I'd be pretty open to smacking these Taliban rednecks even on the nominal Pakistani side of the border.
As a good libertarian, I really HATE the idea of America being the world police. Like Gary Johnson of Team America, I don't WANT the responsibility or the guilt for the inevitable screw-ups. But as Gary's woman explains, we to some significant extent get stuck with the responsibility like it or not, because we're the main country on Earth with the power to be able to do anything. If we simply refuse to accept the responsibility — as in Darfur — then there's no one to stop some pretty ugly stuff.…
Article comments
— go to most recent comments76 - jaz
oh yeah..and for zing...
"we're taking over this town".
77 - zingzing
bit of a test. not sure how to do all this.
for jaz, not a suggestion
78 - zingzing
damn it! what the hell... am i doing something wrong? trying to insert a link. having no joy. it doesn't tell me there is a banned word... it just refreshes and nothing has happened.
79 - jaz
zing, you are not alone...i'm missing a long comment to Al...
never fear Chris Rose is very good at fixing these kind of things...
something completely different.
80 - Christopher Rose
You're doing it perfectly zinger (bet you haven't heard those words from a woman! ;-p ), it's just the anti-spam software chose that moment to have a brainfart!
81 - zingzing
ha, little do you know chris. actually, that's true, i have never heard those words. then again, she really didn't have to put into words what wordless vocalizations convey more perfectly.
ok, i'll try again...
don't let this thing show up three times, chris, or, "perfect! perfect! perfect!"
for jaz, nasty stuff
82 - jaz
zing - yer links are fucked...you have to take them from the right hand box that says "url" and NOT from your browser's top bar...because of the "related search" parameters in the URL
just trying ta help....
the Tao of D'oh.
83 - moonraven
This, as usual, is just silly.
You folks haven't been anywhere near Iran--nor anywhere else in the Middle East.
It's your ignorance and the ignorance of the rest of the folks in the US that your government depends on to do whatever the fuck it pleases--geopolitically speaking.
Get on a plane to Karachi, Lahore or Islamabad and spend a few months there. Then tell us what you actually SAW--not what ole Georgie Porgie Bush told you that he read in a comic book....
84 - jaz
moonraven, check comment #70..i have indeed been to the ME on a few occasions, but years ago
"You folks"...is a sweeping generalization that is thus shown to be inaccurate
85 - zingzing
and she also seems to assume that everyone agrees with al. but of course, we are talking about metal. not the middle east. boring old middle east. i want some brutality! gimme black metal.
86 - moonraven
I don't assume anything.
I said this thread was silly. And it is.
87 - moonraven
jaz: Years ago cuts no ice with me.
88 - jaz
moonraven says - "You folks haven't been anywhere near Iran--nor anywhere else in the Middle East."
which i prove is inaccurate
then the goalposts get switched, no time constrain was initially mentioned...
oh yes, moonraven..i could give an aerial fornication bisecting a rotating pastry about what does or does not cut ice with the likes of you
have a nice day
89 - zingzing
moonie--point. al barger's politics usually are.
90 - moonraven
The point, jaz, is whether or not you KNOW a country or a region. If you visted the Middle East years ago, you do NOT know it.
We live in a fast-moving world.
But then, I forgot: you don't give a fuck.
Just one of the reasons why this thread--and YOU--are both silly.
91 - jaz
again, i don't give a fuck about your opinion...different beast than just not caring
now, go up and read what i typed in #70 again..i do mention sources that are personally known to me, who are still in that part of the world and from whom i get info on a regular basis
you keep making assumptions with no basis in either factor reality, which is the sole reason that your opinions/writing are completely meaningless
reading comprehension for the win, you might also want to take off whatever colored glasses you wear that color your perceptions when it comes to things and people you know nothing about
you might get taken a bit more seriously with just those few adjustments...
your welcome
92 - moonraven
I also don't give a fuck about YOUR opinion.
Happy now?
93 - jaz
you are immaterial to my emotional state, but thanks for the nice thought...
have you gotten over being proven wrong so blatantly yet?
94 - moonraven
I am never wrong.
95 - jaz
now you prove yourself a liar as well...
you said - ""You folks haven't been anywhere near Iran--nor anywhere else in the Middle East.""
i showed you where i had earlier stated i had indeed been to many nations in the region, and still have personal contacts there
that means you were wrong, Q.E.D.
stating you are "never wrong" after definitive proof to the contrary indicates you are either delusional, or an outright liar
my thoughts on which is accurate.
96 - moonraven
Compared to you, I am omniscient. That is all that matters.
97 - jaz
ah..so it's both a liar and delusional...hopefully you will eventually get some treatment for that
98 - moonraven
And I repeat: This thread--and YOU--are both just silly.
99 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Jaz,
Not looking for any arguments here, just asking a polite question. Where did you happen to be in the Middle East and approximately when?
100 - jaz
a few places many years ago, unfortunately it's not something i can speak freely about
not trying to be evasive, but that's the only answer available
101 - moonraven
Probably he was in a stroller. No wonder he remembers nothing.
102 - jaz
incorrect once again, moonraven
i was old enough to vote, drive and drink legally, and i have more than merely memory to go by
103 - moonraven
I haven't seen anythiung from you.
You are just making it up.
104 - jaz
the delusional believe as they like, and nothing can alter their twisted Perception...
i'm quite content to allow my own veracity to be determined by Readers based upon the consistent quality of Content i've provided, and is a matter of Record, here on BC
i've ALWAYS said never believe any single Source..look shit up, and make up your own mind
as to the matter at hand... the Conversation was between Al and myself...of course you are more than welcome to chime in...everybody is.. but the Context was as i've described (with a side bar twixt zing and myself)
the Question was something Ruvy asked of me, and i Answered as best as i am going to
therefore....convincing you is not anything worthy of consideration in the matter... Ruvy and i have quite a history of Conversation, and i am content that he will understand what i've said in Response
enjoy your evening
105 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Marthe,
Jaz and I have been discussing (and mostly disagreeing on) various issues on this site over a year now. But he is honest, a gentleman and a scholar.
Nuf said...
106 - moonraven
bullshit--100% pure.
107 - moonraven
Ruvy,
This is a virtual site. No one is anything. Don't be silly.
108 - moonraven
The bullshit referenced belongs to jaz.
109 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
Looking as comment #74, I do have a few thoughts to share here. I've never been to Jordan, and the one time I was in the Sinai, it was under our rule, not that of the Egyptians. I never visited Pakistan, and doubt that I'd be admitted entry, given that my passport has that six letter curse word to the Moslems who run Pakistan - "ISRAEL". And I do live here in Israel and have no intention of moving. Period.
A number of years ago anthropologist Dr. Shalva Weil of the Hebrew University visited a Yusufzai tribe of Pakhtun living near the "Line of Control" that separates India and Pakistan. The result of her visit was an article for Jerusalem Report called "Our Brothers, the Taliban" (sorry, couldn't get a link).
The Pakhtun (most of the Taliban are Pakhtun) ALL claim to be descendants of the ten tribes of Israel. And they are damned proud of it. So far as they are concerned, we Jews are the scum from the wrong side of the tracks. The Pakhtun tribe of Afridi, for example (the ones who control the Khyber Pass), claim descent from the Tribe of Ephraim.
Any MizraHi Jew could tell you that the Pakhtun are descendants of the tribes of Israel "lost" to the Assyrians about 2,800 years ago when the ancient "Kingdom of Israel" was conquered. Any MizraHi Jew could tell you that the "Jews" of Bukhara, are not really Jews at all but Israelites from the tribe of Reuven (that thought comforts me - the tribe of Reuven lived and did not die) who kept their links to Hebrew and to the Torah. The Pakhtun did not, but continue many of the customs of the Israelite religion, such as lighting candles on Friday night, and wearing sidelocks (I never thought that this was an Israelite custom, but it is).
It is only the Ashkenazi Jews who have been too stupid to recognize who their relatives are. Unfortunately, this country is under the control of secular Ashkenazi Jewish elites, who are not only ignorant of much that the MizeraHim know, but who do not give a damn about being Jews at all. So far as they are concerned, they want to be Europeans of Israeli extraction. For them, G-d is just an abstraction to be forgotten, the faster the better.
So what is the bottom line here? The Taliban and most other Pakhtun are not exactly my bosom buds. Most of the Pakhtun are proud to be Children of Israel. It allows them to look down on fellow Moslems because they can claim descent from the Prophet Yakub. But that is as far as it goes, so far as they are concerned - right now.
But these are still brothers of mine, fellow descendants of the Patriarch Jacob. And things CAN change.
Just an observation: While I do not like the Taliban at all, I do not want to see them murdered off - on spec. They are, after all, my brothers, fellow children of Israel, and they weren't ALWAYS Taliban. The Taliban is a relatively new bunch out of Deoband, India. And their influence can be countered.
And the Pakhtun can learn the truth about their brothers, the Jews. If they have been smart enough to survive this long, they are smart enough to shed the bullshit the MSM tosses around about us, and distinguish the truth from its lies...
Hope infuses the soul with steel and allows it to thrive and survive in the worst circumstances, and things are getting bad here.
110 - MAOZ
Ruvy #109 -- The Pakhtun are Muslims, yes?
Muslims claim that it was Ishmael rather than Yitzhak who underwent the Akeida, yes? (That's the basis of Eid-ul-Adha, if I'm not mistaken.)
You believe they're telling the truth about that? (I.e., tantamount to saying that the Torah is a lie.)
If you ask me, I say that [assuming my understanding of their account of this event is correct] the Muslim account is not to be believed.
And with that in mind, I say to myself: "The [Muslim] Pakhtun claim to be Children of Israel. Is that claim any more reliable than the Muslims' claim vis-a-vis the Akeida?"
111 - Ruvy in Jerusalem
MAOZ,
Let's be crystal clear here. Moslems view their religion as the original one, the default of Adam. They recognize Ya'acov as a prophet, as they recognize Moshe, Yosef and David. But the Pakhtun claim descent from Ya'akov, not Ishmael.
The Pakhtun have been claiming descent from Israel for over a thousand years, and have never hurt Jewish merchants from Kabul who travelled in their lands over the centuries. These things have been cited for several centuries of writings, both in Persia and from Jewish sources. Until recently, the Pakhtun relationship to Islam was a thin one, at best. For the most part they called themselves Moslems and let it go with that. The Taliban changed all that.
The story with the Pakhtun is that they converted to Islam from the Israelite religion, but as descendants of a prophet, they look down on other Moslems... And they do have long noses...
The point is that they were Israelites long before they were Moslems and the names of their tribes (Rabani, Yusufzai, Afridi), along with the terms they use to describe the tribal and subtribal divisions - "Hel" and kahal (Hel is spelled with a Het and likely related to the Hebrew Hayíl, "kahal" should be obvious) gives evidence of this. Further research into Pakhto (a Farsi derived language) will be necessary to substantiate the links.
Check out the works of Dr. Navras Jaat Aafreedi, a Pakhtun from India studying here in Israel who has spoken twice at the Israel Center. Google the guy up on the internet.
I'm inclined to believe Dr. Aafreedi, a fellow Israelite seeking to cement ties between his people and ours, along with fellow Jews who are MizraHim, as well as Rabbi Dr. Yehuda Bohrer and Dr. Shalva Weil, authorities in this field.
112 - sridhar
The broken windows theory has come for a bit of stick by crimnologists who believe that the achievements of Guliani in eradicating crime in New York was highly hyped up. The complex interplay of sociological factors were responsible for the rise in crime in New York. Moreover, some experts hold the view that crime was already on the decline at the time Guliani took over as Mayor.
But Al more to the point: may not be a bad idea to apply Broken windows to American foreign policy.It may significantly reduce terrorism in the world.
113 - RJ
Noted military historian "jaz" writes:
but here's the thing...in the realm of military strategy, you MUST finish what you start before engaging in another front in any conflict
Right. Just like the US during WWII first took out the Japanese before going after the Germans?
114 - MCH
"Noted military historian "jaz" writes:"
- RJ Elliott
At least jaz has actually served in the military, thereby understanding that words without action are meaningless.
115 - jaz
oh yes, and for RJ...look how well fighting on 2 fronts worked for Germany
it IS possible to be done, but NOT on the cheap with so few troops in each theater
but, you knew that
116 - RJ
"jaz" wrote:
in the realm of military strategy, you MUST finish what you start before engaging in another front in any conflict [emphasis mine]
So...I pointed out a conflict in which that wasn't the case, thereby destroying "jaz's" argument. "Jaz" then cites an example of where his little theory did hold, and then moves the goalposts by saying:
it IS possible to be done, but NOT on the cheap with so few troops in each theater
And you wonder why liberals aren't trusted on national security issues...
117 - jaz
ah RJ...in actuality i was attempting to demonstrate why the axiom is one to strive for when speaking about military strategy...even the example you use is fraught with times when all concerned would rather have only had a single front to deal with
sorry if you thought i was trying to move anything, in actuality all i was attempting was to demonstrate my point...and in the case of th eUS in WW2, there were factors outside of operational control concerning where and when to enter each Theater of Operations, weren't there?
you carefully neglect that fact in your analogy, because otherwise it would not hold up when it was pointed out that the ENTIRE timing for all things Iraq were NOT forced, but OPTIONAL and completely at the whims of those in Operational command
in WW2, on one flank were were attacked, on the other helping Allies fend of an expansionist
Iraq neither attacked us, nor were expanding anywhere...they had been contained pretty damned successfully (yeah i know, there were incidents...but ten years of cost and death which doesn't touch the toll in blood and treasure spewed out in the last few years, does it?)
if you understand these things so well..do please explain the reasoning behind the date and time chosen for the Iraq invasion besides the political?
what indicators do you know of that the rest of us don't concerning the level of mission goal accomplishment in Afghanistan was achieved before resources were curtailed?
i'm seriously interested, because i cannot find the answers to either of those, and they form the root of my thesis that it was fucking piss poor judgement to stop in Afghanistan with the job not even half finished and bin Laden still romping about (you remember him, the guy who planned the operation that hit on 9/11?...he's kind of famous..) to shift to sending in too few troops in Iraq with insufficient equipment and preparation...
enlighten us, RJ...we seek your Wisdom
no wonder the definition of a neocon is a "republican that believes the Matrix is real"...
118 - MCH
"And you wonder why liberals aren't trusted on national security issues..."
Actually I "wonder" more about war-wimps who're content to send someone else to fight their battles for them.
119 - Clavos
no wonder the definition of a neocon is a "republican that believes the Matrix is real"...
What's "the Matrix?"
120 - jaz
ummm...the movies with Keanu Reeves
you gotta get out more, Clavos...
121 - RJ
in WW2, on one flank were were attacked, on the other helping Allies fend of an expansionist
So, Saddam wasn't an "expansionist" when he invaded Iran or Kuwait?
But yes, you're correct in saying he didn't invade the US directly. Then again, neither did Germany in WWII...
Of course, Hitler was a bad man and needed to be stopped. But Saddam was a bad man when he tried to assassinate former President Bush, no?
And, yes, Hitler was attacking our allies during WWII, so we had to respond, right? But didn't Saddam attack Israel, a US ally, by funding suicide bombers?
122 - MCH
"And, yes, Hitler was attacking our allies during WWII, so we had to respond, right? But didn't Saddam attack Israel, a US ally, by funding suicide bombers?"
And so your "response" is writing a bunch of phony empty rhetoric on a blogroll?
123 - jaz
RJ...again your are attempting to conflate two completely different things, but that's ok..whatever works for you
you might notice that we invaded Iraq, what...10 years after he did Kuwait..oh wait a second, we invaded him right then too...
i should know better, there's just no reasoning with some folks
i'll just leave it at the simple fact that there is a clearly documented Record here on BC form both you and i about Iraq
i've been right, you've been incorrect on almost all counts
sell your partisan neocon dittohead schtick somewhere else
nobody is buying it any more
124 - RJ
Awww...you're not responding to the actual arguments in my comment, but instead calling me a "neocon" (a slur if there ever was one) and leaving it at that.
Color me unsurprised...
125 - jaz
RJ..i usually do respond, and civilly...when you actually do have arguments in the comments on something i'm reading
scroll up and read it again...
i'd even give you a pass on the neocon bit, if you could show me where you have deviated from their Agenda in your own rants around here...
it's not usually your positions that i find distasteful...there are times i even agree with some of what you say
but your own bomb throwing tactics ( can you say giant thalidimide baby, and all kinds of broad brush slurs against every democrat/"liberal" any chance you get...just to dig?...shouldn't bug me...not being one, but still...geeez d00d)
so...how's this, unless you have somehow changed your mind/position on everything concerning Iraq...how about we let our records speak for themselves?
now...as for your liking to be colored...whatever floats your boat, i guess