NationStates Jolt Archive

However, in my neighborhood in Puerto Rico, Tillman would have been called a "pendejo," an idiot. Tillman, in the absurd belief that he was defending or serving his all-powerful country from a seventh-rate, Third World nation devastated by the previous conflicts it had endured, decided to give up a comfortable life to place himself in a combat situation that cost him his life. This was not "Ramon or Tyrone," who joined the military out of financial necessity, or to have a chance at education. This was a "G.I. Joe" guy who got what was coming to him. That was not heroism, it was prophetic idiocy.

http://media.dailycollegian.com/pages/tillman_lobandwidth.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This has to be the stupidest thing anyone has ever said. If you are against the war in Iraq, good, thats your personal choice. Pat Tillman was killed in Afganistain, in a war that every American should feel is just.

Calling Pat Tillman an idiot for his sacrifice is easily the most ignorant thing I have seen in quite sometime.

I feel that this journalist's comments were motivated by her hate of the Bush administration, and her emotions are defeating the fact that all Americans should support our troops, where ever they may be, regardless of one's personal feelings toward the Bush administration.

*Edit - Title edited for flamebait..Nationstates Moderator*

When most Soldiers get killed in War. They are either doing something very brave, or just being stupid.

I wonder if this woman realizes that if we had not done what we have done in Afghanistan, there is every indication she'd be blasting us for not doing enough for the plight of women there..and I love how she just brushes over the oppressive regime the Taliban were saying they were more Aghani then we are...well..shoot..perhaps we should have allowed for Hitler to do his thing in Europe..after all..he was more European then we were..or allowed for Milodan Silovbic (sp) to continue murdering Bosnian muslims..after all..he was more Balkan then we are.

If she had been an Afghani woman she would not have been allowed to attend a University, nor would she have allowed to have an opinion that wasn't her father's or brother's...and if she wanted to go outside she'd have to have worn a burqa.

Then to call Tillman a "sucker" for trying to serve his country...I've got a few choice words to call her....

She goes at length to what her old neighborhood in Puerto Rico would think of Tillman..I guess that's why she is attending a college in Massachusets....why don't we just send her back to Pueto Rico, let them have their independence and then cut off the 2/3 of their population that is on government assistance....see what her old neighborhood would think then of a man who although college educated and soon to be "in the money" does for his country.

I was all for invading Afghanistan before Sept. 11 for their Human rights abuses. But after I didnt see it as a justification because the ends didnt justify the means. And they didnt Fix The Abuse of women. IT IS STILL GOING ON, just as before.

I wonder if this woman realizes that if we had not done what we have done in Afghanistan, there is every indication she'd be blasting us for not doing enough for the plight of women there..and I love how she just brushes over the oppressive regime the Taliban were saying they were more Aghani then we are...well..shoot..perhaps we should have allowed for Hitler to do his thing in Europe..after all..he was more European then we were..or allowed for Milodan Silovbic (sp) to continue murdering Bosnian muslims..after all..he was more Balkan then we are.

If she had been an Afghani woman she would not have been allowed to attend a University, nor would she have allowed to have an opinion that wasn't her father's or brother's...and if she wanted to go outside she'd have to have worn a burqa.


I find it hard to believe that the US et al went into Afganistan on a woman's liberation mission. We went in there to topple the government that was supporting and hiding P.E.#1, and to hopefully capture him. The fact that a nation was liberated from a cruel tyranical regime was peripheral to the operation. If that was a main objective the US would have made moves to act well before 11/9.

As for the current war, I maintain support for the soldiers but I oppose the war. Everyone who has died on their tours of duty should not be discriminated due to wealth/background etc. He felt he had a sense of duty so he went. However I do not like the way that he has been put up on a pedestle because of his background, as if he gave up more. All the soldiers who have died paid the ultimate sacrifice, which cannot be trumped.

The liberation of Afghanistan? Rank hypocrisy. Was anyone paying attention to the abominable acts of the Taleban before 9/11? Only the human rights observers like Amnesty who may as well have been bleeding stones for blood for all the attention being paid to them.

Afghanistan is still a mess, all the US did was bomb the crap out of it and leave it in the hands of feuding warlords. Claiming women's rights for justification is despicable.

The poor guys die for false reasons. :(

The liberation of Afghanistan? Rank hypocrisy. Was anyone paying attention to the abominable acts of the Taleban before 9/11? Only the human rights observers like Amnesty who may as well have been bleeding stones for blood for all the attention being paid to them.

Afghanistan is still a mess, all the US did was bomb the crap out of it and leave it in the hands of feuding warlords. Claiming women's rights for justification is despicable.

Excuse me...Afghanistan had been bombed back into the Stone Age during the Russian Invasion 30 yrs previously...then 20 yrs of civil war between the Pashtuns (who primarily made up the Taliban) and the Tajiks (who primarily made up the Northern Alliance) gave them the nails in their coffin as to the state of their country......

And at least we did something..granted it was a side-issue as we went there to get Al-Queda..but the Taliban had to go as a terrorist-supporting nation that harbored Al-Queda.

I object to claiming the conflict on any moral grounds outside of the hunt for al-Qaeda and its supporters. I'm not sorry to see the Taleban go.

Sorry, my comment wasn't intended to come across as damning you personally. This whole area of human rights gets my blood rushing...

The man was no hero he passed up on $3.6mn to kill people, he joined a rangers company, where I come from a ranger company can be ussed as a weapon to remove a problem permanently. He joined the american rangers to wipe muslims out 'cos as we all know the american government is on a crusade to eradicate muslim.. oh sorry to Mr. Bush, fanatical governments. He wanted a war and he got it and yes He Did Get What He Deserved!

Listen, GWB is a horrible President who seems to be uncapable of doing anything BI-laterally. I mean to claim that a regime we sold weapons to in the 70's to fight the Russians was deliberately hiding Osama is just plain stupid. How hard could it be to find a 6 foot tall Arab on dialysis. Come on

The man was no hero he passed up on $3.6mn to kill people, he joined a rangers company, where I come from a ranger company can be ussed as a weapon to remove a problem permanently. He joined the american rangers to wipe muslims out 'cos as we all know the american government is on a crusade to eradicate muslim.. oh sorry to Mr. Bush, fanatical governments. He wanted a war and he got it and yes He Did Get What He Deserved!

If I thought you knew anything deemed worthwhile I might actually respond to this post..as it is..I'll merely ignore it as the rantings of a child.

Do not deal death on judgement. Some who die might deserve to live.

And to you conservatives, don't launch a blanket accusation against liberals such as myself. <I> protested when I heard Tillman being called an idiot. I don't care whether the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were justified or not; the man gave his life doing what he believed to be right, and shame on anyone who would mock his sacrifice. As a liberal, I do not like wars and conflict. But I'm not stupid. I can see the need to stand up and fight when you reach a certain point where your ideals are in peril. What many liberals are saying is that they're not convinced we reached that point with Iraq. Whether that is the case or not, I would hope all of you can remain civil while discussing it.

Childeren dont really rant though do they? And Aluran your statemnt makes no sense. THe taliban offered to hand over Sadamma Bin laden but the U.S pretended it never happened. They just wanted to bomb them. Whats hypocritical about this is that there are other key allies in the War on terror That are pretty slack on terror too. There are countries that are slack on terror. The U.S tried to represent Afghanistan as the only country that Actively engaged in it. However they were simply Slack on it like the others.

Childeren dont really rant though do they? And Aluran your statemnt makes no sense. THe taliban offered to hand over Sadamma Bin laden but the U.S pretended it never happened. They just wanted to bomb them. Whats hypocritical about this is that there are other key allies in the War on terror That are pretty slack on terror too. There are countries that are slack on terror. The U.S tried to represent Afghanistan as the only country that Actively engaged in it. However they were simply Slack on it like the others.

Childeren dont really rant though do they? And Aluran your statemnt makes no sense. THe taliban offered to hand over Sadamma Bin laden but the U.S pretended it never happened. They just wanted to bomb them. Whats hypocritical about this is that there are other key allies in the War on terror That are pretty slack on terror too. There are countries that are slack on terror. The U.S tried to represent Afghanistan as the only country that Actively engaged in it. However they were simply Slack on it like the others.

Childeren dont really rant though do they? And Aluran your statemnt makes no sense. THe taliban offered to hand over Sadamma Bin laden but the U.S pretended it never happened. They just wanted to bomb them. Whats hypocritical about this is that there are other key allies in the War on terror That are pretty slack on terror too. There are countries that are slack on terror. The U.S tried to represent Afghanistan as the only country that Actively engaged in it. However they were simply Slack on it like the others.

Childeren dont really rant though do they? And Aluran your statemnt makes no sense. THe taliban offered to hand over Sadamma Bin laden but the U.S pretended it never happened. They just wanted to bomb them. Whats hypocritical about this is that there are other key allies in the War on terror That are pretty slack on terror too. There are countries that are slack on terror. The U.S tried to represent Afghanistan as the only country that Actively engaged in it. However they were simply Slack on it like the others.

Childeren dont really rant though do they? And Aluran your statemnt makes no sense. THe taliban offered to hand over Sadamma Bin laden but the U.S pretended it never happened. They just wanted to bomb them. Whats hypocritical about this is that there are other key allies in the War on terror That are pretty slack on terror too. There are countries that are slack on terror. The U.S tried to represent Afghanistan as the only country that Actively engaged in it. However they were simply Slack on it like the others.

So we're supposed to be sorry that a barbaric torturer got killed?

Boo-hoo

On 9/11, 19 people gave their lives for what they believe in. Do they deserve hero status as well? Or marthyr status?

On 9/11, 19 people gave their lives for what they believe in. Do they deserve hero status as well? Or marthyr status?

Neither..believing that the deaths of innocents is worthy of either?...Tillman did not murder intentionally innocents....

On 9/11, 19 people gave their lives for what they believe in. Do they deserve hero status as well? Or marthyr status?

Neither..believing that the deaths of innocents is worthy of either?...Tillman did not murder intentionally innocents....No indeed, Tillman thought they were not innocent

Using "Stupid" in a subject title in relation to anyone or anything other than yourself is a good way to be DEATed for flaming/flamebating.

That aside, the reason that this man was called stupid is because he abandoned his home thrid-world country to fight in the U.S. army to get a chance at living in the USA. He failed, and that was a possibility from the moment he signed over his life to the corrupt administration of the United States. He was "stupid" because he died for another man's country, that wasn't even close to being his own.

I would just like to say:

In Before The Lock.

:D

The liberation of Afghanistan? Rank hypocrisy. Was anyone paying attention to the abominable acts of the Taleban before 9/11? Only the human rights observers like Amnesty who may as well have been bleeding stones for blood for all the attention being paid to them.

Afghanistan is still a mess, all the US did was bomb the crap out of it and leave it in the hands of feuding warlords. Claiming women's rights for justification is despicable.
Actually, the teliban caught my eye when they destroyed the sacred Bhudist figures in 99 or 2000.

anyone who thinks this UMASS student's editorial is acceptable has no respect for the lives of the GI's in Afganistain, Iraq, and where ever else we are.

On 9/11, 19 people gave their lives for what they believe in. Do they deserve hero status as well? Or marthyr status?

Neither..believing that the deaths of innocents is worthy of either?...Tillman did not murder intentionally innocents....No indeed, Tillman thought they were not innocent

No..correction..he knew they weren't innocent..nor did he intentionally..and you keep putting that word aside for some reason..INTENTIONALLY..there..big letters for you...murder innocent people, unlike the 19 Saudis who did.

Actually, the teliban caught my eye when they destroyed the sacred Bhudist figures in 99 or 2000.

That's nice. However, the Taliban wasn't taken as a serious threat to US interests until 9/11. Therefore, it is incorrect to claim that we did anything in Afghanistan other than protect our own interests and slap down an organization we didn't like. Did they provoke it? It can be argued they did, but let's not try and take some sort of moral high ground here and say we went in there because of horrible human rights violations. We retaliated, pure and simple. Anything else that may or may not have happened was coincidental.


anyone who thinks this UMASS student's editorial is acceptable has no respect for the lives of the GI's in Afganistain, Iraq, and where ever else we are.

Unfortunately, it IS "acceptable" because it's exactly what our soldiers are supposed to be fighting and dying for, the freedom to express an opinion. You have every right to not like that opinion and to present a counter opinion, but to frame it in terms of "acceptability" is dangerously close to implying that she didn't have the right to write it. Personally, I think it's a childish rant written by a reactionary mind that is filled with a certain amount of envy and hatred, but I would never say she didn't have the right to say it.

Actually, the teliban caught my eye when they destroyed the sacred Bhudist figures in 99 or 2000.

That's nice. However, the Taliban wasn't taken as a serious threat to US interests until 9/11. Therefore, it is incorrect to claim that we did anything in Afghanistan other than protect our own interests and slap down an organization we didn't like. Did they provoke it? It can be argued they did, but let's not try and take some sort of moral high ground here and say we went in there because of horrible human rights violations. We retaliated, pure and simple. Anything else that may or may not have happened was coincidental.


anyone who thinks this UMASS student's editorial is acceptable has no respect for the lives of the GI's in Afganistain, Iraq, and where ever else we are.

Unfortunately, it IS "acceptable" because it's exactly what our soldiers are supposed to be fighting and dying for, the freedom to express an opinion. You have every right to not like that opinion and to present a counter opinion, but to frame it in terms of "acceptability" is dangerously close to implying that she didn't have the right to write it. Personally, I think it's a childish rant written by a reactionary mind that is filled with a certain amount of envy and hatred, but I would never say she didn't have the right to say it.

I'm sorry Berkylvania...I was getting misty-eyed with your last paragraphy...now if you can just come a little bit closer into the light and accept this Republican Party lapel Pin I have for you..lol

On 9/11, 19 people gave their lives for what they believe in. Do they deserve hero status as well? Or marthyr status?

Neither..believing that the deaths of innocents is worthy of either?...Tillman did not murder intentionally innocents....No indeed, Tillman thought they were not innocent

No..correction..he knew they weren't innocent..nor did he intentionally..and you keep putting that word aside for some reason..INTENTIONALLY..there..big letters for you...murder innocent people, unlike the 19 Saudis who did.

They didn't think the people they killed were innocent either.

No..correction..he knew they weren't innocent..nor did he intentionally..and you keep putting that word aside for some reason..INTENTIONALLY..there..big letters for you...murder innocent people, unlike the 19 Saudis who did.What did he try to achieve there?

Actually, the teliban caught my eye when they destroyed the sacred Bhudist figures in 99 or 2000.

That's nice. However, the Taliban wasn't taken as a serious threat to US interests until 9/11. Therefore, it is incorrect to claim that we did anything in Afghanistan other than protect our own interests and slap down an organization we didn't like. Did they provoke it? It can be argued they did, but let's not try and take some sort of moral high ground here and say we went in there because of horrible human rights violations. We retaliated, pure and simple. Anything else that may or may not have happened was coincidental.


anyone who thinks this UMASS student's editorial is acceptable has no respect for the lives of the GI's in Afganistain, Iraq, and where ever else we are.

Unfortunately, it IS "acceptable" because it's exactly what our soldiers are supposed to be fighting and dying for, the freedom to express an opinion. You have every right to not like that opinion and to present a counter opinion, but to frame it in terms of "acceptability" is dangerously close to implying that she didn't have the right to write it. Personally, I think it's a childish rant written by a reactionary mind that is filled with a certain amount of envy and hatred, but I would never say she didn't have the right to say it.

I'm sorry Berkylvania...I was getting misty-eyed with your last paragraphy...now if you can just come a little bit closer into the light and accept this Republican Party lapel Pin I have for you..lol

I used to have such a pin, Aluran, until the Republican party sold it's soul to the wealthy and the Christian Right Wing and completely forgot about what they were supposed to actually stand for. If you can get them back on track, perhaps I'll consider looking into them again. Until then, I know exactly what you can do with your pin. :D

On 9/11, 19 people gave their lives for what they believe in. Do they deserve hero status as well? Or marthyr status?

Certainly those 19 get martyr status from many of the extreme practicioners of the Islam religion. What I do not understand from you (as probably a secularist, I assume) why you would not want to send a message to those extremists that they can no longer violate (and thumb their noses) at counter threats and [precious] United Nations resolutions.

If you're a pacifist, fine - I get it! But consider what would happen if you did not live in a country that had a military force to defend your liberties in a manner that allowed you the confort zone that you now enjoy. It would be interesting to see you have to read and memorize the Koran or be subject to death. That's right, I wrote "defend" - through preemptive action if need be. Would you like to see more jihadist "martyrs" in aircraft?

Your stance seems to be naive at best, but appears blatantly foolish in observation.

The man was no hero he passed up on $3.6mn to kill people, he joined a rangers company, where I come from a ranger company can be ussed as a weapon to remove a problem permanently.

Yes he was a hero my Muslim friend.

I find it funny that many people in other countries label the Americans as users and yet still blast a guy for walking away from big money to do something he thought was right.

Rangers are a tough bunch. I know many and yes they are called on to handle dangerous missions.


He joined the american rangers to wipe muslims out

Ahhh so Al-Q and the Taliban are good Muslims? :roll: Unless I am reading some badly translated version of the Qur-an, the Prophet would be upset at their actions.


'cos as we all know the american government is on a crusade to eradicate muslim..

Maybe somebody can explain this to me? The Crusades were over 800 years ago. Get over it. Many Americans have probably heard of them but I doubt many could give much detailed information about them.

And a newsflash: The US is only a couple hundred years old. If you are pissed about the Crusades, direct your anger to Europe.

Finally, if the US was on a crusade to wipe out all Muslims, why didn't we start by wiping out the 4 million or so that we have?


oh sorry to Mr. Bush, fanatical governments. He wanted a war and he got it and yes He Did Get What He Deserved!

Ahh but that is war. Good men like Tillman die on the battle field, while people like you hide at home and post nasty comments on the Net.

See you around troll!

On 9/11, 19 people gave their lives for what they believe in. Do they deserve hero status as well? Or marthyr status?

Neither..believing that the deaths of innocents is worthy of either?...Tillman did not murder intentionally innocents....No indeed, Tillman thought they were not innocent

No..correction..he knew they weren't innocent..nor did he intentionally..and you keep putting that word aside for some reason..INTENTIONALLY..there..big letters for you...murder innocent people, unlike the 19 Saudis who did.

They didn't think the people they killed were innocent either.

Ahh but there is the difference. At least the guys Tillman were after were armed and could fight back.

That aside, the reason that this man was called stupid is because he abandoned his home thrid-world country to fight in the U.S. army to get a chance at living in the USA. He failed, and that was a possibility from the moment he signed over his life to the corrupt administration of the United States. He was "stupid" because he died for another man's country, that wasn't even close to being his own.
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. Pat Tillman was born in California, not some 3rd World Country. You may want to read the entire artice written by this UMASS student before you post a reply that shows the lack of knowledge you have in this circumstance.

So we're supposed to be sorry that a barbaric torturer got killed?

Boo-hoo
The alleged abuses of prisoners took place in Iraq, not Afganistain where CPL Tillman was killed.

Pat Tillman was an Army Ranger, not a MP, Military Intel., or CIA, or whoever is responsible for the abuses of prisioners in Iraq , not Afgainstain.

Considering that CPL Tillman was posthumously awarded the Silver Star (the 4th highest award a soldier can recieve), it is safe to say that his sacrifice resulted in the rest of his platoon not being killed.

"The Silver Star is awarded to a person who, while serving in any capacity with the US Army, is cited for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force, or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The required gallantry, while of a lesser degree than that required for the Distinguished Service Cross, must nevertheless have been performed with marked distinction. "

http://www.armyawards.com/ss.shtml

You comments regarding CPL Tillman's death have resulted in me losing all respect I once had for you.

The alleged abuses of prisoners took place in Iraq, not Afganistain where CPL Tillman was killed.

correction: there are documented abuses of prisoners in both iraq and afghanistan, as well as cases of the us handing prisoners over for interrogation to countries that are known for their use of torture. amnesty international has released several reports documenting these cases over the past several years. the afghan ones (and numerous other iraqi ones) just don't happen to be major news scandals; we don't have grinning photos of a few of the war criminals in those incidents.

HOW COULD THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO KILL A MINORITY

The alleged abuses of prisoners took place in Iraq, not Afganistain where CPL Tillman was killed.

correction: there are documented abuses of prisoners in both iraq and afghanistan, as well as cases of the us handing prisoners over for interrogation to countries that are known for their use of torture. amnesty international has released several reports documenting these cases over the past several years. the afghan ones (and numerous other iraqi ones) just don't happen to be major news scandals; we don't have grinning photos of a few of the war criminals in those incidents.
Okay, I believe the point trying to be made was, where was Pat Tillman's name implicated in the torture of POWs/detaines?

HOW COULD THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO KILL A MINORITY
please tell me this is a quote from a rap song and not an actual reply.

if we are not willing to fight and die for our country we will lose what we have and what our mothers and fathers worked so hard to build.

tillman is not more of a hero because he could have been a rich football player, he lost the same amount of life as the young man who's alternative was flipping burgers. they all died for their country and deserve our honor and gratitude.

we owe our own lives and our own freedoms to the men and women who have ALL volunteered to serve their country.

where would we be if they all decided it was stupid?

if we are not willing to fight and die for our country we will lose what we have and what our mothers and fathers worked so hard to build.

tillman is not more of a hero because he could have been a rich football player, he lost the same amount of life as the young man who's alternative was flipping burgers. they all died for their country and deserve our honor and gratitude.

we owe our own lives and our own freedoms to the men and women who have ALL volunteered to serve their country.

where would we be if they all decided it was stupid?

Switzerland?

Switzerland?

Good bobsled team, whats your point?

switzerland has mandatory military service

Aghanistan is a justifiable conflict against real terrorists.

Iraq is a senseless vendetta.

Supporting the troops in Afghanistan means wishing them victory.

Supporting the troops in Iraq means wishing them quickly home.

there will be no quick homecoming from iraq

we have invated a country that never did anything to us and we are stuck there til we can find a way to make right what we have done.

we cant leave them worse off than when we got there. that would be dishonorable.

we cant afford to seem to cut and run. that would put us into even more danger than we are in now

"waist deep in the big muddy"

So we're supposed to be sorry that a barbaric torturer got killed?

Boo-hoo
The alleged abuses of prisoners took place in Iraq, not Afganistain where CPL Tillman was killed.

Pat Tillman was an Army Ranger, not a MP, Military Intel., or CIA, or whoever is responsible for the abuses of prisioners in Iraq , not Afgainstain.

Considering that CPL Tillman was posthumously awarded the Silver Star (the 4th highest award a soldier can recieve), it is safe to say that his sacrifice resulted in the rest of his platoon not being killed.

"The Silver Star is awarded to a person who, while serving in any capacity with the US Army, is cited for gallantry in action against an enemy of the United States while engaged in military operations involving conflict with an opposing foreign force, or while serving with friendly foreign forces engaged in armed conflict against an opposing armed force in which the United States is not a belligerent party. The required gallantry, while of a lesser degree than that required for the Distinguished Service Cross, must nevertheless have been performed with marked distinction. "

http://www.armyawards.com/ss.shtml

You comments regarding CPL Tillman's death have resulted in me losing all respect I once had for you.

Someone allready corrected you on the prisoner abuse...So I won't go into that.
But I really don't see why I or anyone else should be really sorry for that one guy in particular. So he got an american piece of metal after he was dead? I don't care...
You losing respecting me is a non-issue to me...

I was all for invading Afghanistan before Sept. 11 for their Human rights abuses. But after I didnt see it as a justification because the ends didnt justify the means. And they didnt Fix The Abuse of women. IT IS STILL GOING ON, just as before.
Some articles point to just that. Things are no better in Afghanistan according to many.

As an example:

Death by burning: the only escape for desperate Afghan women

http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1202206,00.html

"Her husband's family were treating her like an animal," said Mr Shah, tears trickling down his cheeks.

"Every minute of every day, she was fetching water, growing crops, looking after animals and children, cleaning the house. She was patient, but it was too much for her. She was educated and sensitive. She found it hard to live like a slave."

Mallali was not alone in her suffering, nor in the agonising way she chose to die. Anecdotal evidence suggests several hundred young women are burning themselves to death every year in western Afghanistan.

Behind the increase, says Ms Afzali, is a disillusionment felt by many educated Afghan women because the two years since the fall of the Taliban have brought precious little freedom. This is felt most among former refugees who returned from Iran and who had grown accustomed to a freer life there.

Afghanistan's constitution gives equal rights to men and women. But despite an increase in the number of girls in school, most Afghan women enjoy no more rights than they did under the Taliban. Most of the country is not controlled by the government but by warlords as misogynistic as the Taliban.

"Women in this country are in a very bad situation, with forced marriages, families selling their daughters to pay drug debts, women being beaten all the time," said Suraya Sobah Rang, the deputy women's minister.

HOW COULD THEY HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO KILL A MINORITY
please tell me this is a quote from a rap song and not an actual reply.

its a reference to "fuck tha police"

its not all that obscure

If you think about it, the US created Iraq, and is now attempting to tear it down. Funny how that works.

Y'see, back when the whole red scare was in full swing, the CIA saw the rise of the Ba'athist party in Iraq. At the time, the Ba'athists were Socalists, but the CIA fixed that by staging a takeover of the party by their lapdog, Sadaam. Now, Sadaam was originally a loyal Ba'athist, but the CIA bribed him and turned him capitalist, forcing him to use his affluence to take over the party and eventually the country. Then, when Sadaam got too powerful for his own good, the US decided to do to him what they do to everyone who gets too powerful; they decided to off him. George Bush Sr. invaded Iraq and launched a fully-successful Operation Desert Storm, but stopped miles away from Baghdad, when he realized that taking control of Iraq would be a bad thing, as it would make him liable for the welfare of a populace that hated him. He felt Sadaam learned his lesson, and left him there to rule and rebuild Iraq. Sadaam apparently DID learn his lesson, because when George Bush Jr. asked him to disarm, he obviously did. Nevertheless, the Junior Bush called him a liar groundlessly and invaded, capturing Sadaam. He fueled the war with hypocracy and lies, saying that Sadaam was killing his own people when he (Bush) was doing the same (ever hear of Depleted Uranium Shells?). But this Bush didn't have the sense to stop before seiging Baghdad, setting himself up for a massive failure.

Certainly those 19 get martyr status from many of the extreme practicioners of the Islam religion. What I do not understand from you (as probably a secularist, I assume) why you would not want to send a message to those extremists that they can no longer violate (and thumb their noses) at counter threats and [precious] United Nations resolutions.What are you talking about, what does the UN have to do with 9/11? If you mean that no country has the right to attack another under the UN chapter unless directly attacked or with security council approval, first it's the US who did violate this one and second, they are not a country and not bound to this UN chapter.

If you're a pacifist, fine - I get it! But consider what would happen if you did not live in a country that had a military force to defend your liberties in a manner that allowed you the confort zone that you now enjoy. It would be interesting to see you have to read and memorize the Koran or be subject to death. That's right, I wrote "defend" - through preemptive action if need be. Would you like to see more jihadist "martyrs" in aircraft?I want my politicians to defend me and the military when the politicians have failed. Talk first, and use force AS A LAST RESSORT.

Your stance seems to be naive at best, but appears blatantly foolish in observation.That's because you didn't understand my positions. From my point of view, you are the one who sound foolish.

What are you talking about, what does the UN have to do with 9/11? If you mean that no country has the right to attack another under the UN chapter unless directly attacked or with security council approval, first it's the US who did violate this one and second, they are not a country and not bound to this UN chapter...

Let me make this as clear as possible: the United States' and the United Nations' lack of response to prior terrorist activity and both's inability thwart rogue nations through endless and inaffective diplomacy, was all just making both the jihadists and the rogue nations' dictators further emboldened. If you cannot see this then no amount of explanation will work for you; only pulling your head out of the sand will.

I used to have such a pin, Aluran, until the Republican party sold it's soul to the wealthy and the Christian Right Wing and completely forgot about what they were supposed to actually stand for. If you can get them back on track, perhaps I'll consider looking into them again. Until then, I know exactly what you can do with your pin. :D

You were a Republican? What is the Republican Party meant to stand for, out of interest? They wouldn't be the first party to abandon their core principles (hello, 'New' Labour!).

Let me make this as clear as possible: the United States' and the United Nations' lack of response to prior terrorist activity and both's inability thwart rogue nations through endless and inaffective diplomacy, was all just making both the jihadists and the rogue nations' dictators further emboldened. If you cannot see this then no amount of explanation will work for you; only pulling your head out of the sand will.Go talk to Israel about this and ask them if removing the heads of the terrorists work.
Or ... ask France about how to deal with Algeria.

I used to have such a pin, Aluran, until the Republican party sold it's soul to the wealthy and the Christian Right Wing and completely forgot about what they were supposed to actually stand for. If you can get them back on track, perhaps I'll consider looking into them again. Until then, I know exactly what you can do with your pin. :D

You were a Republican? What is the Republican Party meant to stand for, out of interest? They wouldn't be the first party to abandon their core principles (hello, 'New' Labour!).

Initially, the Republican Party advocated for smaller government with less governmental intrusion into public life. This translated to fewer governmental regulations on business as well as fewer social programs sponsored, in chief, by the government. They were also champions of state's rights over federal rule.

However, these values have now basically been taken up by the Libertarian party and the Republican's have begun "fighting for the middle" by deregulating businesses and championing legislation that favors business while reducing social service programs and pushing some sort of badly thought out "moral majority" agenda which says, in part, it's wrong to kill a foetus but a-okay to kill an adult.

I left the party because I couldn't stand all of the religious rhetoric that seems common to it nowadays, with members thinking that they have some sort of "mandate from God" to clean up this country. That and the fact that their hideous economic plans no longer serve to promote a generally freemarket place, but instead to grant protections to favored members of the buisness community.

Since I'm also against the "tax and spend" theories of the Democratic party, even though I agree with their stance on most social issues, I tend to classify as an Independent, now.

What is the Republican Party meant to stand for, out of interest? They wouldn't be the first party to abandon their core principles (hello, 'New' Labour!).

originally: freeing the slaves, making up for past transgressions against them, and annoying the crap out of racist southern democrats. its kinda funny how all the racist southerns now vote republican.

Let me make this as clear as possible: the United States' and the United Nations' lack of response to prior terrorist activity and both's inability thwart rogue nations through endless and inaffective diplomacy, was all just making both the jihadists and the rogue nations' dictators further emboldened. If you cannot see this then no amount of explanation will work for you; only pulling your head out of the sand will.Go talk to Israel about this and ask them if removing the heads of the terrorists work.
Or ... ask France about how to deal with Algeria.

The anti-semetic people in the world who wield the influence & financing to do so, work against Israel at every turn, sometimes granting those very terrorists Nobel "Peace Prizes" for their roles in encouraging the explosive detonations innocent men, women, and children in the name of "freedom fighting". Maybe we all should do as you suggest and talk to Israel and then really listen to what they have to say on the matter.

Whether or not it's socially acceptable, everyone is allowed to have their say on what they thought of Tillman.

Personally, he wasn't an "idiot" for serving America; he was misinformed.

The anti-semetic people in the world who wield the influence & financing to do so, work against Israel at every turn, sometimes granting those very terrorists Nobel "Peace Prizes" for their roles in encouraging the explosive detonations innocent men, women, and children in the name of "freedom fighting". Maybe we all should do as you suggest and talk to Israel and then really listen to what they have to say on the matter.Listen to who? Sharon? Come on.