[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by supermachone that is my answer, what good is our military action doing for the security of our nation at the moment? we got the bad guys we were suppose to get, now how about we come home and defend our country instead of preemptively attacking "terrorists"

you realize besides the Active duty, Reserves, Special Ops, and Special Forces that pull quite a few Ops sometimes longterm 4-6 months for air force,navy, and marines and 12-15 months for Army that even with all of that going on only a portion of the Military personell is deployed at a time and besides that What do you think the National Guard is for?

But again What is the bad in Your opinion that trumps the good on the foreign policy that You were talking about?

[supermachone]

the military doesnt involve just deployed troops

and it seems like our government is focused more on the middle east than our borders at home

do you honestly think we need to be over there to protect our nation?

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by supermachone the military doesnt involve just deployed troops and it seems like our government is focused more on the middle east than our borders at home do you honestly think we need to be over there to protect our nation?

I got your answer(in a way I guess) Super.

I decided to warm up some fish from last night instead of going and spending on more food. Im sure you will come back with a responseby the time i get done eating.

[supermachone]

well if you get my answer why not answer my questions?

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by supermachone well if you get my answer why not answer my questions?

I guess you didnt get what I was saying. You never answered me!!! What is the bad that trumps the good IN YOUR OPINION?

[supermachone]

Originally Posted by Rockwell29 I guess you didnt get what I was saying. You never answered me!!! What is the bad that trumps the good IN YOUR OPINION?

i did answer your question

just because I didnt copy/paste specific reasons doesnt mean i didnt answer your question

if we were truely uninvolved in the middle east it wouldnt be all over the news everyday

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by supermachone i did answer your question just because I didnt copy/paste specific reasons doesnt mean i didnt answer your question if we were truely uninvolved in the middle east it wouldnt be all over the news everyday

later guy!

[101fng]

I guess I wasn't clear in my earlier post.

Al-Qaida = TERRORISTS
Taliban = afghan militia

I'm trying to think of one time where the Taliban used terror to coerce a nation or influence national policy and I just can't for the life of me think of a single occurrence.

[nileppezdel77!]

Originally Posted by 101fng I guess I wasn't clear in my earlier post. Al-Qaida = TERRORISTS Taliban = afghan militia I'm trying to think of one time where the Taliban used terror to coerce a nation or influence national policy and I just can't for the life of me think of a single occurrence.

Besides Afghanistan itself, you mean?

"Increasingly, the Taliban has been targeting certain groups of civilians, including humanitarian aid workers, journalists, doctors, religious leaders, and civilian government employees, condemning them as spies or collaborators. In 2006, at least 177 civilians were killed in assassinations, and similar ambushes and attacks have continued in 2007."
(Afghanistan: Civilians Bear Cost of Escalating Insurgent Attacks | Human Rights Watch)

"Attacks have also left lasting physical and psychological scars on victims and eyewitnesses, and caused tremendous pain and suffering to surviving family members."
" In addition to bombings and other attacks that resulted in damaged shops, buildings, and infrastructure, insurgents specifically targeted local schools, which are often the only symbol of government in remote areas."
(The Human Cost | Human Rights Watch)

[1FastFox]

Originally Posted by 101fng I guess I wasn't clear in my earlier post. Al-Qaida = TERRORISTS Taliban = afghan militia I'm trying to think of one time where the Taliban used terror to coerce a nation or influence national policy and I just can't for the life of me think of a single occurrence.

Seriously? There are hundreds of examples...


77 U.S. troops injured in Taliban truck bombing
77 U.S. troops injured in Afghanistan truck bombing - Los Angeles Times

Taliban Bombing Kills 80 in 'First Revenge for Osama's Martyrdom'
Taliban Bombing Kills 80 in 'First Revenge for Osama's Martyrdom' - Global - The Atlantic Wire

Suicide bomber hits NATO bus in Kabul; 12 Americans, 4 Afghans killed
Suicide bomber hits NATO bus in Kabul; 12 13 Americans, 4 Afghans killed - The Washington Post

Afghanistan Truck Bombing: Taliban Target American Base
Afghanistan Truck Bombing: Taliban Target American Base

Eight private contractors were killed in a Taliban attack in Kabul Saturday, serving as a sharp reminder of the US military's heavy – and controversial – reliance on contractors.
Deadly Taliban Kabul attack highlights US reliance on private contractors - CSMonitor.com

Im really at a loss as to how you can think they use anything other than terror to attempt to coerce a nation or influence national policy.

[101fng]

War. Terror. Two different things. If attacking US bases is terrorism, than what would you consider artillery bombardments on suspected Taliban fighting positions? Warfare, right? Then what's the difference when they do it to us? They're fighting an armed enemy (us) and we're fighting an armed enemy (them). It's war. It's terrifying no matter what side you're on.

The suicide bombing thing is questionable. The Haqqani network is credited with bringing suicide attacks to Afghanistan. Those guys are often confused with the Taliban, and rightly so since they're fighting in the same country. Also, the Taliban have pretty much formally cut off ties with the Haqqani network due to their unconventional and barbaric tactics. They pretty much have two separate areas in Afghanistan. The Taliban predominately in the south and the HQN in the east for the most part. HQN is HQ'd in Peshawar Pakistan and the Taliban HQ'd in Quetta. According to the article in the OP, we're in talks with the Taliban. I didn't see anything about HQN.

[T-Lee. 30]

Seems like 101 is laying out some 1st hand info that may or may not be avialable in whats read within the states or layed out in the media. I dont know what his(101s) mos is but there are quite a few jobs that have alot more intel on whats actually going on 1st hand over there in those lands vs what gets put on paper here or what the media puts out. I know before we use to roll out one of the S2 reps would breif us on the current situation outside of the wire and they clearly knew some info that we(my mos) would never get our hands on bc its their job not ours.

[1FastFox]

Fighting an army? Google "Taliban bombing" and see how many articles on the first page alone involve fighting an army. By no means am I saying the US is flawless but according to the Geneva Convention and its articles these are not acts of warefare but acts of terrorism as defined by it.

Originally Posted by Rockwell29 Seems like 101 is laying out some 1st hand info that may or may not be avialable in whats read within the states or layed out in the media. I dont know what his(101s) mos is but there are quite a few jobs that have alot more intel on whats actually going on 1st hand over there in those lands vs what gets put on paper here or what the media puts out. I know before we use to roll out one of the S2 reps would breif us on the current situation outside of the wire and they clearly knew some info that we(my mos) would never get our hands on bc its their job not ours.

Yeah, yeah... We get it. You're going to "+1" a bunch of posts, regurgitate internet propaganda, tell us how we dont need to know what soldiers know, post an extremist view from youtube to paint everyone with, and say "ok dude", "later bro", or something along those lines. Just wanted to sum up your next 10 posts to save you some time on this one...

[101fng]

Just wiki asymmetric warfare... I could try to explain it until I'm blue in the face, but until you get past this notion that all our enemies are terrorists, you just won't smell what I'm steppin in. Even after reading, you still may not understand. Many people still consider Che Guevara to be a terrorist (politics aside). It's just the nature of guerrilla warfare I guess. But believe me, terrorists don't know anything about squad or platoon based battle maneuvers. The Taliban on the other hand can outflank the fuck out of you if you're not paying attention. They are the masters of the "L" shape ambush.

[101fng]

"The Haqqani network pioneered the use of suicide attacks in Afghanistan and tend to use mostly foreign bombers whereas the Taliban tend to rely on locals in attacks.[7]"

Straight outta wiki

It's also worth mentioning the reasons for HQN's use of foreigners for suicide attacks. It's simple, HQN doesn't care about collateral and they're just looking for as many dead soldiers as possible. Women and children in the way? No problem. As long as it gets the job done. They're also known to behead locals suspected of providing information to the US. I've seen the videos, it does happen. It's as simple as Haji Haqqani saying "I heard you gave the Americans some info. You will now die."

The Taliban rely on locals for the simple fact that locals actually care about their neighbors and will not risk an attack if it puts other locals in danger. This isnt just for suicide attacks either. Low and mid-level commanders are usually local to their area of assignment. This is because they're just as concerned about hearts and minds as we are. Unlike HQN, the Taliban will only kill suspected spies after a pseudo-trial in which the "prosecutor" lays out the evidence and the suspected spy attempts a defense.

The Taliban have a national identity. That, to me, is why they are not terrorists but rather a misinformed and misguided militia. The low level fighters are not the Islamic extremists you'd expect, they're actually very patriotic (comparable to most Americans). I've never talked to an HQN fighter, but just judging from their varied membership, I'd say most arent even afghan and could care less about the country's fate.

[1FastFox]

I understand asymmetric warfare, its much along the lines of the nerd who gets bullied in high school and forced to use unconventional means due to the obvious lack of ability to go head to head with the individual challenging him ( or her ).

But the point I was making in my previous two posts were that they arent optimizing on weak spots to overtake an opponent (in this case being us), they are using terror ( hence the title terrorist ) to mindfuck us. They are blowing up and killing those not involved in an effort to show their power and intimidate us from action.

Going back to the nerd and bully analogy, if Im understanding what you are saying correctly you are saying its ok for the nerd to bring in a gun as reasonable means to scare (or terror) his attacker. Its a blatant use to intimidate his attacker and way beyond the means most would consider acceptable. Rather than facing his attacker knowing he will lose, he has to use terror on his side to get his point across.

Tossing in an edit to address your second post since I was typing when it was posted. We agree that HQN are in fact terrorists, correct?

[nileppezdel77!]

Originally Posted by 101fng Just wiki asymmetric warfare... I could try to explain it until I'm blue in the face, but until you get past this notion that all our enemies are terrorists, you just won't smell what I'm steppin in. Even after reading, you still may not understand. Many people still consider Che Guevara to be a terrorist (politics aside). It's just the nature of guerrilla warfare I guess. But believe me, terrorists don't know anything about squad or platoon based battle maneuvers. The Taliban on the other hand can outflank the fuck out of you if you're not paying attention. They are the masters of the "L" shape ambush.

I'm perfectly inclined to identify with the notion that not all enemies are "terrorists" but I'm really losing you on why tactics and terrorism are mutually exclusive concepts in war. Why can't a terrorist cell also be an army? Also, Guevara was a master of guerrilla warfare (and by extension, the tactics involved - he literally wrote the book), but I think I'm just flatly not understanding the point you're making.

[T-Lee. 30]

Originally Posted by 1FastFox Yeah, yeah... We get it. You're going to "+1" a bunch of posts, regurgitate internet propaganda, tell us how we dont need to know what soldiers know, post an extremist view from youtube to paint everyone with, and say "ok dude", "later bro", or something along those lines. Just wanted to sum up your next 10 posts to save you some time on this one...

lmao "ok GUY"

I was done responding to you many post ago on this thread so LATER bro!

[101fng]

Originally Posted by nileppezdel77! I'm perfectly inclined to identify with the notion that not all enemies are "terrorists" but I'm really losing you on why tactics and terrorism are mutually exclusive concepts in war. Why can't a terrorist cell also be an army? Also, Guevara was a master of guerrilla warfare (and by extension, the tactics involved - he literally wrote the book), but I think I'm just flatly not understanding the point you're making.

Yes, HQN are terrorists and to answer the above quote, they are also capable of being an organized militia.

I explained that the Taliban have a national identity earlier. This nationalism limits their attacks to political and military targets, otherwise they risk losing their support base. HQN gets their support from outside Afghanistan so they're not limited to specific targets like the Taliban. Find an article where the Taliban killed X amount of civilians and no NATO/ISAF soldiers, and I'll just tell you that the article is confusing two distinct insurgent groups. The Taliban are also really good about claiming their attacks. Google voice of jihad.

[101fng]

Here's a perfect example of the misinformation being regurgitated by the media. Most Americans don't know enough to even see this discrepancy, so it's a constant circle of misinformation and the reason I've made so many damn posts in this thread.

From wiki

"Estimates of the Haqqanis's numbers vary. A 2009 New York Times article indicates that they are thought to have about 4,000 to 12,000 Taliban under their command"

In case anyone missed it, they referred to members of HQN as "Taliban". Fact is, their (Taliban and HQN's) philosophies, politics, and methods are worlds different.