US isn't very picky when it comes to chosing allies

[Ned]

Saint Marcus, Doesn't the article say we are investigating? Didn't you tell me that the Dutch government is investigating Sebrenicia?

What else can we do?

[Saint Marcus]

Saint Marcus, you are bound to unleash the fury of HYPER-patriots, such as Chris62 and Slowwhand.

Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

(guess that quote)

Saint Marcus, Doesn't the article say we are investigating?

Yes. A bit late though (since everyone knew the NA has a habit of doing stuff like this).

What else can we do?

End your support of the NA.

Didn't you tell me that the Dutch government is investigating Sebrenicia?

We already finished the investigation. And that massacre wasn't commited by our allies.

The NA contained several vile elements, most particularly Doustum's gang, but of course they were there, had international recognized rights in the conflict, and were ready to fight, whereas foreign pacifist cowards would be entirely useless.

So why didn't the US just fight it's own fight?

The enemy of my enemy...

And that makes it right? So in your opinion, warcrimes are alright as long as the "enemy" is the target?

To be fair at the time they were after the guys who did Sept11

No they weren't. The NA was primarily fighting the Taliban, not Al Qaida.

[Thucydides]

Originally posted by TheStinger


The USA hadn't been allied to the USSR since the 1940's

I know, I reached a little farther back in time for that one then the others, but the principle is still the same.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus
And that makes it right? So in your opinion, warcrimes are alright as long as the "enemy" is the target?

If you can point out an armed resistance group in Afghanistan that existed prior to 9/11 with clean hands, I'll agree with your contention that we shouldn't have allied with them. However until you do that, I fail to see where we had any choice but to ally ourselves with NA forces.

[Az]

good move DD.

SM , stop recycling.

[chequita guevara]

It was a particularly hideous manner of execution.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
It's ironic that we supported terriorists against the Soviet Union and now find ourselves targeted. Reap what you sow.

So those who resisted the Soviet Union's invasion of Afghanistan in 1979 — and the subsequent 10-year occupation — are termed terrorists because they received U.S. funding and, later, Stinger missiles?

But, no, it's not really ironic. We knew from the get-go that a good number of the elements resisting the Soviet invasion were religious zealots of the Islamic strain. It shouldn't be of any great surprise that their theological ire would eventually turn on the the U.S. and the rest of the outside world once the Soviet Union was expelled. After all, we're not much better in their eyes, being mostly secular and being governed by democratic/republican systems of government.

Our arrangement with the mujhadeen was one of necessity, not because we were genuinely good buddies who saw eye-to-eye. The real world seems to be replete with examples of this — the enemy of my enemy is my friend — and, well, that's life. Any change in that is going to require a shift in humanity's evolution, nothing less.

Gatekeeper

[Gastric ReFlux]

Originally posted by Saint Marcus


Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel.

(guess that quote)

Samuel Johnson

[rah]

DD, you summed it up perfectly

One can only assume that SM is stuck in a rut desplayed from his obvious lack of originality today.

And that he has NEVER had to choose between the lessor of two evils. Maybe when he gets older, he'll understand.

RAH

maybe you never have to choose between the lesser of two evils up in the neverlands. Unfortunately, we in the US, have to make that choice regularly. We get lots of practice voting in presidential campaigns.

[Saint Marcus]

It is really sad some people don't seem to find this very appaling. The general consensus here is: "**** happends, who cares." Very sad.

If you can point out an armed resistance group in Afghanistan that existed prior to 9/11 with clean hands, I'll agree with your contention that we shouldn't have allied with them. However until you do that, I fail to see where we had any choice but to ally ourselves with NA forces.

Why ally with any group? Can't fight your own fights?

Samuel Johnson

Very good. Here's a cookie.

[rah]

Your lack of understanding political reality is the real sad thing here.

The US never intended to rule the country.
(directly that is )

[Jac de Molay]

Why ally with any group? Can't fight your own fights?

One Word - Synergy. They were able to provide important ground recon over difficult, rugged terrain, which helped the US coordinate their own ground and air efforts. In turn, we could provide them with hardware support and utililize their unique fighting ability and experience in certain areas of the country.

And I happen to think the NA are just of bunch of sweet, misunderstood guys.

[Lefty Scaevola]

Originally posted by rah
maybe you never have to choose between the lesser of two evils up in the neverlands.

When occupied durring WW2 many Dutch made interesting choice. Durring much of the time they were occuppied, they contirbeute more manpower tens of thousands to NAZI military and security forces, the side of genocide, than were active in the resistance against them. The resistance later had more active mebers when it was clear the allies were winning. Not all that far from the cowardice displayed at some levels in Bosnia 50 years later.

[Gatekeeper]

Originally posted by rah
The US never intended to rule the country.
(directly that is )

rah, do you really want to make him more paranoid than he already is?

Gatekeeper

[rah]

Is that Possible.