If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Stars and Stripes)   Hamid Karzai: "To give US troops immunity from prosecution, I'll need you to hand over all detainees in custody, shut all prisons, hand over control of Afghan airspace, and stop raiding villages." So you're sayin' there's a chance?   (stripes.com) divider line 11
    More: Unlikely, Hamid Karzai, Afghans, United States, Afghan airspace, number of troops, sovereignty, villages, prosecutors  
•       •       •

1327 clicks; posted to Politics » on 10 Dec 2012 at 10:47 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



Voting Results (Smartest)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Archived thread
2012-12-10 11:50:04 AM
2 votes:

The Larch: born_yesterday: Yep. And when Afghanistan balkinizes and falls to radicals in less time than we've spent fighting over there, it will all be worth it.

We got Osama bin Laden and pretty much destroy Al Qaeda. So, we did what we set out to do.

After World War II, we stayed in Europe rebuilding for four years. The Soviet Union stayed for the next forty years. We're starting to look a hell of a lot more like the Soviet Union than the United States.


Don't get me wrong, the Taliban needed to be eliminated as a state entity. We did that. But when asking "What's our exit strategy?" gets "You're a traitor" as its only response, there is something very wrong.
2012-12-10 11:42:57 AM
2 votes:

born_yesterday: Yep. And when Afghanistan balkinizes and falls to radicals in less time than we've spent fighting over there, it will all be worth it.


We got Osama bin Laden and pretty much destroy Al Qaeda. So, we did what we set out to do.

After World War II, we stayed in Europe rebuilding for four years. The Soviet Union stayed for the next forty years. We're starting to look a hell of a lot more like the Soviet Union than the United States.
2012-12-10 11:37:48 AM
2 votes:

born_yesterday: Yep. And when Afghanistan balkinizes and falls to radicals in less time than we've spent fighting over there, it will all be worth it.


Welcome to Afghanistan. I'm pretty sure this time will be six or seven. Once they take down 10 empires with ridiculous foreign wars, they get a free car wash.
2012-12-10 11:19:43 AM
2 votes:

oryx: How about US troops GTFO pronto? Then Karzai can have all the sovereignty he wants.


Yep. And when Afghanistan balkinizes and falls to radicals in less time than we've spent fighting over there, it will all be worth it.

/At least we were greeted as liberators
//At least the war paid for itself
///And it's not like anyone died over there
2012-12-10 10:50:31 AM
2 votes:

I_C_Weener: So let's do it.


Do it and GTFO.
2012-12-10 01:47:24 PM
1 votes:

Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: Tell Me How My Blog Tastes: Dr Dreidel: Anyway, subjecting US troops to Afghan justice (when they fark up, of course) is a great way of conferring legitimacy to that government and its criminal justice system, don't you think?

Forgot to respond to this one: I don't think "Afghan justice" is a thing. Blaming the rape victim and paying for literally any damage you cause in goats or underaged boys is not going to get the message across that you want to be sent.


And certainly, the casual racism of assuming the entire system is based on nothing but nomadic tribalism will fix things right up. The Afghani people have no reason or right to assume that US servicepeople will be called to answer for crimes like killing an Afghani civilian ("We though he was an alky yayda, Sarge - honest injun!"), right?

Like I said, it would do wonders for the conceptions of the Afghani criminal justice system if a US servicemember is tried, convicted and sentenced by one of their courts in an open, free and fair hearing (which, I assume, would be a precondition for subjecting servicepeople to the Afgahni code). No way that happens without (tacit) US approval even if the Afghanis get complete control tomorrow.
2012-12-10 12:54:59 PM
1 votes:

Shaggy_C: born_yesterday: Don't get me wrong, the Taliban needed to be eliminated as a state entity.

Why? The Taliban didn't attack us. They even offered to hand over Bin Laden as long as he was tried in the Hague instead of in a secretive military tribunal where the verdict was all but known ahead of time. We decided that wasn't good enough. There was very little reason to invade Afghanistan other than for bloodthirsty revenge, which the American people cheered for loudly.


It's even worse than that. They're effectively an arm of the ISS, the "secret police" that run much of Pakistan. It's impossible to beat the Taliban without beating the ISS, and at best that would take a civil war in Pakistan.

Making the Taliban our enemy was a really dumb idea. The Taliban didn't even like Al Qaeda.

/Still convinced that the ISS was in on the attack on Osama.
//Damn near impossible to believe that they didn't notice an attack right next to Pakistan's West Point.
///President Obama made nice with the ISS in return for Osama, is what it came down to.
//Something that we could have done 11 years ago.
/11 years...how time flies.
2012-12-10 11:58:07 AM
1 votes:

born_yesterday: Don't get me wrong, the Taliban needed to be eliminated as a state entity.


Why? The Taliban didn't attack us. They even offered to hand over Bin Laden as long as he was tried in the Hague instead of in a secretive military tribunal where the verdict was all but known ahead of time. We decided that wasn't good enough. There was very little reason to invade Afghanistan other than for bloodthirsty revenge, which the American people cheered for loudly.
2012-12-10 11:50:10 AM
1 votes:
Done in one.
2012-12-10 11:25:40 AM
1 votes:
Karzai would do well to remember that the real reason we went into Iraq in the first place were those oil fields he is opening up to the Chinese. We can come back whenever we need to, you ungrateful twit.
2012-12-10 11:25:15 AM
1 votes:

Holocaust Agnostic: Of course, factually they have little hope of arresting US troops in any numbers


And wouldn't the military want to prosecute things like rape, murder, arson and rape anyway? Or is this a "Does the judge speak Arabic or English when they sentence you" kind of thing?

I know that there are sometimes loopholes that allow a servicemember to, say, participate in the gang-rape of a Japanese woman on a military base and not be tried for it (or maybe I'm remembering that wrong, and because it happened on-base, he was subject to UCMJ...whatever. There are loopholes).

Anyway, subjecting US troops to Afghan justice (when they fark up, of course) is a great way of conferring legitimacy to that government and its criminal justice system, don't you think?

Holocaust Agnostic: Being refused immunity is the same reason the US left Iraq.


The fact that public opinion supported "burning down Congress with all 535 members locked inside" over "spend 20 more military minutes in Iraq" had nothing to do with it? (I agree that that was a big driving factor, but no way was it 50+% of the reason.)
 
Displayed 11 of 11 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report