasion in Afghanistan, and was against any war with Iraq but the US has in no way treated the Afghani's even remotely as savagely as the USSR did. The USSR systematically put down the civilian populace - almost all the 1 to 2 million people dead were civilians, displacing 1/3 of the populace internally, and pushing around five million out of the nation. By contrast the Taliban are responsible for most civilian deaths in the current conflict:

You would not happen to have any validation of the two million dead afghani's would you?

A collation of the stats from various sources http://necrometrics.com/20c1m.htm#Afghanistan

quote:

Artem Borovik, The Hidden War: A Russian Journalist's Account of the Soviet War in Afghanistan (New York: Atlantic Monthly Press, 1990), 13. ... The Afghans suffered about two million dead (mostly civilian) along with economic devastation and five million displaced citizens. The Soviet government spent approximately $8.2 billion per year during the occupation.

< Message edited by Anaxagoras -- 4/11/2012 5:48:05 PM >

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 5:51:16 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

A collation of the stats from various sources http://necrometrics.com/20c1m.htm#Afghanistan

Your link does not validate your position.

Afghanistan (1979-2001): 1,800,000 [make link]

•Soviets vs. Mujahideen vs. Govt. vs. Taliban [estimates listed chronologically] ◦War Annual 6 (1994): 1,000,000
◦Britannica Annual (1994): 1,500,000
◦Wallechinsky (1995): 1,300,000
◦D.Smith (1995): 1,500,000
◦B&J (1997): 1,500,000 (1979-95)
◦Dictionary of 20C World History (1997): 1M
◦CDI: 1,550,000 (1978-97)
◦29 April 1999 AP: 2,000,000
◦Dict.Wars: >2M
◦23 May 1999 Denver Rocky Mtn News: 1,800,000
◦Ploughshares 2000: 1,500,000
◦[MEDIAN of latest five: 1,800,000]

•Partials ◦Soviet Phase and immediate aftermath only ■Isby, War in a Distant Country: Afghanistan (1989): Civilian deaths: ■1986 voluntary aid study: 600,000
■1987 USAID study: 875,000
■1987 Gallup study: 1,200,000

■2 June 2002 LA Times: 670,000 civilians during 10-year Soviet occupation
■Toronto Star (6 May 1991): more than 1,000,000
■SIPRI 1990: 1,000,000 total dead (the 1988 Yearbook estimated 100-150T battle dead)
■Minneapolis Star-Tribune (14 Sept. 1991): 1,500,000
■FAS 2000: 1-2M Afghans (1979-89)
■USA Today (17 Apr. 1992): more than 2 million.
■[MEDIAN: 1.5M]

◦20 Sept 2001 Christian Science Monitor: 400,000 civilian deaths in the 1990s [http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/0920/p1s3-wosc.html]
◦Factional fighting in Kabul, 1992-96 ■30 Dec. 2001 AP: 50,000
■2 June 2002 LA Times: >50,000 acc2 Red Cross

•Atrocities: ◦Zucchino, “The Americans ... They Just Drop Their Bombs and Leave”, 2 June 2002 LA Times: 20,000 civilians k. by Soviet air raids, March 1979 in Herat
◦Sussman, “CIA Almost Sure of Afghan Massacre, Senator Says”, 4 March 1980 AP: 1,300 villagers in Konarha Province k. by Soviets & Afghan govt. "last year"
◦By Soviets in Kunduz (province in northern Afg.) ■“Soviet Military In Unconfirmed Report Linked To Massacre Of 900 Civilians”, 27 March 1985 AP: 900 massacred
■“Hundreds of Civilians Reportedly Killed by Soviets in Afghanistan”, 26 Feb. 1985 AP: 480 civilians massacred at Chahardara (town) ca. Feb. 2/3

◦Taliban POWs k. by Northern Alliance in Mazar-i-Sharif, May 1997 ■28 Nov.1998 NY Times: up to 2,000
■26 Aug. 2002 Newsweek: 1,250

◦By Taliban in Mazar-e Sharif, Nov. 1998 ■13 Nov. 1998 News-India Times: 5,000-8,000 massacred
■28 Nov.1998 Washington Post: 2,000-5,000 ethnic Hazara civilians k.

◦Harff & Gurr: 1,000,000 old regime loyalists, rebel supporters were victims of revolutionary politicide.

•Soviet deaths: ◦FAS 2000: ca. 14,500
◦20 May 88 Chicago Tribune: 12-15,000 killed
◦Isby, War in a Distant Country: 13,310 KIA as of 25 May 1988
◦24 Dec. 1989 Arizona Republic: 13,310
◦War Annual 6 (1994): 13,833
◦Wallechinsky: 14,454, incl. 11,381 in combat

< Message edited by thompsonx -- 4/11/2012 5:52:23 PM >

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 5:53:56 PM

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

A collation of the stats from various sources http://necrometrics.com/20c1m.htm#Afghanistan

Your link does not validate your position.

Afghanistan (1979-2001): 1,800,000 [make link]

Actually it does but I realised it featured too broad a timeline so I provided another source http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4087802

< Message edited by Anaxagoras -- 4/11/2012 6:11:05 PM >

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 6:01:05 PM

Posts: 23322
Joined: 10/1/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

A collation of the stats from various sources http://necrometrics.com/20c1m.htm#Afghanistan

Your link does not validate your position.

Afghanistan (1979-2001): 1,800,000 [make link]

I realised it featured too broad a timeline so I provided another source http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4087802

That would be brzezinsky's opinion.
The population statistics do not show a loss of 2 million people during the 9 years of soviet occupation. Your source list the los angeles times as listing the death toll for the 9 years at 670,000.

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 6:05:46 PM

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

ORIGINAL: Anaxagoras

quote:

ORIGINAL: thompsonx

quote:

A collation of the stats from various sources http://necrometrics.com/20c1m.htm#Afghanistan

Your link does not validate your position.

Afghanistan (1979-2001): 1,800,000 [make link]

I realised it featured too broad a timeline so I provided another source http://www.collarchat.com/fb.asp?m=4087802

That would be brzezinsky's opinion.
The population statistics do not show a loss of 2 million people during the 9 years of soviet occupation. Your source list the los angeles times as listing the death toll for the 9 years at 670,000.

Ah I see you don't want to accept the figures. The figures are vague due to the reality of the conflict but the majority of sources place the numbers at well over one million, e.g. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/7883532.stm

quote:

15 February: The USSR announces the departure of the last Soviet troops. More than one million Afghans and 13 thousand Soviet troops have been killed . Civil war continues as the mujahideen push to overthrow Najibullah, who is eventually toppled in 1992.

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 6:16:30 PM

xssve

Posts: 3589
Joined: 10/10/2009
Status: offline

Anyway, whoever the hall monitor is, I was not insulting the developmentally disabled by comparing them to conservatives, I was insulting conservatives by comparing them to the developmentally disabled - the major difference being, the latter are not responsible for their condition.

I have a developmentally disabled child, and have had to injure myself to that other word, since it's commonly used by conservatives to describe him.

_____________________________

Walking nightmare...

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/11/2012 7:08:18 PM

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

TX, since I know you are rarely if ever satisfied by the replies of those you disagree with, here are a few more sources that state over a million died in Afghanistan:

The Soviets killed 1.3 million people: http://www.kansaspress.ku.edu/grasovpreface.html

quote:

About 14,500 Soviet and an estimated one to two million Afghan lives were lost between 1979 and the Soviet withdrawal in 1989.

http://www.fas.org/irp/world/afghan/intro.htm

quote:

An estimated 1.3 million Afghans lost their lives during the war. This is a greater percentage
than that lost by the Soviets during World War I

http://hist-sdc.com/images/spotlights/sb_saw/SAW_notes.pdf

quote:

In fighting the Soviets the Afghans suffered about two million dead (mostly civilian), an economic devastation, over five million displaced citizens, and such political and social disintegration that the very future survival of Afghanistan as a state is still questionable.

http://www.afghan-web.com/history/articles/ussr.html

quote:

The Soviet military intervention was not only costly to the Soviet Union but, above all, to the Afghan people: over 1.5 million Afghans killed; over three million refugees in Pakistan and two million refugees in Iran; over a million internally displaced; thousands upon thousands maimed, orphaned and widowed, with the country devastated and covered by land and butterfly mines.

http://www.keghart.com/node/292

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to thompsonx)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/12/2012 5:30:45 AM

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

American sources, of course. Not like any of those might have even the teensiest bit of a bias against the former soviet union leading them to spin their information a bit...

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/12/2012 7:48:52 AM

Posts: 3086
Joined: 5/9/2009
From: Eire
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
American sources, of course. Not like any of those might have even the teensiest bit of a bias against the former soviet union leading them to spin their information a bit...

Stop reading Al Guardian dear boy, better pick up the Daily Mail instead: some were Russian, UN (a senior official), an Afghani source, and last time I looked the BBC wasn't American either...

_____________________________

"That woman, as nature has created her, and man at present is educating her, is man's enemy. She can only be his slave or his despot, but never his companion." (Venus in Furs)

(in reply to Moonhead)

RE: Oh what the fucking fuck??? - 4/12/2012 7:50:03 AM

Posts: 16520
Joined: 9/21/2009
Status: offline

I prefer the Indie meself.

_____________________________

I like to think he was eaten by rats, in the dark, during a fog. It's what he would have wanted...
(Simon R Green on the late James Herbert)

(in reply to Anaxagoras)

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Oh what the fucking fuck???

Page: << < prev 6 7 [8] 9 10 next > >>

Jump to:

New Messages	No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages	Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages	Locked w/o New Messages

Post New Thread

Reply to Message

Post New Poll

Submit Vote

Delete My Own Post

Delete My Own Thread

Rate Posts

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.145