I’ve also been suggesting RoS get some new carpet…the odor is rather strong….

Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 29, 2007 @ 6:34 pm

That’s the problem w/ lettin’ ya in, Li’l Footie… ya leave permanent stains wherever ya go!

Personally, I will take the word of the U.S. Military over the word of our sworn terrorist enemies. However, you folks feel free side with our enemies if you feel the need to.

Otherwise, there appears to be no issue here.

Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 29, 2007 @ 1:41 pm

Well, other than the military’s decision to spectacularly announce a death that apparently happened a year or so ago as if it just happened. That, Mr Sasquatch, verges on misinformation–something that should be anathema to a free society. How are we to know whether the military’s statements are timely and, more importantly, factual if the military itself waits to make the announcement?

Comment by O. Bigfoot

Don’t piss him off.

Perhaps he knows where you can score some dirt-cheap rugs.

Your urine-stained shag smells like a kennel.

However, you folks feel free side with our enemies if you feel the need to.

Otherwise, there appears to be no issue here.

Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 29, 2007 @ 1:41 pm

God, yer a stone MORON from Hell. Such a devilishly clever plot by Al Kaidi!!! Announce the death of a top commander a full YR ahead of time, so’s when the Infidel Americans kills him, it’ll make them American Invaders look bad. Damn! Yer too quick fer us, Li’l Footie!

Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — September 29, 2007 @ 3:05 pm

Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 29, 2007 @ 4:18 pm

Yep… that’s why I stand back and let ya have yer way w/ the livestock…

Indeed, once yer done, there’s won’t be any virgin wool in these yar parts!!!

Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 29, 2007 @ 4:18 pm

Pssst… a joke is only “funny”, if there’s an element of “truth” to it. In some way, it must make “sense”, like when I ask you, “Howza Neuticlesâ„¢ doin?”, ’cause, clearly yer a b*ll-less blowhard. ‘Splains why ya got such a squeaky, hig-pitched voice.

“Conversion to Islam”??? WTF??? This is so silly, I’m not sure how to reply. Knock yerself out. It’s gotta be some sorta “personal joke” only you get… no one else does…

Comment by CaptainMantastic — September 29, 2007 @ 11:57 am

Well, if Dubya and his cohorts had bothered to CONTINUE the MISSION in Afghanistan, we wouldn’t have had an invasion of Iraq. So, your first point is a bit absurd. The Taliban (who’d been hosting Osama and his al-Qaeda cabal) had managed to form a government in Kabul, but were still busy (after nearly 5 years) trying to consolidate their control over the whole of the country (they had the *sympathy* of a number of the tribal leaders in most of the country, but not the full support–especially in western and northern areas, as well as poppy-growing areas). Would jihadists have been recruited to fight the NATO forces (and you should remember that there ARE a number of other countries which have troops and military advisors still in Afghanistan)? Possibly, but not necessarily. Afghanistan is NOT a major focal point to Muslims around the world (the only reason for the original Mujahedeen forming in the 1980s was due to the Marxist–and necessarily, anti-Islamic–stance of the government of Najibullah; under the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan, a number of modernizations, especially with regards to women’s rights, were expanded and the conservative tribal leaders outside of Kabul and the major cities opposed these “anti-Islamic” modernizations). If you’ll care to remember, the original funding for the Mujahedeen came as a response to the Soviet Union’s “invasion” of Afghanistan (this was also widely seen by the Muslim world in general as another “imperialist” move intended to weaken Islam; had the US directly invaded Afghanistan, even to fight the Najibullah gov’t, the Muslim world would’ve reacted the same way–and given the way the “Great Satan” was already perceived by the Muslim world, especially in the Middle East and South Asia, our chances of success would’ve been even less than the Soviet Union’s).
As for progressives choosing to support the mission in Afghanistan, well, if the Bushie Cabal in charge isn’t too concerned about it (and we don’t even have 1/5 the number of troops in Afghanistan that we do in Iraq), then the progressive community shouldn’t be expected to show any greater support.

#32. Are the body bags coming from Afganistan somehow more acceptable than the body bags coming from Iraq?

Well, since we don’t see the body bags coming from EITHER place, I don’t suppose they’re very acceptable to the Bushies. (From the way you phrased your question, I’d guess that you don’t think the “body bags coming from Afghanistan” are even equal to those “coming from Iraq.”)

Is our presense in Afganistan somehow less offensive to Islamic jihadists than our presense in Iraq?

Well, given the history of our involvement in Afghanistan, I’d say “yes”. We didn’t overthrow a POPULAR Muslim government in Afghanistan (although, we did support an equally unpopular group in deposing the Taliban; the Taliban’s sole measure of popularity came from their being from the largest ethnic group in Afghanistan–the Northern Alliance, whom we allowed to take credit for deposing the Taliban, were from smaller ethnic groups which didn’t even necessarily like each other). It is worth noting, too, that the Taliban was alleged to have offered up bin Laden and his top al-Qaeda cohorts before the US started its attacks in October 2001 but wanted a guarantee that the Taliban wouldn’t have appeared to have done so, but the US refused to provide that guarantee.

Is 9/11, seen as a criminal Bush administration plot used to justify an illegal invasion of Iraq; somehow sound justification for our actions in Afganistan?

Well, since that theory presupposes that the Bush administration needed a “fall guy”, in this case bin Laden, almost any country would’ve sufficed. Iraq would have been nice, but Saddam wouldn’t cooperate by allowing bin Laden a safe harbor in his country. (For some strange reason, Saddam didn’t approve of radical Islamist terrorist groups; he was a major supporter of terrorist organizations, but there is no hard evidence that he ever supported any Islamist group.) Since bin Laden happened to be in Afghanistan, under the “protection” of that country’s Taliban leaders, that was the country that had to be attacked. (And, please note my previous point about the Taliban’s alleged offer to turn over bin Laden. If that offer was real and the 9/11 Bush-conspiracy plot was real, then it makes sense why the US refused the offer. With bin Laden in custody, the plotters would’ve had to reformulate the rationale for invading Iraq.)

If our withdrawl from Iraq will so surely quell jihadist anger; wouldn’t it seem just as prudent to withdraw from Afganistan?

A doesn’t always lead to B. The national media have swallowed a Big Lie in the equating the Afghanistan resistance fighters with “jihadists”. They’re not. While the Afghanistan resistance are Islamists, they’re NOT jihadists (except by choice of name). They’re NOT simply fighting “infidels” to preserve and defend their FAITH; they’re fighting to CONTROL A COUNTRY. In other words, it’s a civil war–an extension of the same conflict that’s been going on since 1978. This time, we’re largely seeing a reprise of the post-Soviet withdrawal fight which led to the 1995 establishment of the Taliban control of the country. What most neocons tend to forget is that the Taliban were constantly fighting their own groups of insurgents from 1995 until their toppling in 2001; the only difference was that (with the exception of the Buddha statues incident and Clinton’s attempt to eliminate bin Laden at the height of the conservative-led “Monicagate” incident), the Western media didn’t really give a rat’s rear end. Even now, the US media largely doesn’t REPORT what’s going on in Afghanistan; they merely PARROT what the Bushies feed them.

So, if you support the withdrawl from Afganistan (in essence, isolationism in terms of addressing jihadism), please tell your representatives in congress and those running for president. Because, I don’t know of many that support withdrawl from Afganistan.

Comment by CaptainMantastic — September 29, 2007 @ 12:12 pm

Well, there’s a big difference that you’ve obviously forgotten: Our commitment in Afghanistan is only 12-18 thousand troops, with nearly that many OTHER allied countries’ troops helping out. Our “Coalition of the Willing” in Iraq, however, is almost exclusively made up of American troops. IF we could convince other countries that Iraq had been (or is) harboring bin Laden, we might could make a serious reduction in OUR troops in Iraq. The reality, however, is that the post-9/11 Coalition that attacked Afghanistan has remained largely intact and holding up the efforts of helping to reestablish a strong central government in that country; of course, until the President of Afghanistan is recognized as the Leader of All of Afghanistan and not just the Leader of Kabul and suburbs, the foreign forces will maintain their presence.

Comment by barfly — September 29, 2007 @ 3:39 pm

I hope yer right. I’d sure love to see it, but after the last couple of yers, I’m gittin’ pretty pessimistic.

Comment by The Republic of Stupidity

‘09 will be a circus. I’m betting that even now there are lawyers gearing up to sue these guys back to the Stone Ages. They see the reports of missing funds and abused employees, and they see nothing but dollar signs – and with a democratically-controlled investigation-hungry Congress doing their discovery work for them. Dick Cheney will then become an anchor around their slimy necks.

Comment by barfly — September 29, 2007 @ 2:06 pm

Probably feels pretty good at Blackwater and Halliburton…

Comment by barfly — September 29, 2007 @ 3:05 pm

Yeah… well, considering the IQ of yer average troll (hint: B*g F&&t), you might well get yer chance.

Comment by barfly — September 29, 2007 @ 3:04 pm

Wait a minute… are you saying Martin Mull was in Al Qaida? And Billy the Kid too? Good Lord! Have Al Qaida been planning to take over this country since the 1880’s?

Comment by The Republic of Stupidity

I know; but was hoping to bait him into exposing himself as a troll.

Oh, well…

Otherwise, there appears to be no issue here.

Comment by O. Bigfoot — September 29, 2007 @ 1:41 pm

God, yer a stone MORON from Hell. Such a devilishly clever plot by Al Kaidi!!! Announce the death of a top commander a full YR ahead of time, so’s when the Infidel Americans kills him, it’ll make them American Invaders look bad. Damn! Yer too quick fer us, Li’l Footie!

It looks like a young Martin Mull.

Comment by barfly — September 29, 2007 @ 3:02 pm

This could well be someone just rying to make the site look bad.

i was wonderin’ why that face looked familiar… yer right… he does look like Billy the Kid! Good call!

Comment by jason

Why?

Comment by jason baddo — September 29, 2007 @ 2:28 pm

Probably not a good idea to voice such sentiments like this here…