Total Posts:37|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

War on Terror

tajshar2k
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.

Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 3:36:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.


Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

Succeeded? I can't possibly see how anyone could think it has. The question is could it, and I doubt that it could - at-least using the tactics we are currently using.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 3:39:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
As in other conversations, the problem is a mindset one. You can't "defeat" a tactic. A tactic used by people with no other viable tactic available to them.

If the question is, will we ever succeed in stabilizing the middle-east, the answer is NO. WE will not succeed, THEY must succeed. We can't force them to do as we wish by the gun, and have it be a lasting change.
lotsoffun
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 3:51:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.


Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

It was a joke in the first place. It was used as an excuse to attack Iraq and to keep the American people in fear as the New World Order Agenda is implemented. Many Americans see this. Some, blinded by "America can do no wrong" attitude can't see it.
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 3:58:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:39:46 PM, TBR wrote:
As in other conversations, the problem is a mindset one. You can't "defeat" a tactic. A tactic used by people with no other viable tactic available to them.

If the question is, will we ever succeed in stabilizing the middle-east, the answer is NO. WE will not succeed, THEY must succeed. We can't force them to do as we wish by the gun, and have it be a lasting change.

Do you think we should keep engaging against terrorists in the region, or pull out? The issue I have is, that if we pull out, the terrorists will become stronger, and will be a bigger threat to our national security.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:06:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Do you think we should keep engaging against terrorists in the region, or pull out? The issue I have is, that if we pull out, the terrorists will become stronger, and will be a bigger threat to our national security.

Yea, I think we should pull out completely. As to making them stronger, that is EXACTLY what we are doing by engaging them.

We can protect our home nation in a lot of ways. There are very good men and women that are doing a he11 of a job "protecting" us from additional attack. The invasion/nation building cycle is only draining resources, and adding to their strength.
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:22:35 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 4:06:07 PM, TBR wrote:
Do you think we should keep engaging against terrorists in the region, or pull out? The issue I have is, that if we pull out, the terrorists will become stronger, and will be a bigger threat to our national security.

Yea, I think we should pull out completely. As to making them stronger, that is EXACTLY what we are doing by engaging them.

We can protect our home nation in a lot of ways. There are very good men and women that are doing a he11 of a job "protecting" us from additional attack. The invasion/nation building cycle is only draining resources, and adding to their strength.

Could you specify a bit more? How is fighting them making them stronger, and how is backing out weakening them?

"There are very good men and women that are doing a he11 of a job "protecting" us from additional attack" What are you specifically talking about?
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
TheProphett
Posts: 520
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:24:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.


Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

Unwinnable war. Of course terrorism should be heavily campaigned against, and terrorists should be punished, but it is an unwinnable war. There will always be those who misinterpret their religion and use it as an excuse to wage war on the free world.
Topics I would like to debate: https://docs.google.com...

Epic Quotes:

She's a cunning linguist, but I'm a master debater - Austin Powers


Economic Forum Revival Co-Leader

If you are interested in starting a political journal for the site, please contact me.
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:27:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 4:24:04 PM, TheProphett wrote:
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.


Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

Unwinnable war. Of course terrorism should be heavily campaigned against, and terrorists should be punished, but it is an unwinnable war. There will always be those who misinterpret their religion and use it as an excuse to wage war on the free world.

I would disagree with you saying about them misinterpreting their religion, but I agree with what you said above. I deciding whether the War on Terror is worth fighting anymore, but I want to know the Pro's of withdrawing.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:40:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Could you specify a bit more? How is fighting them making them stronger, and how is backing out weakening them?

Sure... ISIS.

Violence breeds violence. We attack them, they want to fight back. This is not a new concept. From our foes perspective, we are terrible people. The more we do to be terrible people to the peoples of these countries, the more "radicalized" we make.

We are not saints and liberators to the people suffering from our "collateral damage" every day.


"There are very good men and women that are doing a he11 of a job "protecting" us from additional attack" What are you specifically talking about?

What do we want? To be safe? Thwart attempts to kill Americans at home? Well, we have a very large infrastructure working to do just that. They are not drone pilots, not hero snipers in Iraq. They are intelligence agencies backed by LE and a slew of other people working every day for our safety.

We squander any good will by invading and bombing, we make the job of actually protecting our citizens harder.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:49:40 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Say you are a 18 y.o. guy in Afghanistan. Your entire life at this point has been consumed with Americans attacking your country. People die, some completely unrelated to any terrorism, they are just men you have known. Your father perhaps. Further, your uncle was locked in Abu Ghraib and torched a "little bit", and has never been the same since. Do I blame you for becoming "radicalized" now? He11 NO! America is the greatest evil you have ever known.

Since you cant join the Afghanistan Marine Corps, or pilot a 4 million dollar drone, you use what you can to fight the "evil Americans". We call it terrorism, ISIS, extremists. I see that as a logical path for this 18 y.o.
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:49:59 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 4:40:28 PM, TBR wrote:
Could you specify a bit more? How is fighting them making them stronger, and how is backing out weakening them?

Sure... ISIS.

Violence breeds violence. We attack them, they want to fight back. This is not a new concept. From our foes perspective, we are terrible people. The more we do to be terrible people to the peoples of these countries, the more "radicalized" we make.

We are not saints and liberators to the people suffering from our "collateral damage" every day.


"There are very good men and women that are doing a he11 of a job "protecting" us from additional attack" What are you specifically talking about?

What do we want? To be safe? Thwart attempts to kill Americans at home? Well, we have a very large infrastructure working to do just that. They are not drone pilots, not hero snipers in Iraq. They are intelligence agencies backed by LE and a slew of other people working every day for our safety.

We squander any good will by invading and bombing, we make the job of actually protecting our citizens harder.

So, you are saying, if we backed out, the terrorists will not grow stronger? I still am skeptical in believing this. ISIS especially is doing a great job in brainwashing youth in Western countries into joining their cause, and Muslims in countries like Canada have already been arrested for supporting ISIS, and going to Syria. We let ISIS take the region of Syria and Iraq, we might be witnessing a Pan-Islamic state, which can only net negative.

That's true, but we know that isn't 100% foolproof. Terrorists don't necessarily have to come to America, terrorists can be created here themselves. I don't think intelligence services, can go to every mosque in America, and make sure everything is alright, they would like be called out for being "Islamophobic" or "Racist". Which is mostly done by Liberals just saying.
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
EndarkenedRationalist
Posts: 14,201
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:52:27 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Nobody thinks the war on terror was a success. That whole region just isn't ready for democracy, so intervention there at this point is largely futile.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:54:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
So, you are saying, if we backed out, the terrorists will not grow stronger?

What does this mean to you? Will ISIS become stronger... Perhaps. Not really my call. What I can say is, doing MORE of the same will insure that ISIS will have fresh recruits.

I still am skeptical in believing this. ISIS especially is doing a great job in brainwashing youth in Western countries into joining their cause, and Muslims in countries like Canada have already been arrested for supporting ISIS, and going to Syria. We let ISIS take the region of Syria and Iraq, we might be witnessing a Pan-Islamic state, which can only net negative.
Where is the material coming from for this brainwashing? From US. We do this crap, they point to it, and say "see, America is very evil". Yup, its us.

That's true, but we know that isn't 100% foolproof. Terrorists don't necessarily have to come to America, terrorists can be created here themselves. I don't think intelligence services, can go to every mosque in America, and make sure everything is alright, they would like be called out for being "Islamophobic" or "Racist". Which is mostly done by Liberals just saying.
How is bombing Syria going to find them here? No, concentrating on proper LE is more effective, right? Not giving them more reasons to hate America is even better, right?
1harderthanyouthink
Posts: 13,100
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 4:57:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:58:28 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 10/12/2015 3:39:46 PM, TBR wrote:
As in other conversations, the problem is a mindset one. You can't "defeat" a tactic. A tactic used by people with no other viable tactic available to them.

If the question is, will we ever succeed in stabilizing the middle-east, the answer is NO. WE will not succeed, THEY must succeed. We can't force them to do as we wish by the gun, and have it be a lasting change.

Do you think we should keep engaging against terrorists in the region, or pull out? The issue I have is, that if we pull out, the terrorists will become stronger, and will be a bigger threat to our national security.

If you get rid of them, then there's just another vacuum in which new terrorists will arise.
"It's awfully considerate of you to think of me here,
And I'm much obliged to you for making it clear - that I'm not here."

-Syd Barrett

DDO Risk King
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 5:24:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
If you get rid of them, then there's just another vacuum in which new terrorists will arise.

Yea, I don't get why this is such a hard one to understand. Its not like there is some definable number of "terrorists" and you go out to kill this number, and terrorism will be gone. It just doesn't work that way.

If you leveled the entire M.E. the real number of terrorists would be GREATER in the end. You cant kill your way to a fix for this. You cant occupies and prop governments this problem in to submission.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,249
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 6:15:15 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 5:24:52 PM, TBR wrote:
If you get rid of them, then there's just another vacuum in which new terrorists will arise.

Yea, I don't get why this is such a hard one to understand. Its not like there is some definable number of "terrorists" and you go out to kill this number, and terrorism will be gone. It just doesn't work that way.

If you leveled the entire M.E. the real number of terrorists would be GREATER in the end. You cant kill your way to a fix for this. You cant occupies and prop governments this problem in to submission.

A war on an ideology can't be won with guns, only suppressed.
UtherPenguin
Posts: 3,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 6:53:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.


Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

https://www.youtube.com...
"Praise Allah."
~YYW
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 6:58:57 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 6:53:11 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.


Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

https://www.youtube.com...

Its a good video UtherPengun.

Look. It makes me nuts to call most of fighting going on now as "terrorism". Exactly what part of a civil war are they talking about as terrorism?
UtherPenguin
Posts: 3,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 7:33:02 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 6:58:57 PM, TBR wrote:
At 10/12/2015 6:53:11 PM, UtherPenguin wrote:
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Guys, I'm on the verge of changing my Big Issues once again, and I'm asking for some help.


Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

https://www.youtube.com...

Its a good video UtherPengun.

Look. It makes me nuts to call most of fighting going on now as "terrorism". Exactly what part of a civil war are they talking about as terrorism?

Most likely Al-Nusra, since the Iraqi branch of Al-Qadea and the Syrian branch had not yet merged in the making of the video. And since Al Nusra was the only faction able to be objectively called terrorist.
"Praise Allah."
~YYW
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 7:38:52 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Most likely Al-Nusra, since the Iraqi branch of Al-Qadea and the Syrian branch had not yet merged in the making of the video. And since Al Nusra was the only faction able to be objectively called terrorist.

I think you misunderstood - no big deal. What I was trying to say is, the generic term "terrorism" is getting applied to a lot of fighting that has nothing to do with terrorism. During the Bush years, they drilled that into every American brain they could reach. Basically, all fighting against America is now labeled as terrorism. Its like a tick for us now. Muslims fighting anywhere, regardless of purpose are labeled as terrorists.
UtherPenguin
Posts: 3,681
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 7:40:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 7:38:52 PM, TBR wrote:
Most likely Al-Nusra, since the Iraqi branch of Al-Qadea and the Syrian branch had not yet merged in the making of the video. And since Al Nusra was the only faction able to be objectively called terrorist.

I think you misunderstood - no big deal. What I was trying to say is, the generic term "terrorism" is getting applied to a lot of fighting that has nothing to do with terrorism. During the Bush years, they drilled that into every American brain they could reach. Basically, all fighting against America is now labeled as terrorism. Its like a tick for us now. Muslims fighting anywhere, regardless of purpose are labeled as terrorists.

Exactly, I agree with you on that one.
"Praise Allah."
~YYW
lotsoffun
Posts: 1,608
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/12/2015 8:59:45 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
The West should stay out of the Middle East. Let them evolve and find democracy on their own. I used to think we could impose it on them, but we can't. There was a lot of good done in Afghanistan, although it was misguided to be there. The U.S. created the Taliban, but it doesn't excuse the 7th century mindset and cruelty. Hell they shot that young Pakistani girl because she spoke out about education for girls. She survived as is rightly hailed as a hero. If we leave the Middle East alone, there will still be plenty of killing and a few wars let them kill each other. That is how they will grow. I am not Jewish, but I fully support Israel's right to exist and we should always support them along with a Palestinian state. Not an easy issue to deal with. There is always going to be the issue of Islamists, who really believe that they have a divine right to take over the world and impose their sick version of Islam on all of us. they've infiltrated the White House and many high levels of U.S. government. This is the real danger to the West. Takeover by stealth.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 6:15:30 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 8:59:45 PM, lotsoffun wrote:
they've infiltrated the White House and many high levels of U.S. government.

Lol what
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
bsh1
Posts: 27,503
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 6:24:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I think the "War on Terror" is silly. You cannot fight a tool...terror is just that: a tool. You can never get rid of it. We should've called it: "The War on Al-Qaeda" because that's much clearer and better defined. The objective in that iteration is obvious, whereas the former would be an unending undertaking.
Live Long and Prosper

I'm a Bish.


"Twilight isn't just about obtuse metaphors between cannibalism and premarital sex, it also teaches us the futility of hope." - Raisor

"[Bsh1] is the Guinan of DDO." - ButterCatX

Follow the DDOlympics
: http://www.debate.org...

Open Debate Topics Project: http://www.debate.org...
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 6:32:25 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 4:49:59 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
So, you are saying, if we backed out, the terrorists will not grow stronger? I still am skeptical in believing this. ISIS especially is doing a great job in brainwashing youth in Western countries into joining their cause, and Muslims in countries like Canada have already been arrested for supporting ISIS, and going to Syria. We let ISIS take the region of Syria and Iraq, we might be witnessing a Pan-Islamic state, which can only net negative.

I definitely see your logic. And by extension, we should probably send in the military and fight the terrorists so they don't expand, yes? And if we leave, the weak security environment will breed more terrorism... and the evidence of this in Iraq seems to confirm this.

The thing to consider though is that terrorism is not endemic to the Middle East. It is filling a vacuum.

Consider Syria and Iraq. Not to sound like Donald Trump, but right now "they don't have a country". The government in both instances is corrupt, favoring some parties over others. Large swaths of these states are underdeveloped, and they lack infrastructure, jobs, a well-developed civil society, and an economy that exceeds subsistence.

A small portion of the people in both states are committed to murdering those who aren't like them... ISIL is trying to kill Shi'ites, there are a plethora of Sunni groups in Iraq who are pissed off because al-Maliki's government promoted Shi'ites instead of Sunnis -- and so they say "hey, let's let ISIL take over our village, they at least give a damn about us". In Syria, Bashar al-Assad's government is killing its own people in its attempts to hold onto power, and it doesn't give two cents to the Syrian Kurds and others who aren't loyal. Tl;dr the people don't get along at the moment.

If these states were to build infrastructure, an education system, a sense of national unity, it would be beneficial. If these states were to have an economy where people have a steadily rising standard of living, and where they can get real paying jobs, people wouldn't resort to fighting in militia groups to get an income. If there was a civil society to bring people together, people would be less likely to pull out a gun on their neighbors.

The War on Terror tries to put the U.S. in this quagmire, where we fight the people who resort to violence (they are angry because of the above reasons). We kill terrorists, but our violence must breed more violence, I mean if we carpet bomb a city we are going to kill thousands of innocent civilians. Terrorists are engaging in guerrilla warfare, which is not the same as conventional warfare. If the U.S. were to leave, I think that terrorist groups would expand, due to the shi*tty situation with regards to socioeconomic conditions. But our presence hasn't really helped things either.

So that's why I think we should help these countries develop, so that they "outgrow" terrorism and become societies that are better functioning. A lighter footprint is probably better than no footprint, but a heavier presence is probably counter-intuitive.

That is just my take though. I think that the War on Terror in many ways is misguided... I see the logic behind it, but I think that it ignores the fundamental roots of the problem.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
tajshar2k
Posts: 2,379
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/13/2015 7:57:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 6:32:25 PM, Contra wrote:
At 10/12/2015 4:49:59 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
So, you are saying, if we backed out, the terrorists will not grow stronger? I still am skeptical in believing this. ISIS especially is doing a great job in brainwashing youth in Western countries into joining their cause, and Muslims in countries like Canada have already been arrested for supporting ISIS, and going to Syria. We let ISIS take the region of Syria and Iraq, we might be witnessing a Pan-Islamic state, which can only net negative.

I definitely see your logic. And by extension, we should probably send in the military and fight the terrorists so they don't expand, yes? And if we leave, the weak security environment will breed more terrorism... and the evidence of this in Iraq seems to confirm this.

The thing to consider though is that terrorism is not endemic to the Middle East. It is filling a vacuum.

Consider Syria and Iraq. Not to sound like Donald Trump, but right now "they don't have a country". The government in both instances is corrupt, favoring some parties over others. Large swaths of these states are underdeveloped, and they lack infrastructure, jobs, a well-developed civil society, and an economy that exceeds subsistence.

A small portion of the people in both states are committed to murdering those who aren't like them... ISIL is trying to kill Shi'ites, there are a plethora of Sunni groups in Iraq who are pissed off because al-Maliki's government promoted Shi'ites instead of Sunnis -- and so they say "hey, let's let ISIL take over our village, they at least give a damn about us". In Syria, Bashar al-Assad's government is killing its own people in its attempts to hold onto power, and it doesn't give two cents to the Syrian Kurds and others who aren't loyal. Tl;dr the people don't get along at the moment.

If these states were to build infrastructure, an education system, a sense of national unity, it would be beneficial. If these states were to have an economy where people have a steadily rising standard of living, and where they can get real paying jobs, people wouldn't resort to fighting in militia groups to get an income. If there was a civil society to bring people together, people would be less likely to pull out a gun on their neighbors.

The War on Terror tries to put the U.S. in this quagmire, where we fight the people who resort to violence (they are angry because of the above reasons). We kill terrorists, but our violence must breed more violence, I mean if we carpet bomb a city we are going to kill thousands of innocent civilians. Terrorists are engaging in guerrilla warfare, which is not the same as conventional warfare. If the U.S. were to leave, I think that terrorist groups would expand, due to the shi*tty situation with regards to socioeconomic conditions. But our presence hasn't really helped things either.

So that's why I think we should help these countries develop, so that they "outgrow" terrorism and become societies that are better functioning. A lighter footprint is probably better than no footprint, but a heavier presence is probably counter-intuitive.

That is just my take though. I think that the War on Terror in many ways is misguided... I see the logic behind it, but I think that it ignores the fundamental roots of the problem.

Wow, thanks for the insight. That literally covered all the questions I had. I think I'm officially Con War on Terror. Thanks :)

Just a question. How do you feel about the war in Afghanistan? Justified or not justified?
"In Guns We Trust" Tajshar2k
Midnight1131
Posts: 1,643
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2015 12:14:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/12/2015 3:24:07 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
Do you think the War on Terror succeeded, or Failed? Do we need to continue it? What is your opinion?

It hasn't succeeded, that's for sure. If anything it's taught us that no matter how many terrorist organizations you destroy, there will be more to take their place. In my opinion we should pull out and let the dust clear a bit.
#GaryJohnson2016
#TaxationisTheft
#TheftisTaxation
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
10/14/2015 6:13:46 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 10/13/2015 7:57:32 PM, tajshar2k wrote:
At 10/13/2015 6:32:25 PM, Contra wrote:
At 10/12/2015 4:49:59 PM, tajshar2k wrote:

Wow, thanks for the insight. That literally covered all the questions I had. I think I'm officially Con War on Terror. Thanks :)

Yeah, my pleasure. I've had the same questions that you had, and the other answers that I saw on here weren't that extensive.

Just a question. How do you feel about the war in Afghanistan? Justified or not justified?

I definitely think that the War in Afghanistan was justified. Al-Qaeda attacked the U.S., and we destroyed al-Qaeda's training camps and their existing networks in Afghanistan -- so we pummeled the people who attacked us. I think that was right.

Today Afghanistan is still heavily divided between their ethnic groups, and add to this the fact that al-Qaeda and the Taliban are benefiting from the porous border with Pakistan.

Idk what we should do about this mess. The Pashtuns, Hazaras, and Tajiks hate each other, and typically governed themselves before they were lumped together. Maybe we should help Afghanistan divide itself up into different states? Either that, or the government should fight a vicious campaign against corruption, so that these clans feel included in their government and so they get a greater sense of national identity... just my two cents.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan