Taliban Tells Obama to F** Off

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
21

[quote]ProwlCat wrote:
Let’s just strap in for an eight year freakshow, folks. We’ve elected an arrogant, America hating race-baiter president. What did anyone expect? He was the most liberal member of the most liberal senate of all time? We were hoping for Barry Goldwater instead of Barry Obama?

The press lied for him and our society’s losers turned out to vote for their goody-bag. And they’re getting it. Free money for having kids you can’t support! Homes you dont’ actually have to pay for! Free health care! Jobs! A cure for cancer! HOPE! At long last, HOPE!

We KNEW he hated America. We KNEW he hated the UK. Read his freaking books! We knew he’d done drugs, you know, a ‘little blow’. We knew he surrounded himself with America-hating terrorists. And we expected him to NOT try and be pals with Hamas (he gave 'em a billion dollars), the Taliban, et al?

We got what we deserve for being a nation of idiots. Got hope? Hell…I don’t even see those t-shirts any more. I’ll probably bust out laughing if I do.[/quote]

Shut the fuck up already. You’re such a blithering moron. Who was sending off 50 million dollars to Afghanistan/Taliban prior to 911? Durrrrr, was it a republican controlled congress? Ding ding ding, yes it was. CNN.com - U.S. gives $43 million to Afghanistan - May 17, 2001

"The United States has contributed more than $1 billion in humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people since 1979, more than any other country. " U.S. Announces $320 Million in Aid to Afghanistan - Afghanistan | ReliefWeb Hmmm, I wonder who got the bulk of that?

I also seem to remember another president who did some cocaine, and was a fucking drunk. Do you remember him? George W something…

Your shit bag party has had just as much hand in, if not more, than the democrats in ruining this country over the last 30 years through terrible policies and getting in bed with terrorists. So stop acting as if it hasn’t. You’re right about the nation of idiots though, a bunch of party loving twats incapable of placing the blame on everyone involved instead of just the “other side”.

22

Leftist rage and utter intolerance of anything different than their own views – while of course mouthing the virtues of “diversity,” “bipartisanship,” “unity,” “common ground” and so forth – is always so comical.

23

I love this board.

Where else can you get “Bush got such a raw deal” and “Obama is a communist drug user intent on destroying America” in the same thread?

I don’t suppose anyone has considered that his actions may buy him much needed political capital in the Muslim world? Also, many of the fighters in Afghanistan did not start out as idealists, they started out as very poor people who wanted a leg up, and unfortunately, that is the easiest way to get a socioeconomic boost in that particular part of the world. His professed willingness to negotiate may give some of those people pause.

I’m not defending him. In the long run it was probably a bad choice, but the amount of Obama-hate I’ve seen in the past three months is just staggering. You’re acting just like the liberals who railed against Bush, and it’s just as constructive.

Two wrongs don’t make a ______ (fill in the blank).

24

[quote]tom8658 wrote:
I love this board.

Where else can you get “Bush got such a raw deal” and “Obama is a communist drug user intent on destroying America” in the same thread?

I don’t suppose anyone has considered that his actions may buy him much needed political capital in the Muslim world? Also, many of the fighters in Afghanistan did not start out as idealists, they started out as very poor people who wanted a leg up, and unfortunately, that is the easiest way to get a socioeconomic boost in that particular part of the world. His professed willingness to negotiate may give some of those people pause.

I’m not defending him. In the long run it was probably a bad choice, but the amount of Obama-hate I’ve seen in the past three months is just staggering. You’re acting just like the liberals who railed against Bush, and it’s just as constructive.

Two wrongs don’t make a ______ (fill in the blank).[/quote]

Good post. But it’ll get lost in the sea of moronic partisanship around here.

25

[quote]pat wrote:

LOL! Yet another embarrassing moment, there are so many! Let’s have a moment of silence…It just speaks for itself.[/quote]

You’re having real trouble understanding this, huh?

There are multiple Talibans, all of whom may pledge nominal fealty to the same leaders. The “Quetta Shura” (because that’s where they’re presumed to be hiding) is led by Mullah Omar, the original leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan. They are irreconcilables. They sheltered bin Laden and refused to give him up. They undoubtedly think they can wait us out and come back to power in Kabul. They may be right.

However, on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan (which has its own Taliban), there are undoubtedly many footsoldiers and more than a few commanders who are not fanatical jihadists. Some may be drug smugglers, some have lost a friend or family member to Coalition airstrikes, some are nationalists who don’t like foreign troops on their soil, some are Pashtuns who see the government in Kabul as a clique of Tajiks and Uzbeks, and some just like the excitement of violence (like young men for all of human history). Peeling some of these people off, through money or politics, makes plenty of sense. A press release, presumably from Mullah Omar’s folks, does not make a ton of difference either way. What do you think he would say?

Again, WE DID THIS EXACT THING IN IRAQ 18 MONTHS AGO. It may not work as well in Afghanistan. I suspect it won’t. But I don’t get why it is so hard to understand.

26

[quote]ProwlCat wrote:
Let’s just strap in for an eight year freakshow, folks. We’ve elected an arrogant, America hating race-baiter president. What did anyone expect? He was the most liberal member of the most liberal senate of all time? We were hoping for Barry Goldwater instead of Barry Obama?

The press lied for him and our society’s losers turned out to vote for their goody-bag. And they’re getting it. Free money for having kids you can’t support! Homes you dont’ actually have to pay for! Free health care! Jobs! A cure for cancer! HOPE! At long last, HOPE!

We KNEW he hated America. We KNEW he hated the UK. Read his freaking books! We knew he’d done drugs, you know, a ‘little blow’. We knew he surrounded himself with America-hating terrorists. And we expected him to NOT try and be pals with Hamas (he gave 'em a billion dollars), the Taliban, et al?

We got what we deserve for being a nation of idiots. Got hope? Hell…I don’t even see those t-shirts any more. I’ll probably bust out laughing if I do.[/quote]

Oh yeah, tighten it up an extra notch. This was a prophecy that was set in motion when he was running for the senator slot. Be careful what you wish for!

BG

27

[quote]Inner Hulk wrote:
ProwlCat wrote:
Let’s just strap in for an eight year freakshow, folks. We’ve elected an arrogant, America hating race-baiter president. What did anyone expect? He was the most liberal member of the most liberal senate of all time? We were hoping for Barry Goldwater instead of Barry Obama?

The press lied for him and our society’s losers turned out to vote for their goody-bag. And they’re getting it. Free money for having kids you can’t support! Homes you dont’ actually have to pay for! Free health care! Jobs! A cure for cancer! HOPE! At long last, HOPE!

We KNEW he hated America. We KNEW he hated the UK. Read his freaking books! We knew he’d done drugs, you know, a ‘little blow’. We knew he surrounded himself with America-hating terrorists. And we expected him to NOT try and be pals with Hamas (he gave 'em a billion dollars), the Taliban, et al?

We got what we deserve for being a nation of idiots. Got hope? Hell…I don’t even see those t-shirts any more. I’ll probably bust out laughing if I do.

Shut the fuck up already. You’re such a blithering moron. Who was sending off 50 million dollars to Afghanistan/Taliban prior to 911? Durrrrr, was it a republican controlled congress? Ding ding ding, yes it was. CNN.com - U.S. gives $43 million to Afghanistan - May 17, 2001

"The United States has contributed more than $1 billion in humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people since 1979, more than any other country. " U.S. Announces $320 Million in Aid to Afghanistan - Afghanistan | ReliefWeb Hmmm, I wonder who got the bulk of that?

I also seem to remember another president who did some cocaine, and was a fucking drunk. Do you remember him? George W something…

Your shit bag party has had just as much hand in, if not more, than the democrats in ruining this country over the last 30 years through terrible policies and getting in bed with terrorists. So stop acting as if it hasn’t. You’re right about the nation of idiots though, a bunch of party loving twats incapable of placing the blame on everyone involved instead of just the “other side”.[/quote]

Yet another dumbass strawman! There is not leg to stand on here. President dumbass said he want to negotiate with ‘moderate’ elements of the taliban…They simply confirmed that there is no moderate taliban…No amount of 'shit’s and 'fuck’s are going to change the stupidity of what happened here.

28

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
pat wrote:

LOL! Yet another embarrassing moment, there are so many! Let’s have a moment of silence…It just speaks for itself.

You’re having real trouble understanding this, huh?

There are multiple Talibans, all of whom may pledge nominal fealty to the same leaders. The “Quetta Shura” (because that’s where they’re presumed to be hiding) is led by Mullah Omar, the original leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan. They are irreconcilables. They sheltered bin Laden and refused to give him up. They undoubtedly think they can wait us out and come back to power in Kabul. They may be right.

However, on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan (which has its own Taliban), there are undoubtedly many footsoldiers and more than a few commanders who are not fanatical jihadists. Some may be drug smugglers, some have lost a friend or family member to Coalition airstrikes, some are nationalists who don’t like foreign troops on their soil, some are Pashtuns who see the government in Kabul as a clique of Tajiks and Uzbeks, and some just like the excitement of violence (like young men for all of human history). Peeling some of these people off, through money or politics, makes plenty of sense. A press release, presumably from Mullah Omar’s folks, does not make a ton of difference either way. What do you think he would say?

Again, WE DID THIS EXACT THING IN IRAQ 18 MONTHS AGO. It may not work as well in Afghanistan. I suspect it won’t. But I don’t get why it is so hard to understand.[/quote]

He said they’re multiple talibans!!! Oh shit you guys are killing me! LOL!!! LOL!!! I fucking crying!

29

[quote]pat wrote:
Inner Hulk wrote:
ProwlCat wrote:
Let’s just strap in for an eight year freakshow, folks. We’ve elected an arrogant, America hating race-baiter president. What did anyone expect? He was the most liberal member of the most liberal senate of all time? We were hoping for Barry Goldwater instead of Barry Obama?

The press lied for him and our society’s losers turned out to vote for their goody-bag. And they’re getting it. Free money for having kids you can’t support! Homes you dont’ actually have to pay for! Free health care! Jobs! A cure for cancer! HOPE! At long last, HOPE!

We KNEW he hated America. We KNEW he hated the UK. Read his freaking books! We knew he’d done drugs, you know, a ‘little blow’. We knew he surrounded himself with America-hating terrorists. And we expected him to NOT try and be pals with Hamas (he gave 'em a billion dollars), the Taliban, et al?

We got what we deserve for being a nation of idiots. Got hope? Hell…I don’t even see those t-shirts any more. I’ll probably bust out laughing if I do.

Shut the fuck up already. You’re such a blithering moron. Who was sending off 50 million dollars to Afghanistan/Taliban prior to 911? Durrrrr, was it a republican controlled congress? Ding ding ding, yes it was. CNN.com - U.S. gives $43 million to Afghanistan - May 17, 2001

"The United States has contributed more than $1 billion in humanitarian assistance to the Afghan people since 1979, more than any other country. " U.S. Announces $320 Million in Aid to Afghanistan - Afghanistan | ReliefWeb Hmmm, I wonder who got the bulk of that?

I also seem to remember another president who did some cocaine, and was a fucking drunk. Do you remember him? George W something…

Your shit bag party has had just as much hand in, if not more, than the democrats in ruining this country over the last 30 years through terrible policies and getting in bed with terrorists. So stop acting as if it hasn’t. You’re right about the nation of idiots though, a bunch of party loving twats incapable of placing the blame on everyone involved instead of just the “other side”.

Yet another dumbass strawman! There is not leg to stand on here. President dumbass said he want to negotiate with ‘moderate’ elements of the taliban…They simply confirmed that there is no moderate taliban…No amount of 'shit’s and 'fuck’s are going to change the stupidity of what happened here.[/quote]

So are you telling me that your new source of reliable and accurate information is the Taliban?

30

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Leftist rage and utter intolerance of anything different than their own views – while of course mouthing the virtues of “diversity,” “bipartisanship,” “unity,” “common ground” and so forth – is always so comical.[/quote]

Did you even read the post I quoted?

31

[quote]pat wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
pat wrote:

LOL! Yet another embarrassing moment, there are so many! Let’s have a moment of silence…It just speaks for itself.

You’re having real trouble understanding this, huh?

There are multiple Talibans, all of whom may pledge nominal fealty to the same leaders. The “Quetta Shura” (because that’s where they’re presumed to be hiding) is led by Mullah Omar, the original leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan. They are irreconcilables. They sheltered bin Laden and refused to give him up. They undoubtedly think they can wait us out and come back to power in Kabul. They may be right.

However, on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan (which has its own Taliban), there are undoubtedly many footsoldiers and more than a few commanders who are not fanatical jihadists. Some may be drug smugglers, some have lost a friend or family member to Coalition airstrikes, some are nationalists who don’t like foreign troops on their soil, some are Pashtuns who see the government in Kabul as a clique of Tajiks and Uzbeks, and some just like the excitement of violence (like young men for all of human history). Peeling some of these people off, through money or politics, makes plenty of sense. A press release, presumably from Mullah Omar’s folks, does not make a ton of difference either way. What do you think he would say?

Again, WE DID THIS EXACT THING IN IRAQ 18 MONTHS AGO. It may not work as well in Afghanistan. I suspect it won’t. But I don’t get why it is so hard to understand.

He said they’re multiple talibans!!! Oh shit you guys are killing me! LOL!!! LOL!!! I fucking crying![/quote]

As in any revolutionary movement, there are factions, and the strength and control of the central leadership varies. Witness the shootings in Ireland the last couple days…

Ah, forget it dude. I give up. Keep spreading your ignorance around this forum in big doses.

If you do ever become curious in learning what actually goes on over there, General Petraeus’ Australian strategist, David Kilcullen, wrote a book called ‘The Accidental Guerrilla’ recently.

32

Is it really so hard to believe that there are factions within the Taliban? I suppose you would prefer to argue semantics than to admit that there is even the slightest possibility that you are wrong?

It’s even possible that there are factions within the Taliban that think Mullah Omar is out to destroy Afghanistan with his socialist policies… see what I did there? It’s called a metaphor. If you’d like to nitpick at that, I’ll go ahead an help you out: claim that I compared you to a terrorist, then call me a socialist pig.

What, exactly, would you expect a spokesperson for the Taliban to say? “Thanks, President Obama! We are carefully considering your proposal to divide our powerbase, and we appreciate your attempt to reach out to us.” Of course they told him to fuck off.

33

There are no “moderate” Taliban. But, since we can’t win against Jihadists anyways, why keep wasting so many resources?

34

“Can’t win” isn’t true. We have so far succeeded in killing more than 50,000 of the murderous scum terrorists (between both Iraq and Afghanistan) and stopped all kinds of things they were trying to do, including running those countries.

However, for sure Obama has made it far harder now.

The fact is, regardless of any other factor, most Muslim individuals, as with most individuals, are rational people when it comes to their own self-interest in any truly major way.

Thus, even though millions of them indeed believe that the Koran promises reward unachievable in any other way for the killer of infidels including via suicide bombing, the number that actually decide to strap on the bomb vest is but a tiny, tiny percentage.

And ditto for millions (I should probably say tens of millions at the least, or perhaps more than 100 million) believing, from their understanding of the Koran, that their God would be most pleased with them taking up arms agains the United States of America and other infidels – again, rational self-interest steps in and the number that choose to do this is “only” in the tens of thousands. Or maybe moderately over 100,000, I don’t know. But still a very small percentage of the total.

But now, how many are saying, “You were concerned before that taking up arms against the Great Satan would acomplish nothing in this world, that you would just die uselessly against their superior power, as tens of thousands of jihadists have fallen already. But now the Great Satan is surrendering, is saying they cannot win, is saying we must win! And we will win! Now that victory is sure, cast off all doubt, take up arms against the Great Satan and be part of the victory!”

Being part of the winning side on the very verge of victory is MUCH more appealing than being part of the side getting slaughtered, as has been the case for them the last 6 years or so.

And Obama has just given them what is needed to give them confidence in victory.

Wow, all that and more in just 7 weeks in office! What a man!

Or is he even a man? I suspect he is a superman! Or even Messiah.

35

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
pat wrote:
GDollars37 wrote:
pat wrote:

LOL! Yet another embarrassing moment, there are so many! Let’s have a moment of silence…It just speaks for itself.

You’re having real trouble understanding this, huh?

There are multiple Talibans, all of whom may pledge nominal fealty to the same leaders. The “Quetta Shura” (because that’s where they’re presumed to be hiding) is led by Mullah Omar, the original leader of the Taliban in Afghanistan. They are irreconcilables. They sheltered bin Laden and refused to give him up. They undoubtedly think they can wait us out and come back to power in Kabul. They may be right.

However, on the ground in Afghanistan and Pakistan (which has its own Taliban), there are undoubtedly many footsoldiers and more than a few commanders who are not fanatical jihadists. Some may be drug smugglers, some have lost a friend or family member to Coalition airstrikes, some are nationalists who don’t like foreign troops on their soil, some are Pashtuns who see the government in Kabul as a clique of Tajiks and Uzbeks, and some just like the excitement of violence (like young men for all of human history). Peeling some of these people off, through money or politics, makes plenty of sense. A press release, presumably from Mullah Omar’s folks, does not make a ton of difference either way. What do you think he would say?

Again, WE DID THIS EXACT THING IN IRAQ 18 MONTHS AGO. It may not work as well in Afghanistan. I suspect it won’t. But I don’t get why it is so hard to understand.

He said they’re multiple talibans!!! Oh shit you guys are killing me! LOL!!! LOL!!! I fucking crying!

As in any revolutionary movement, there are factions, and the strength and control of the central leadership varies. Witness the shootings in Ireland the last couple days…

Ah, forget it dude. I give up. Keep spreading your ignorance around this forum in big doses.

If you do ever become curious in learning what actually goes on over there, General Petraeus’ Australian strategist, David Kilcullen, wrote a book called ‘The Accidental Guerrilla’ recently.[/quote]

Ok man, show us where these “moderate” taliban are… Just provide a link or something that shows there is a “moderate” taliban.

It doesn’t matter what we did in Iraq or in WW 2 or any other war. This ain’t Iraq. And there are no moderate talibans anywhere in the world. becuase they only exist in Afghaniatan and Pakistan region.
I don’t need to read that book to know there aren’t any “moderate” taliban groups…There is only one.
We already arm and supply the more moderate counter insurgents. We don’t need to redo that.

36

I’ll have to disagree. I simply don’t believe the West can win.

37

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
“Can’t win” isn’t true. We have so far succeeded in killing more than 50,000 of the murderous scum terrorists (between both Iraq and Afghanistan) and stopped all kinds of things they were trying to do, including running those countries.
[/quote]

Invading a sovereign nation and killing thousands of civilians, and men who decide to pick up arms and resist an invading/occupying force doesn’t magically turn those people into “murderous scum terrorists”.

38

[quote]pat wrote:
I don’t need to read that book to know there aren’t any “moderate” taliban groups…There is only one.[/quote]

LOL!

Who needs to read books written by experts on the subject when you have opinion based on…opinion?!

The amount of absurdity in your post is staggering.

39

Sorry, I view al-Qaeda members as being murderous scum terrorists. The fact you don’t, speaks volumes of you but says nothing else.

I’m not surprised you don’t. Actually I’d expect you’d give them a blow job, and then ask whether they wanted a rim job and if they’d like to take you in the ass, before offering your wife and daughters to them.

Because leftists like you just love giving aid and comfort to the enemy, and worrying about how Saddam Hussein was “sovereign” and that precious sovereignty of his regime was “violated” and his tyranny – excuse me, benevolent rule – was brought to an end as were his slaughters, tortures, rape rooms etc. You just hate that, being a leftist. It should have continued, and America is evil for ending it. Of course (to a leftist.)

40

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
However, for sure Obama has made it far harder now.

The fact is, regardless of any other factor, most Muslim individuals, as with most individuals, are rational people when it comes to their own self-interest in any truly major way.

Thus, even though millions of them indeed believe that the Koran promises reward unachievable in any other way for the killer of infidels including via suicide bombing, the number that actually decide to strap on the bomb vest is but a tiny, tiny percentage.

And ditto for millions (I should probably say tens of millions at the least, or perhaps more than 100 million) believing, from their understanding of the Koran, that their God would be most pleased with them taking up arms agains the United States of America and other infidels – again, rational self-interest steps in and the number that choose to do this is “only” in the tens of thousands. Or maybe moderately over 100,000, I don’t know. But still a very small percentage of the total.

But now, how many are saying, “You were concerned before that taking up arms against the Great Satan would acomplish nothing in this world, that you would just die uselessly against their superior power, as tens of thousands of jihadists have fallen already. But now the Great Satan is surrendering, is saying they cannot win, is saying we must win! And we will win! Now that victory is sure, cast off all doubt, take up arms against the Great Satan and be part of the victory!”

Being part of the winning side is MUCH more appealing than being part of the side getting slaughtered, as has been the case for them the last 6 years or so.

[/quote]

I agree. In that culture, attempt at negotiation would likely be considered a sign of weakness. On the other hand, if more troops do start making a positive impact on the situation in Afghanistan, some local warlords and tribal leaders may start thinking twice about fighting the US, and will remember this offer, because, as you point out, they are basically rational people who just wanted to be on the winning side.

I think he is betting on the troop surge in Afghanistan going well and being a tipping point in the war, but by making that bet, he has likely increased the odds of failure.