Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

The ignorance of some people

24

Comments

  • #32
    walshb
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 61,078 ✭✭✭✭walshb


    scareydoll wrote: »
    Just because someone has a different opinion than you doesn't make them ignorant.

    But not knowing why you have that opinion does.


  • #33
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Merch wrote: »
    I'm interested to hear your reply? what or who an acceptable casualty?

    I never said anything about casualties being acceptable so please don't put words into my mouth. It would have been far better if they could have overthrown the Taliban without any casualties but unfortunately I doubt it would have been possible.


  • #34
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    What difference does it make? I made my point and that's all that matters.

    Anyway, I never said anything about my Dad. This isn't my thread anyway. The mujhadeen were supported by the US to fight against the soviets, they did not support them for no reason. They refused to hand him over because they would lose face AND i'm fairly sure they were in full support of what he did. I have no idea where you heard that the US coined the name Al Qaeda but Osama Bin Laden himself was asked the origin of the name and as far as I remember it had something to do with a training camp early in the organisations beginnings. Many governments can be accused of oppressing their people, these governments must be removed from power to protect their people. What is wrong with that?

    Sorry my mistake re being your thread


  • #35
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 24,369 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    To rid it of the Taliban who were supporting a terrorist organisation and were oppressing and harming their own people?

    Check the thread in Cool Vids and Pics "Photos that shook the world" and you'll see exactly why the Taliban were removed from power.

    The main reason was that they wouldn't let anyone watch the telly, and the US networks were a bit pissed off that they couldn't sell any programmes to them.


  • #36
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    The casualties are people but that is war after all, it's not nice and it would have been better to not have to result to war but I doubt the Taliban would step down by any peaceful means. Would you rather the UN let the Taliban keep control of Afghanistan?
    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    I never said anything about casualties being acceptable so please don't put words into my mouth. It would have been far better if they could have overthrown the Taliban without any casualties but unfortunately I doubt it would have been possible.

    But this bit confuses me, seems like you are saying it's acceptable


  • Advertisement
  • #37
    banquo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,487 ✭✭✭banquo


    brummytom wrote: »
    Oil.

    Oh, we're not meant to say that are we?

    This. Drives. Me. Crazy.

    America needs oil. It buys oil from other places. When there's a protracted war in a country that produces oil then the price of oil tends to go up due to supply problems. It's not about oil.


  • #38
    Ann22
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,006 ✭✭✭Ann22


    This annoyes me big time too op:mad:. Some people spread an awful lot of garbage without knowing what they're talking about. The most recent one in my workplace was the swine flu jab..a girl was mouthing some serious amout of crap, she admitted to me she hadn't read up on the subject at all but was scaremongering and brainwashing workmates from getting their kids done, some of whom were asthmatic...

    Then the Lisbon Treaty...more sh*te across the canteen table from people who were literally making stuff up making it sound dramatic then when I questioned each person on where they go their facts from they said stuff like 'I didn't read up on it and I don't know the details but I'd betcha that's what will happen':rolleyes:

    People are entitled to have an opinion but people should know what they're talking about before they start trying to convince others to change their views.


  • #39
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    I have no idea where you heard that the US coined the name Al Qaeda but Osama Bin Laden himself was asked the origin of the name and as far as I remember it had something to do with a training camp early in the organisations beginnings. Many governments can be accused of oppressing their people, these governments must be removed from power to protect their people. What is wrong with that?

    Hmm, you make it sound like you were standing beside him when he was asked? where did you hear that?
    The first use of al-Qaida in western media was in 1996 in an American newspaper report which identified it as another name of the Islamic Salvation Foundation, one of Bin Laden's jihadi charities. The term only came into general usage after the group's bombing of the US embassies in East Africa in 1998, when the FBI and CIA fingered it as an umbrella organisation for various projects of Bin Laden and his associates - many of which grew out of ideas originally hatched by Abdullah Azzam, who'd been killed by a car-bomb in Peshawar in 1989. from
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/aug/24/alqaida.sciencefictionfantasyandhorror


  • #40
    Holmer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 284 ✭✭Holmer


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    The main reason was that they wouldn't let anyone watch the telly, and the US networks were a bit pissed off that they couldn't sell any programmes to them.


    Ah yes, the notorious Telly Ban.


  • #41
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    banquo wrote: »
    This. Drives. Me. Crazy.

    America needs oil. It buys oil from other places. When there's a protracted war in a country that produces oil then the price of oil tends to go up due to supply problems. It's not about oil.

    You make it sound like that doesnt suit the people who control the oil business??


  • Advertisement
  • #42
    Dionysus
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,420 ✭✭✭Dionysus


    stupidusername wrote: »
    Tell your 'da' they're all opium farmers! That'll set him straight!

    It's reassuring that the Brits are now fighting against the opium farmers in Afghanistan rather than fighting for them as they were against China.

    Who says there's no such thing as progress....


  • #43
    Hannibal Smith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,893 ✭✭✭Hannibal Smith


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    To rid it of the Taliban who were supporting a terrorist organisation and were oppressing and harming their own people?

    Check the thread in Cool Vids and Pics "Photos that shook the world" and you'll see exactly why the Taliban were removed from power.

    Well then why did the US fight alongside the Taliban against Russia then?

    And there are far more countries with far worse civil rights atrocities, why don't the US go in there? Why chose Afghanistan?


  • #44
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Merch wrote: »
    But this bit confuses me, seems like you are saying it's acceptable
    Well i'm not. Casualties are inevitable in war. If there was any other way then it should have been taken but unfortunately I doubt the Taliban would have been overthrown any other way.


  • #45
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Merch wrote: »
    Hmm, you make it sound like you were standing beside him when he was asked? where did you hear that?
    The first use of al-Qaida in western media was in 1996 in an American newspaper report which identified it as another name of the Islamic Salvation Foundation, one of Bin Laden's jihadi charities. The term only came into general usage after the group's bombing of the US embassies in East Africa in 1998, when the FBI and CIA fingered it as an umbrella organisation for various projects of Bin Laden and his associates - many of which grew out of ideas originally hatched by Abdullah Azzam, who'd been killed by a car-bomb in Peshawar in 1989. from
    http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2002/aug/24/alqaida.sciencefictionfantasyandhorror
    I heard it on the news a few years back around the time of 9/11. In a tape released by Osama bin laden.

    Hannibal Smith wrote: »
    Well then why did the US fight alongside the Taliban against Russia then?

    And there are far more countries with far worse civil rights atrocities, why don't the US go in there? Why chose Afghanistan?
    It was near the end of the cold war. Do I really need to tell you why America were assisting enemies of the soviet union?

    There are countries with civil rights atrocities but as for why they chose Afghanistan i'd say it has to do with the fact that they were housing and supporting the group that cost their country billions if not trillions in money and claimed the lives of 3000 innocent people.


  • #46
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    Well i'm not. Casualties are inevitable in war. If there was any other way then it should have been taken but unfortunately I doubt the Taliban would have been overthrown any other way.

    Ok, thats your opinion, I'm not having a go at you but personally I think theat the Taleban were probably no worse than the puppets whoare in there now, at the very least their strict religious values makes me think they would be less corrupt, but just because we dissagree with their values? does that make it right to overthrow them? The war which has lasted nearly ten years has achieved what? deaths of US/Nato soldiers who probably mostly didnt want to even be there, poor innocent civilians who had no choice??
    I see no reason why it was essential to overthrow them? seems like it was either for revenge or oil to me, would I rather some poor innocent farmer (even if it is opium, not his fault there isnt a market for pomegranates) gets killed, makes me wonder why people can listen to the bile of the Hawks from the US, what is it with that bloodlust? I hope they never discover oil here in quantity


  • #47
    PK2008
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,219 ✭✭✭PK2008


    Theres a war in Afghanistan you say??


  • #48
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    I heard it on the news a few years back around the time of 9/11. In a tape released by Osama bin laden.



    It was near the end of the cold war. Do I really need to tell you why America were assisting enemies of the soviet union?

    There are countries with civil rights atrocities but as for why they chose Afghanistan i'd say it has to do with the fact that they were housing and supporting the group that cost their country billions if not trillions in money and claimed the lives of 3000 innocent people.

    Heard it on the news, must be true then, I was more certain it was coined by the US, some dept as opposed to a news agency (which I just found by a quick google)
    You think it was revenge for 9-11, I think it was an excuse for a war, what has killing thousands more achieved? they were wrong to go into Afghanistan and certainly Iraq, there was more to this behind the scenes, people were war mongering for years, perhaps it was the hubris of post end of the Red monster? greed? but surely revenge for costing them thousands of lives and money were not the reasons? its sickening if it was but there is more to it


  • #49
    brummytom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,572 ✭✭✭✭brummytom


    banquo wrote: »
    This. Drives. Me. Crazy.

    America needs oil. It buys oil from other places. When there's a protracted war in a country that produces oil then the price of oil tends to go up due to supply problems. It's not about oil.


    The war wasn't in a country that had oil. It was in a country, as I said, needed for an oil pipeline. To install the pipeline, the government stated the country needed a single party governing. Or maybe a foreign occupation. Led by the leader of one of the world's biggest oil consumers. With millions of dollars invested in oil...

    The war wouldn't have hindered oil supplies in any way.


  • #50
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    brummytom wrote: »
    The war wasn't in a country that had oil. It was in a country, as I said, needed for an oil pipeline. To install the pipeline, the government stated the country needed a single party governing. Or maybe a foreign occupation. Led by the leader of one of the world's biggest oil consumers. With millions of dollars invested in oil...

    The war wouldn't have hindered oil supplies in any way.

    I agree with the first bit as certainly being a possibility, but I guess they never considered people would be running around with rpg's in the middle of no-where, as I recal Rove and Cheney just thought people would fall in line after they rolled in, regardless if their neighbours/family/friends were killed in the process


  • #51
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    Sykk wrote: »
    I was having an argument with my father the other day about the war in Afghanistan. The only thing he had to say was "How would you like it if the fúcking yanks landed over here with tanks and machine guns." "Leave the poor farmers alone."

    There's so many things I could list. But what I'm saying is, a lot of people feel so strongly about something they know nothing about. It's everywhere.
    /Discuss

    1.Your Da is right
    2.I agree


  • Advertisement
  • #52
    brummytom
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,572 ✭✭✭✭brummytom


    Merch wrote: »
    I agree with the first bit as certainly being a possibility, but I guess they never considered people would be running around with rpg's in the middle of no-where, as I recal Rove and Cheney just thought people would fall in line after they rolled in, regardless if their neighbours/family/friends were killed in the process
    Yeah, sorry. I phrased that sentence badly.

    What I meant was that, to the administration, a war wouldn't have hindered any construction plans. Cheney's not the brightest spark.


  • #53
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Merch wrote: »
    Ok, thats your opinion, I'm not having a go at you but personally I think theat the Taleban were probably no worse than the puppets whoare in there now, at the very least their strict religious values makes me think they would be less corrupt, but just because we dissagree with their values? does that make it right to overthrow them? The war which has lasted nearly ten years has achieved what? deaths of US/Nato soldiers who probably mostly didnt want to even be there, poor innocent civilians who had no choice??
    I see no reason why it was essential to overthrow them? seems like it was either for revenge or oil to me, would I rather some poor innocent farmer (even if it is opium, not his fault there isnt a market for pomegranates) gets killed, makes me wonder why people can listen to the bile of the Hawks from the US, what is it with that bloodlust? I hope they never discover oil here in quantity
    Their "strict religious values"... You see it's these "strict religious values" which were the problem.

    It's not that we disagress with their values, it's that their values disagree with life.

    Here are a few of their restrictions:
    1. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Complete ban on women's work outside the home, which also applies to female teachers, engineers and most professionals. Only a few female doctors and nurses are allowed to work in some hospitals in Kabul.
      [/SIZE][/FONT]
    2. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Complete ban on women's activity outside the home unless accompanied by a mahram (close male relative such as a father, brother or husband).
      [/SIZE][/FONT]
    3. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on women studying at schools, universities or any other educational institution. (Taliban have converted girls' schools into religious seminaries.)
      [/SIZE][/FONT]
    4. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1] Whipping, beating and verbal abuse of women not clothed in accordance with Taliban rules, or of women unaccompanied by a mahram.
      [/SIZE][/FONT]
    5. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Requirement that women wear a long veil (Burqa), which covers them from head to toe.
      [/SIZE][/FONT]
    6. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Public stoning for adultery
      [/SIZE][/FONT]
    7. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on the use of cosmetics. (Many women with painted nails have had fingers cut off). [/SIZE][/FONT]
    8. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on women talking or shaking hands with non-mahram males. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    9. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on women's presence in radio, television or public gatherings of any kind.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    10. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on women playing sports or entering a sport center or club[/SIZE][/FONT]
    11. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on women gathering for festive occasions such as the Eids, or for any recreational purpose. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    12. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on women washing clothes next to rivers or in a public place[/SIZE][/FONT]
    13. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Modification of all place names including the word "women." For example, "women's garden" has been renamed "spring garden"[/SIZE][/FONT]
    14. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on women appearing on the balconies of their apartments or houses. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    15. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Compulsory painting of all windows, so women can not be seen from outside their homes. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    16. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on males and females traveling on the same bus. Public buses have now been designated "males only" (or "females only").[/SIZE][/FONT]
    17. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on flared (wide) pant-legs, even under a burqa. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    18. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Banned listening to music[/SIZE][/FONT]
    19. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Banned the watching of movies, television and videos, for everyone. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    20. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Disavowed Labor Day (May 1st), because it is deemed a "communist" holiday. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    21. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1] Ordered that all people with non-Islamic names change them to Islamic ones. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    22. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1] Forced haircuts upon Afghan youth.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    23. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ordered that men wear Islamic clothes and a cap. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    24. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ordered that men not shave or trim their beards, which should grow long enough to protrude from a fist clasped at the point of the chin. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    25. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ordered that all people attend prayers in mosques five times daily. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    26. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Banned the keeping of pigeons and playing with the birds, describing it as un-Islamic. The violators will be imprisoned and the birds shall be killed. The kite flying has also been stopped. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    27. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ordered all onlookers, while encouraging the sportsmen, to chant Allah-o-Akbar (God is great) and refrain from clapping. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    28. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Ban on certain games including kite flying which is "un-Islamic" according to Taliban. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    29. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Anyone who carries objectionable literature will be executed[/SIZE][/FONT]
    30. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Anyone who converts from Islam to any other religion will be executed.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    31. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Non-Muslim minorities must distinct badge or stitch a yellow cloth onto their dress to be differentiated from the majority Muslim population. Just like what did Nazis with Jews. [/SIZE][/FONT]
    32. [FONT=Arial,Helvetica][SIZE=-1]Banned the use of the internet by both ordinary Afghans and foreigners.[/SIZE][/FONT]

    http://www.rawa.org/rules.htm


  • #54
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    brummytom wrote: »
    Yeah, sorry. I phrased that sentence badly.

    What I meant was that, to the administration, a war wouldn't have hindered any construction plans. Cheney's not the brightest spark.

    Well they (Rove and Cheney) certainly ****ed up thinking people would be lining the streets to welcome Democracy after shooting them up, I guess the locals thought democracy didnt include occupation? but what did the yanks in charge at the time think would happen? after an overthrow, some kind of civil war was inevitable, guess that just didnt come into their plans.
    I would say Cheney is very shrewd and devious, he's a politician and a hawk, but that doesn't mean he's intelligent I suppose.
    So where's the OP?


  • #55
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Merch wrote: »
    Heard it on the news, must be true then, I was more certain it was coined by the US, some dept as opposed to a news agency (which I just found by a quick google)
    You think it was revenge for 9-11, I think it was an excuse for a war, what has killing thousands more achieved? they were wrong to go into Afghanistan and certainly Iraq, there was more to this behind the scenes, people were war mongering for years, perhaps it was the hubris of post end of the Red monster? greed? but surely revenge for costing them thousands of lives and money were not the reasons? its sickening if it was but there is more to it
    In a video interview with Osama Bin Laden talking...

    I just did a quick google myself...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Qaeda#Etymology
    Read that paragraph

    Excuse for war? I'm starting to get the impression you're one of those conspiracy theorists who think 9/11 was an inside job.


  • #56
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    Their "strict religious values"... You see it's these "strict religious values" which were the problem.

    It's not that we disagress with their values, it's that their values disagree with life.

    Here are a few of their restrictions:

    [/LIST]
    http://www.rawa.org/rules.htm

    I agree, I dont believe in their beliefs but who am I or you to tell them otherwise? who is right to impose our values if they have naturally come to power (although it is essentially the vacuum left after the communist government fell)

    Surely a war isnt the answer, that will never solve a problem, the US supported groups that opposed the Soviet Union when it suited their purposes, the taleban is a direct cosequence of US support, when it suited them, so if I disagree with it now, should they be killed?


  • #57
    Merch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,322 ✭✭✭Merch


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    In a video interview with Osama Bin Laden talking...

    I just did a quick google myself...

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Qaeda#Etymology
    Read that paragraph

    Excuse for war? I'm starting to get the impression you're one of those conspiracy theorists who think 9/11 was an inside job.

    I dont know if 9-11 was an inside job or not, I think it looks very suspicious and from what I read it looks like the Hawks in Washington were spoiling for a war for years before Bush got into power, at the least the US govt is guilty of negligence for not knowing what was coming as they were warned by the French and Pakistani secret services, yet they chose to ignore that?
    So if you think I'm a conspiracy theorists? what does that mean? I haven't ruled out any possibility because I have no evidence to support any position, whereas you seem have ruled out what you have been told is not the case? what I do know is that nearly a decade on, does any of this seem right? thousands of deaths, maybe tens/hundreds is that right?


  • #58
    Hannibal Smith
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,893 ✭✭✭Hannibal Smith


    partyatmygaff wrote: »
    It was near the end of the cold war. Do I really need to tell you why America were assisting enemies of the soviet union?

    There are countries with civil rights atrocities but as for why they chose Afghanistan i'd say it has to do with the fact that they were housing and supporting the group that cost their country billions if not trillions in money and claimed the lives of 3000 innocent people.

    Feel free to if you like, but I'm well up on it thanks. I'm just surprised you can't see the anomoly.

    And rather than it being a humanitarian matter, as you previously suggested, you think it might be more of a revenge attack?


  • #59
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Merch wrote: »
    I agree, I dont believe in their beliefs but who am I or you to tell them otherwise? who is right to impose our values if they have naturally come to power (although it is essentially the vacuum left after the communist government fell)

    Surely a war isnt the answer, that will never solve a problem, the US supported groups that opposed the Soviet Union when it suited their purposes, the taleban is a direct cosequence of US support, when it suited them, so if I disagree with it now, should they be killed?
    We are people just like they are people. Their beliefs are oppressive and it is beyond even what most muslims believe in. It's past religion even, it's just a complete stripping of freedom from the people. Every single aspect of their lives public and private was controlled by the Taliban. Surely no one should be subject to something like that.

    War is never ideal but do you honestly think the Taliban would have been removed from power or granted more freedom to their people any other way?

    The taliban is a direct consequence of US support, that's true but that was in the 80s during the cold war where the fight between communism and capitalism was still in full swing.


  • #60
    The_Minister
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,255 ✭✭✭✭The_Minister


    Sykk wrote: »
    Then you've got the good oul' Lisbon treaty. I remember arguing with people voting yes as I asked them if they had any idea what it meant or what impact it would have on the country.. One guy in particular said to me "If we don't sign it, this country will hit another dark age."

    [Flashback] A woman dragging her child away from me as I stand their open-mouthed Yes leaflet still in hand, flapping limply in the wind. The child's face is one of sheer terror as his mother walk-runs so fast that his shoes skid audibly along the ground. As she storms away she turned her crimson face towards me, eyes flashing and roars "You aren't getting him for your ****ing EU army!" [/Flashback]


  • Advertisement
  • #61
    partyatmygaff
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 10,992 ✭✭✭✭partyatmygaff


    Merch wrote: »
    I dont know if 9-11 was an inside job or not, I think it looks very suspicious and from what I read it looks like the Hawks in Washington were spoiling for a war for years before Bush got into power
    So you think that Al Qaeda and Jihad is a fabrication by the US government?

    http://boards.ie/vbulletin/forumdisplay.php?f=364

    Enough said.

    Hannibal Smith wrote: »
    Feel free to if you like, but I'm well up on it thanks. I'm just surprised you can't see the anomoly.

    And rather than it being a humanitarian matter, as you previously suggested, you think it might be more of a revenge attack?
    The US were spearheading the invasion for revenge but the UN were supporting it to ensure the removal of the Taliban regime.


Advertisement
Advertisement