FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


"Operation in Afghanistan is rooted in Israel"





Nick2008
Quote:

The real reason why the U.S. continues its presence in Afghanistan is Iran the country which is an annoyance for Israel, said Karen Kwiatkowski, a writer and former U.S. Air Force officer.

She says the real reason America continues its presence in Afghanistan is to keep the pressure up on Iran.


Source: http://russiatoday.ru/Politics/2009-07-24/operation-in-afganistan-is-rooted-in-israel.html (watch the interview also)

So what do you think winning in Afghanistan looks like? Do you think Iran will be a serious threat to Israel in the future?
deanhills
Nick2008 wrote:
Quote:

The real reason why the U.S. continues its presence in Afghanistan is Iran the country which is an annoyance for Israel, said Karen Kwiatkowski, a writer and former U.S. Air Force officer.

She says the real reason America continues its presence in Afghanistan is to keep the pressure up on Iran.


Source: http://russiatoday.ru/Politics/2009-07-24/operation-in-afganistan-is-rooted-in-israel.html (watch the interview also)

So what do you think winning in Afghanistan looks like? Do you think Iran will be a serious threat to Israel in the future?
The article reads a little bit like a far-fetch as well as the Web page does not appear that stable. Where does this on-line magazine come from? Very Happy The .ru at the end has me very suspicious. Cool If this is a serious question, I'm sure the US is watching Iran closely, but there are many other reasons why it is in Afghanistan, the Taliban and El Qaeda featuring high on the list, stability in Pakistan being a very important reason. A direct answer to your question would be, yes, there is an element of truth, but enough to be misleading. And where does this article really come from? Razz
Nick2008
The woman interviewed worked in the US defence departments and military before (watch the interview). I think this is an interesting point of view she provided.

But how can we win this war? I can't really define it, but to go a bit far, I would say if we destroyed all the terrorists, but I don't think that's possible because there's so many. Embarassed

The article comes from a English Russian TV station called RT (Russia Today). Anything's better than CNN or FOX News (the last sources I would trust), LoL. The TV's website is unstable a lot of times, I heard it was constantly attacked by hackers.
deanhills
Nick2008 wrote:
I would say if we destroyed all the terrorists, but I don't think that's possible because there's so many.
Right, and they are not fighting a war, they are fighting for a cause for which each and everyone of them is willing to sacrifice their lives for. If one dies, it is more than a motivation for the others to strengthen the fight.

Iran is not to be underestimated though as an enemy. I'm sure it is featuring quite prominently in the provision of arms to the Palestinians, as well as the Syrians. I'm really glad the US has a strong position in Afghanistan, and relieved that Obama is continuing this position during his Presidency. I just wish that other countries of the world can act similarly. Stability in the Middle East is crucial for World peace.
Nick2008
deanhills wrote:
Right, and they are not fighting a war, they are fighting for a cause for which each and everyone of them is willing to sacrifice their lives for. If one dies, it is more than a motivation for the others to strengthen the fight.


Right, terrorism is a strong belief, there a many people joining them, so it can never be stopped. Sort of like Piracy, we thought it was an old piece of history, but the beliefs are still held by some, and Piracy has gained more attention in the past few years.
deanhills
Nick2008 wrote:
deanhills wrote:
Right, and they are not fighting a war, they are fighting for a cause for which each and everyone of them is willing to sacrifice their lives for. If one dies, it is more than a motivation for the others to strengthen the fight.


Right, terrorism is a strong belief, there a many people joining them, so it can never be stopped. Sort of like Piracy, we thought it was an old piece of history, but the beliefs are still held by some, and Piracy has gained more attention in the past few years.
Piracy is a good example, as I can imagine for terrorists this must have become a way of life, as well as a way of survival.
ThePolemistis
deanhills wrote:
Nick2008 wrote:
deanhills wrote:
Right, and they are not fighting a war, they are fighting for a cause for which each and everyone of them is willing to sacrifice their lives for. If one dies, it is more than a motivation for the others to strengthen the fight.


Right, terrorism is a strong belief, there a many people joining them, so it can never be stopped. Sort of like Piracy, we thought it was an old piece of history, but the beliefs are still held by some, and Piracy has gained more attention in the past few years.
Piracy is a good example, as I can imagine for terrorists this must have become a way of life, as well as a way of survival.


Both sides are fighting for a cause. American soldiers are fighting for democracy (so they say), but all signs point to that fact they are fighting to support American enterprises, and to maintain their world order.
The Afghanistanis are resisting occupation. Those that specifically target innocent civilians in the process must be deemed as evil terrorists; but those who fight for resisting occupation: there is no harm in that.
deanhills
ThePolemistis wrote:
deanhills wrote:
Nick2008 wrote:
deanhills wrote:
Right, and they are not fighting a war, they are fighting for a cause for which each and everyone of them is willing to sacrifice their lives for. If one dies, it is more than a motivation for the others to strengthen the fight.


Right, terrorism is a strong belief, there a many people joining them, so it can never be stopped. Sort of like Piracy, we thought it was an old piece of history, but the beliefs are still held by some, and Piracy has gained more attention in the past few years.
Piracy is a good example, as I can imagine for terrorists this must have become a way of life, as well as a way of survival.


Both sides are fighting for a cause. American soldiers are fighting for democracy (so they say), but all signs point to that fact they are fighting to support American enterprises, and to maintain their world order.
The Afghanistanis are resisting occupation. Those that specifically target innocent civilians in the process must be deemed as evil terrorists; but those who fight for resisting occupation: there is no harm in that.
I thought US soldiers were in Afghanistan to make sure that terrorists stay out of the United States? Also you failed to mention the other occupants in Afghanistan, i.e. the terrorists that are not of Afghanistani origins? Who are forcefully recruiting children for their cause. Also large number of volunteers from all over the world, trying to help the Afghanistanis. Afghanistanis are trying to survive. Those who do not have any employment, and need to work, may find themselves fighting in an army, either for or against the terrorists, or in the Government or trying to farm drugs, or may work as taxi drivers in more well to do countries of the Middle East, so that their families can survive.
ThePolemistis
deanhills wrote:
I thought US soldiers were in Afghanistan to make sure that terrorists stay out of the United States?


I seriously doubt a wave of terrorists would come to the US from remote regions of the world where cars are not common, purely to kill innocent civilians.

Also the US attacking Afghanistan on this basis, rather than enforcing stricter immigration policies, would only give way to 100 or more Bin ladens.

I give way that 911 may have been an exception (although I seriously doubt that much of it was orchestrated from Afghanistan). But in general, the terrorists would usually fight for their cause in nearby lands, and not lands thousands of miles away.

deanhills wrote:

Also you failed to mention the other occupants in Afghanistan, i.e. the terrorists that are not of Afghanistani origins? Who are forcefully recruiting children for their cause.


Who specifically? But yes, the US has its coalition made up of multi-nationalities "fighting for democracy". Let the afghans make up their coalition of multi-nationalities "fighting for freedom". No harm in that is it?

deanhills wrote:

Also large number of volunteers from all over the world, trying to help the Afghanistanis.


When you say "help the Afghanistanis", are you referring to the US led coalition (volunteers around the world) here?

deanhills wrote:


Afghanistanis are trying to survive. Those who do not have any employment, and need to work, may find themselves fighting in an army, either for or against the terrorists, or in the Government or trying to farm drugs, or may work as taxi drivers in more well to do countries of the Middle East, so that their families can survive.


Sure are. They are like any other human population. No greater or lesser of a people.
deanhills
ThePolemistis wrote:
deanhills wrote:
I thought US soldiers were in Afghanistan to make sure that terrorists stay out of the United States?


I seriously doubt a wave of terrorists would come to the US from remote regions of the world where cars are not common, purely to kill innocent civilians.

Also the US attacking Afghanistan on this basis, rather than enforcing stricter immigration policies, would only give way to 100 or more Bin ladens.

I give way that 911 may have been an exception (although I seriously doubt that much of it was orchestrated from Afghanistan). But in general, the terrorists would usually fight for their cause in nearby lands, and not lands thousands of miles away.
I can't agree with you on this one. I'm not a specialist on the goings on, but the fact that Obama got more troops voted for Afghanistan, whereas previously he was going to get that stopped, says that this has to be in the national interest of the United States.

ThePolemistis wrote:
deanhills wrote:

Also large number of volunteers from all over the world, trying to help the Afghanistanis.


When you say "help the Afghanistanis", are you referring to the US led coalition (volunteers around the world) here?
No. I meant volunteers who are there in a non-governmental voluntary capacity, such as medical doctors and nurses who genuinely want to help the Afghanistanis.
ThePolemistis
deanhills wrote:
ThePolemistis wrote:
deanhills wrote:
I thought US soldiers were in Afghanistan to make sure that terrorists stay out of the United States?


I seriously doubt a wave of terrorists would come to the US from remote regions of the world where cars are not common, purely to kill innocent civilians.

Also the US attacking Afghanistan on this basis, rather than enforcing stricter immigration policies, would only give way to 100 or more Bin ladens.

I give way that 911 may have been an exception (although I seriously doubt that much of it was orchestrated from Afghanistan). But in general, the terrorists would usually fight for their cause in nearby lands, and not lands thousands of miles away.
I can't agree with you on this one. I'm not a specialist on the goings on, but the fact that Obama got more troops voted for Afghanistan, whereas previously he was going to get that stopped, says that this has to be in the national interest of the United States.


A national interest in terms of what? To create a world police state? or to as you would say "protect the terrorists entering the US"?
It all depends on your viewpoint - but I think all the evidence suggests it is more about protecting american capitalism around the world than "fighting under the holy name of liberty and democracy".

deanhills wrote:

ThePolemistis wrote:
deanhills wrote:

Also large number of volunteers from all over the world, trying to help the Afghanistanis.


When you say "help the Afghanistanis", are you referring to the US led coalition (volunteers around the world) here?
No. I meant volunteers who are there in a non-governmental voluntary capacity, such as medical doctors and nurses who genuinely want to help the Afghanistanis.

[/quote]

And let them help. The Afghanistani's have been living generation after generation under oppression and war. Why can't they live in peace? Away from occupation and away from oppression?
ocalhoun
ThePolemistis wrote:


And let them help. The Afghanistani's have been living generation after generation under oppression and war. Why can't they live in peace? Away from occupation and away from oppression?

And do you really think that the USA leaving now would bring peace and freedom from oppression to the country?
deanhills
ocalhoun wrote:
ThePolemistis wrote:


And let them help. The Afghanistani's have been living generation after generation under oppression and war. Why can't they live in peace? Away from occupation and away from oppression?

And do you really think that the USA leaving now would bring peace and freedom from oppression to the country?
Excellent question Ocalhoun, my question too.

I don't share ThePolemist's views on the US wishing to create a World Police State either. The closest possibly along those lines would be the US wishing to ensure that there is a balance of power in that area, as if the balance gets out of kilter, this could have grave consequences for world peace. Especially given that some of the countries in close proxemity to Afghanistan for example have nuclear capability.
Related topics
Pre-Mondial :: 2-2 Israel vs. Ireland...
Abbas in Gaza to reinforce shaky truce
OPERATION TIMED OUT
gazza withdraw
The Iran Issue!
Most peaceful religion
The Middle East Conflict
Tony Blair
Are Americans stupid?
Outrageous: Denmark re-publish Mohammud cartoons
Israel started this war, broke ceasefire first
Now we know: Israel military killed mostly civilians in Gaza
Anonymous declares 'cyberwar' on Israel
Nuclear Weapon Free Iran Act of 2013
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Lifestyle and News -> Politics

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.