US wants to leave peacekeeping and rebuilding Afganistan to Europe!

[Wiglaf]

Don't you think that the NA deserves a special mention?

for taking empty cities, and breaking into Kabul despite being told not to?

We aren't going after Iraq. If I were a betting man, I'd say that the Philipines (sp) are next.

Bush will eliminate terrorism. He'll get Iraq eventually.

[Wiglaf]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Wiglaf, why should Canada be hit? They put themselves at great risk by accepting the planes that were redirected by the FAA. I'd say that they have proven themselves.

They lied about military aid. and, btw, the civilian planes were NO danger to them after they were diverted. not only were fighters on alert, the terrorists weren't exactly going to plan B the whole thing all of a sudden and hit some foreign landmark...

But I think it's funny that you think the NA did nothing.

you think everything is unfair.

I understand your point of view too.

the middle ground gets you nothing.

How many were the american casualties? Very little close to zero.

tell that to the five dead pilots, their familes, and fellow troops.

How did the Taliban leave? Because your smart bombs OCCUPIED the cities?

they had no more power after their troops were deserting, being picked off daily, and ran low on ammo. the NA didn't take anything, there was never a fight for any of the northern cities from anyone but the US.

the alliance is just a placeholder.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Wiglaf
for taking empty cities, and breaking into Kabul despite being told not to?

Air power has never won a war on its own. The NA's efforts saved us from having to commit large amounts of ground troops to the area.

[TCO]

Wiglaf,

Quit being a jackass. Sure we're doing most of the heavy lifting. We're the injured party. Whatever help we can get from other countries we will take even if it is purely nominal (even that has value for diplomatic and PR reasons.)

Paiktis...

[Giancarlo]

Everyone, I think Phillippine President Arroyo can handle the situation with her Armed forces. All she needs to do is unleash an unrelenting attack on the Abu Sayuff (SP?)

But I must admit that nobody did anything besides the US, absolutely nothing in the combat perspective. Probably because some of these countries are ill-prepared to go in. My country does not have the manpower to contribute much, though we will send some in soon.

[Bereta_Eder]

edited: forget it

[Wiglaf]

Air power has never won a war on its own. The NA's efforts saved us from having to commit large amounts of ground troops to the area.

they were going after their own agenda. eventually we'll probably have to replace them, as they have defied the US several times on their march into Kabul.

Quit being a jackass. Sure we're doing most of the heavy lifting. We're the injured party. Whatever help we can get from other countries we will take even if it is purely nominal (even that has value for diplomatic and PR reasons.)

So Blair was being truthful when he said his country was attacked, and he would treat EF like 4,000 british citizens died to cause it? whatever.

[Roman]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
Re Roman's article: What exactly is wrong with it?

The article shows a pattern emerging. The US usually carries out a military action with minor EU support. The EU then goes in for the long term doing peacekeeping and spending vast sums of money to rebuilt the country concerned, becoming commited to the area with little prospect of being able to pull out in the future.

Both blocks should do both.

[CapTVK]

Originally posted by Evil_Eric_4



Yea using American Dollars

Why thank you! but Europe can pay it's own bills when it comes to foreign aid. Thanks for the offer though.


And Eric, foreign aid to undeveloped armies (errr...countries)doesn't count.

[Dis]

because U.S. peacekeeping forces would be decimated by terrorists if we occupied the country. Look at the russian, they weren't peacekeepers, but terrorists won't make a distinction.

in case it isn't obvious. the U.S. isn't well liked over there.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Wiglaf

So Blair was being truthful when he said his country was attacked, and he would treat EF like 4,000 british citizens died to cause it? whatever.

Who the **** cares? This is not a **** size contest, you little weener. If you're such a badass, go sign up and serve your country.

[TCO]

Originally posted by Roman


The article shows a pattern emerging. The US usually carries out a military action with minor EU support. The EU then goes in for the long term doing peacekeeping and spending vast sums of money to rebuilt the country concerned, becoming commited to the area with little prospect of being able to pull out in the future.

Both blocks should do both.

If you don't want to help out, don't. Simple as that. No sweat.

Oh, by the way I think you underestimate how much Europeans depend on the US to help forege coalitions. Nobody wanted to do anything in Yugo, unless "the big boy" was committed, also.

[Evil_Eric_4]

Why thank you! but Europe can pay it's own bills when it comes to foreign aid. Thanks for the offer though.

There has been much talk inside our government about a Marshall Plan for Afganistan for some time --even before the shooting started.

Trust me -The bulk of the cash to rebuild will be coming from the American taxpayer.

Not that those ( or you for that matter) people will apreciate it though.

[red_jon]

Hmm, maybe our troops aren't liberating the cities because they are sitting around waiting for orders from the Americans?

Never mind, I'm sure you Americans can make a nice film about how you stopped the Taliban from nuking the world

[red_jon]

(My apologies to any decent Americans I offended - we should be standing together, but you're always gonna get some moron like wiglaf watching the Redneck News Network )