search results matching tag: afghan

» channel: nordic

go advanced with your query
Search took 0.000 seconds

    Videos (96)     Sift Talk (2)     Blogs (3)     Comments (181)   

Taliban flaunt weapons, dollars after US flees

newtboy says...

Absolutely...The Taliban is the far right wing of Afghan politics. Hyper religious, hyper "conservative". I'm pretty certain that if they were Christians but with no other changes, the Republican party would be funding them. (Oh wait...they just did fund them with these mountains of cash!)

Watch what happens in Afghanistan...you'll see what America could be if Republicans had been successful at their coup in January....including the eventual takeover by Russia.

vil said:

They also seized a gym, a roundabout and some bumper cars.
https://www.insider.com/taliban-soldiers-kabul-amusement-park-bumper-cars-merrygoround-trampoline-2021-8

Difficult to fight crazy religious people with guns and money.

Also the premise that Afghans exist and that Pashtuns (Taliban) are someone else fighting them turns out to have been silly. These are the people of Afghanistan, they will keep riding that roundabout until it breaks and then they will keep selling drugs to buy more guns.

Biden should have asked them to buy tickets for the roundabout, I guess?

Taliban flaunt weapons, dollars after US flees

vil says...

They also seized a gym, a roundabout and some bumper cars.
https://www.insider.com/taliban-soldiers-kabul-amusement-park-bumper-cars-merrygoround-trampoline-2021-8

Difficult to fight crazy religious people with guns and money.

Also the premise that Afghans exist and that Pashtuns (Taliban) are someone else fighting them turns out to have been silly. These are the people of Afghanistan, they will keep riding that roundabout until it breaks and then they will keep selling drugs to buy more guns.

Biden should have asked them to buy tickets for the roundabout, I guess?

Taliban flaunt weapons, dollars after US flees

newtboy says...

Good thing Biden stopped nearly another $10 Billion from being available to them through banking and the IMF, now they’re just left with the enormous piles of cash and weapons Trump shipped to the region for bribing locals to be on our side and other unethical spending he wanted off the books.

@bobknight33 doesn’t seem to know where this cash and weapons came from….it wasn’t Biden, he’s not been sending more weapons and more pallets of cash during the draw down/retreat. These were in the hands of the Afghanistan government, put there by the previous administration, largely as bribe money.

Reminds me of when Bush sent $12 billion in cash to Iraq with similar intentions and $9 billion of it went missing.

Afghan President Ashraf Ghani had fled the country with four cars and a helicopter full of cash and had to leave huge piles of cash behind on the tarmac as it would not all fit in, the RIA news agency reported.

As US Withdraws from Afghanistan, Refugees Must Be Evacuated

newtboy says...

Nope, sorry. Another total failure of your memory.

This is Trump's retreat, negotiated by Trump with the criminal terrorists who gave up absolutely nothing to get Trump's unconditional surrender and retreat. In the process, Trump delegitimized and abandoned the legitimate Afghan government and indicated they would not be supported by the U.S. military. He also abandoned those Afghanis who risked their lives to help us, making absolutely no plans to identify or allow them to immigrate here, instead actually putting active road blocks in the way, slowing or discarding their applications, and not staffing positions required to process applications. Biden was left to facilitate the disastrous agreement Trump made when he "negotiated" (actually just capitulated) with terrorists but did not prepare for. Biden failed to fix this disastrous withdrawal Trump caused and botched, he didn't cause it.

I understand, with an IQ below 75, it's hard for you to remember who did what. Trump made this happen, bragged about it until a few weeks ago. Trump released 5000+ of the Taliban from prison then unconditionally surrendered to them last spring without consulting the Afghan government. The only concession he got was an agreement from terrorists to not attack the U.S. during the retreat until May but attacking the Afghanis was allowed...Biden got that extended through August.

Got 25th? Could you mean implement the 25th amendment? When did right wing nutjobs lose their ability to speak English?

Won't happen....if Delusional Donny wasn't demented and dementia riddled enough to remove, Biden has nothing to worry about at all. His mental state makes Trump look like a Alzheimer's patient and stroke victim who's addicted to crack. Is that why he's besties with the My Crackpipe Guy now....that's his dealer?
Are you advocating for President Harris? How about President Pelosi? Do you even realize that's what happens if Biden was removed? Talk about cutting off your nose to spite your face! Lol.

TangledThorns said:

Buffoon Biden made this failure happen. How long before the Democrats got 25th on him?

As US Withdraws from Afghanistan, Refugees Must Be Evacuated

newtboy says...

The RNC reportedly just removed the pages on their website where for the last 18 months they had bragged about the historic "peace deal" (read as unconditional surrender to the Taliban and abandonment of the Afghan government) Trump negotiated with the Taliban that included the total withdrawal of American troops by May 1st and the ONLY stipulation was the Taliban not directly and intentionally attack US soldiers during the retreat. Of course, there was no peace deal, only a temporary ceasefire against Americans while we withdrew....but not a ceasefire between the Afghanistan government and the Taliban, and without our support the Afghanis folded like a Trump run business.

I guess the Republicans wanted kudos for "negotiating with" (surrendering to) 12th century religious zealots who had no intention of sharing power or keeping their agreements, while not involving the government of Afghanistan in talks about their nation, making it a certainty the zealots would quickly regain full control of Afghanistan and our 20 years of nation building (and all the American lives lost and billions spent) would be a waste, but now they don't want responsibility for the foreseeable results. Why does that sound familiar? (Covid)

Vox: How the US failed to rebuild Afghanistan

Colbert To Trump: 'Doing Nothing Is Cowardice'

scheherazade says...

There are 100 million people with day to day access to arms in the U.S. (granted, of all ages, not all of fighting age).

There are 1.4 million military members.

Bombs destroy the very assets you wish to control. Nukes would be useless.

Tanks run out of fuel, as do jets, without a civil population to resupply them.





I already mentioned the Arab Spring. Governments with tanks and Jets fell to people with rifles.

Soldiers have families. When their families participate in revolt (and become targets of the government), soldiers change sides. Good example would be the Russian revolution against the Tsar, where the army stood down and abandoned the monarchy.

But yes, the military can do its own thing.
Afghan military in the 70's siding with Russia against its government.
Turkey's military ejecting their government whenever it goes bad (*minus this last attempt)

Or even the people can coup vs the people.
The 2014 Ukrainian coup, ethnic Ukrainians ejecting their government to make a new one that deprives ethnic Russians of representation.

-scheherazade

newtboy said:

Since the mechanization of war, armed citizens stand zero chance against a better trained, armed, and armored military. You can barely buy a rifle that might penetrate a hummer, and they are the least armored vehicles.

You forget, armed coups happen all the time without the support of the populace. See, when the military is overwhelming, no one balks at paying exorbitant taxes, at least not after a few public executions on the spot. Willing public support is definitely not required to retain power. If it were, we wouldn't have a word for tyranny or draconianism.

No single terror attack in US by countries on Trump ban list

newtboy says...

Then, you (We) are suggesting legitimizing their claim to be autonomous states by accepting that classification to be able to declare war against them. Horrible idea, and against international law.

I call bullshit. That's like saying if an American commits a crime outside of America, or inside it against a foreigner, America just declared war on that country. Absolute bullshit. if Pakistan's government didn't direct the attack, they aren't declaring war. You don't hold a nation accountable for the actions of a few criminals within their borders unless they are backed by that nation. Because they can't stop the monster(s) we made (neither can we) absolutely in no way means they yield their sovereignty...that's asinine. EDIT: your theory would mean the Bundies would be their own country now, sovereign and at war with America, because we were unable to stop them from taking over public land (repeatedly), and didn't prosecute any of them.

Bullshit again. Because they aren't a state, they shouldn't be treated as one, no matter what bullshit they claim. Duh. Maybe they claim to be one, but they don't run away from that claim, it just isn't given credence by accepting it. They mostly are illegal aliens in the countries they now live in.

Afghanistan had good reason to refuse Bush....and you might recall were fighting the Taliban and Al-Qaida already for control of their own country.

Afghanistan was not hosting the terrorists, they 'invaded' or morphed out of non government controlled militias (Al-Qaida started as a retirement unit for the 'freedom fighters' we trained to fight Russia) . The Afghan government has excellent reasons to never invite a super power to cross their borders ever again.....and empires have good reason to avoid doing so. Afghanistan did not start or declare war with us, some invaders and criminals squatting in caves there did.

Exactly, the terrorist organizations aren't the fault or beneficiary of the government's in the countries where they hide or invade, they are the fault of those that support them, oddly missing from the travel ban and our assassination plans. See how that might piss off Afghansans and Pakistani?

bcglorf said:

Trying split up addressing your points and enoch's here, forgive me if things bleed over between a bit.

Large terrorist networks like Al Qaida were and still are using your definitions against your country. They operated with impunity and effectively as their own autonomous state within the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The question is whether acts of war launched from that region then are classed as an act of the Afghan or Pakistani state. If they are, then Afghanistan and Pakistan are to be held to account as states launching the act of war. If they are not, then they have for intents and purposes yielded the sovereignty of that territory to a new independent state waging it's own independent war.

The jihadists are trying to hard to live in an international loophole where they are operating with the autonomy of a state right up until another nation state wants to wage war back against them and then suddenly they are just citizens of the larger state they are technically within the borders of.

When the Bush admin pushed back hard, the Afghanistan government refused(more on this in my reply to Enoch) while the Pakistani government extremely begrudgingly agreed to at least pretend they weren't friendly with them in back channels anymore. Thus act of war met with war in Afghanistan, and yes, I would insist a war that Afghanistan initiated and NOT GW.

As for Saudi Arabia, they are more responsible for Jihadi ideology and funding than any other state, and yes the west largely has ignored it so long as they sold their oil and then used the money to buy back top of the line American made military hardware. I have to say I think it's a bit shortsighted to have made Saudi Arabia number 3 on the global military budget charts... You won't find my hypocritically trying to defend them, they are the ones sending most of the money into Pakistan's mountains to build the madrasa's that don't seem to teach anything after how to fire and assemble your AK.

No single terror attack in US by countries on Trump ban list

bcglorf says...

Trying split up addressing your points and enoch's here, forgive me if things bleed over between a bit.

Large terrorist networks like Al Qaida were and still are using your definitions against your country. They operated with impunity and effectively as their own autonomous state within the borders of Afghanistan and Pakistan. The question is whether acts of war launched from that region then are classed as an act of the Afghan or Pakistani state. If they are, then Afghanistan and Pakistan are to be held to account as states launching the act of war. If they are not, then they have for intents and purposes yielded the sovereignty of that territory to a new independent state waging it's own independent war.

The jihadists are trying to hard to live in an international loophole where they are operating with the autonomy of a state right up until another nation state wants to wage war back against them and then suddenly they are just citizens of the larger state they are technically within the borders of.

When the Bush admin pushed back hard, the Afghanistan government refused(more on this in my reply to Enoch) while the Pakistani government extremely begrudgingly agreed to at least pretend they weren't friendly with them in back channels anymore. Thus act of war met with war in Afghanistan, and yes, I would insist a war that Afghanistan initiated and NOT GW.

As for Saudi Arabia, they are more responsible for Jihadi ideology and funding than any other state, and yes the west largely has ignored it so long as they sold their oil and then used the money to buy back top of the line American made military hardware. I have to say I think it's a bit shortsighted to have made Saudi Arabia number 3 on the global military budget charts... You won't find my hypocritically trying to defend them, they are the ones sending most of the money into Pakistan's mountains to build the madrasa's that don't seem to teach anything after how to fire and assemble your AK.

newtboy said:

When asked about the innocent 8 year old girl shot through the neck, you replied 'they advocate killing children, killing them (and their children) lowers the overall body count' but really it increases it, because every child that's collateral damage creates 100+ more violent enemies bent on revenge.

Again, context, bombing a nation we are at war with is 100% a different thing from targeted assassination by multiple drone strike or assassination squad on a group. I see that's how you insist on seeing things, but it's not reality. You can't declare war on a group, it's a total intentional misapplication of the term.

If we only targeted known (not suspected) fighters and killers and didn't bomb weddings to get one guy, ok, but we attack large groups and then attack the first responders coming to their aid, then claim they are all terrorists because one of them might be one....creating more terrorists by murdering innocents and then washing our hands smugly. Can you admit that?


By your standard for designating proper targets, we should have bombed the royal family in Saudi Arabia long long ago, but that's not on the table because.....oil and cash.

Bill Maher: Julian Assange Interview

bareboards2 says...

Golden quote from McFuckface Wikileak rapist who is hiding from the law:

But there is a responsible tradition of redacting potentially harmful private information. In 2010, just before publishing the first Afghan war logs provided to WikiLeaks by Chelsea Manning, Mr. Assange and a group of journalists from The Guardian, The New York Times and Der Spiegel were engaged in a tussle over redacting the names of Afghan informants. The three publications all decided to do so, but Mr. Assange disagreed. As he told Nick Davies of The Guardian, “If an Afghan civilian helps coalition forces, he deserves to die.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/opinion/can-we-trust-julian-assange-and-wikileaks.html?emc=edit_ty_20160808&nl=opinion&nlid=40977923

EYES IN THE SKY Trailer

Drachen_Jager says...

Well that looks utterly stupid.

So... they have bug UAVs and hummingbird UAVs, yet they're targeting the bad guys with antiques?

Also, it's not like this is some imaginary moral dilemma. US forces can, have, and will target innocent civilians WITHOUT confirmation that their actual target is on site. Hell they've attacked wedding parties and hospitals just for shits and giggles (well not quite, but "because some Afghan guy said so" is close enough).

CNN -- Bernie Sanders Interview with Jake Tapper (6/5/2016)

bobknight33 says...

Bernie or bust.


25 things I trust more than Hillary Clinton:
• Mexican tap water
• A wolverine with a ‘pet me’ sign
• A mixed drink served by Bill Cosby
• A straight shave from Jodi Arias
• An elevator ride with Ray Rice
• Browns going to the Super Bowl
• Brian Williams memory
• Pete Carroll coaching decisions
• Loch Ness monster sightings
• Pinocchio
• The Boy that cried Wolf
• A snapping turtle in a mud bath
• A Nigerian inheritance email
• A pilot alone in the cockpit
• A factory packed parachute
• A test fart in bed with the flu
• Tying Anthony Weiner’s shoes
• Harry Reid’s exercise equipment
• A kiss from Judas
• An Afghan wearing a backpack
• A Dana White apology
• Keeping my healthcare plan
• A North Korean trial
• A BIC pen that won’t leak
• A tuna fish sandwich left on a city bus

muslim rape game has come to europe-taharrush gamea

vil says...

Excellent propaganda. 40 seconds of radical muslim horror - in German, Belgian, French, Swedish cities possibly near you, a real present day danger which we need to do something about .

And then they start using the words refugee and Arab.

Of the current wave of people uncontrollably and iresponsibly invited by Angela Merkel and company to Germany estimates are (because real official numbers apparently will not be available before mid 2016) about 40% are refugees from war zones, mostly Syria, families, many educated people, several irrelevant religions (including a few flavors of muslim) some Arabs. We can keep these and try to help them. Educational videos and money will keep them warm and fed, Afghan families will eventually learn to use flushing toilets. They will find jobs and start kebab joints and go to school. Refugees.

Which leaves 60% of north african, balkan, middle eastern immigrants, overwhelmingly men 18-25, muslim, many illiterate (some Arab but that is irrelevant). Who join the masses of crazy radical muslims already living here in Europe previously. Not refugees. Not running away from something but running to the social systems and muslim ghettos of western Europe. Not easily separable from the above mentioned refugees. Protected by the insane political correctness of German and Swedish and Belgian politicians. Educational videos will entertain them and keep them warm. No amount of welfare will ever be enough for them. Very few will get an education and jobs, lots of trouble ahead. How do we get rid of these people now? Radical muslim immigrants.

Meanwhile we also have lots of regular immigrants in Europe, like Ukrainians, Russians, varieties of asians, and generally from all over the world as the trend is that jobs are available in parts of Europe and overall its a nice safe place to live in.

Problem is if we dont get rid of the stupid radical muslims its not going to stay that way, as jews and now women have found out in some large European cities. Hopefully the refugees can stay, but our inability to react in the face of danger at least according to previously agreed measures (Schengen border protection) will make it difficult for us to help real refugees in the face of public opinion damaged by these idiots (radical muslims and politically correct politicians).

Bill Maher: Richard Dawkins – Regressive Leftists

enoch says...

@Barbar
i do not know if you are aware,but you actually made my point in regards to justification.specifically your third paragraph.

as for the disagreement in regards to religious texts being inert and neutral.this should not really be an issue and should be plain for all to see.religious texts are amalgamations,musings,stories,philosophies all jammed into a canonized text.they are often hypocritical and contradictory.it is the reader that interprets and injects their own subjective understandings based on their own proclivities.

which then makes religious text a subjective text.so if you are violent,then your interpretations will be violence,which would lead to justifications based on those interpretations.

unless you are using fundamentalism as a fulcrum.which sees religious text as the unerring word of god,which brings a whole new conundrum into focus:contradictory philosophies which are in diametric opposition.which is an impossibility to reconcile,but again brings us to my main point:justification.(by way of mental gymnastics).

and harris does not just smell like apologist BS,he IS an apologist.now this is understandable when seen through the lens of nationalism,but it engages in the same wishful thinking harris accuses many religious people of engaging in.

we WANT to feel we are the good guys.
we WANT to think that what we are doing is for a higher,and more morale purpose.
we WANT to think all this violence and bloodshed is ultimately for a better and more prosperous future for everybody involved.
we WANT to believe that our government is not just destroying and destabilizing whole communities with wanton destruction just so our corporations can have a new market to exploit,or to control the oil fields for BP and chevron to control.

but thats not the reality.
our wants are just wishful thinking and an inability to accept that we cling to these wants to justify horror,destruction and death.

https://theintercept.com/2015/10/05/the-radically-changing-story-of-the-u-s-airstrike-on-afghan-hospital-from-mistake-to-justification/

so what is OUR justification?
so just like the more moderate and secular muslims who look the other way when faced with horror.we too,look away at the truth of things,because to recognize the reality means to accept responsibility.
we have blood on our hands....all of us.
as do those muslims who also look away.

but the allure of justifications....
to have the ability to turn horror into righteousness.
it is extremely powerful,and we ALL participate.
even sam harris.

Meanwhile in Afghanistan

shang says...

http://ogrishforum.com/forumdisplay.php?f=5

The original was taken down, but it was on liveleak, but ogrish has it. Idiot Muslim gets out trips and ran over leg.

Then goons and encyclopedia dramatica made goof parodies which spawned the vine craze.

The desert is south west US, as the original Afghan is mountainous and hilly.

Dark humor

Goons, anons, lulzsec, antisec we don't give a shit about political correctness. Go yo images.google.com search Amanda Todd cocktail lol
Millions of memes

You can't get mad at dark humor, there is no line you can't cross in comedy

iaui said:

nothing



Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists

Beggar's Canyon