Feed the terrorists!

[AnonymousPenguin]

As far as not having given a dollar to the Afghanis prior to Sept 11, 2001...and giving a dollor to the Afghanis now...better late than never.

As informed as one may be, you never know about every crisis occuring at any given time...sometimes big events have to happen for you to find out about something you did not have awareness of...  so you didn't help then...and you do now...

 

[gojugin]

Interesting postings going on....

My beef with the whole thing is that while Americans are homeless and hungry, we can find the time and money to feed other countries and people.
With our economy (lack of), many of us have lost our jobs and are stuggling to find ways to feed our families daily.  When those of us hear how "free" food and money is given to a country that harbors terrorists, it makes their blood boil.   Yes, they can tell their children that it is more important for others to eat, while they go hungry but...explain that to children, especially your own, when you can see the sadness in their eyes!  
Here we are, in this "land of opportunity" with a poor economy and families are losing everything due to cutbacks and layoffs... but yet, we help another country.  
"Where is Daddy going?"... to stand on street corners begging for a job and/or money so we can eat honey".
Go figure!!!!!!!!

Opium is the number one export of Afghanistan... gee, we can use more of that in the world.

 

[PmoneyandTT]

Like I said - It really doesn't matter what anyone does with their money - Don't give a Damn

And - Oh believe me - I don't need blondie to tell me it will make me a better person.. So keep your stupid comments to yourself.. I don't need to participate in worldly things - to prove myself worth.. Only LOSERS like you..

 

[vraiblonde]

Gojugin, the poorest person in America is a rich man compared with how these Afghan refugees live.  But that's not the point.  I like it better when I can <i>choose</i> the charity I give to, not just having the government decide and taking my money by law.

TT notwithstanding, most Americans are givers - they volunteer, they donate to charity, that sort of thing.  So it's not like no poor person, country, whatever wouldn't ever get a handout from Americans if there was no government mandated enforcement (via our taxes).  You and I might choose to give to the homeless.  We might take in a foster child whose parents couldn't take care of them.  Someone else might decide to send a million $ to Rwanda for the freedom effort.  But it should be <i>our</i> choice, not the government's.  Especially for something as stupid as dropping food from an airplane in some war-torn country.

 

[AnonymousPenguin]

Quote: from vraiblonde on 8:42 am on Oct. 18, 2001[br]But it should be <i>our</i> choice, not the government's

Now, there's something worth considering.  Personally, I think the government SHOULD take money from us taxpayers to help the poor in OUR country.  However, as far as helping someone in another country...that is  something that the government should not make us do.  Vrai, you are correct in that...that should be our choice.  Then again, is the government <i>making</i> us do this.  We pay taxes...and that goes for many purposes.  Taxes suck...but come on u are obviously surviving without it... they serve many good purposes.  If there were no taxes...we would probably be getting paid less.  Either way...the money wouldn't end up in your hands some way some how.

 

[Christy]

I don't think the government has the right to take my tax dollars and donate it to anyone.  There are way too many free hand outs, not only to foreign nations hell bent on our destruction, but within this country.  If my tax dollars weren't constantly being increased in order allow single drug addicted welfare mother's to stay home and spend quality time with their children, my family could survive off one income and my children would not have to suffer from my absence 8 hours a day 5 days a week.  

It irks me to no end that so many people feel that free handouts actually help people, and that it's appreciated.  It is no longer considered by these people as a charity, it's an entitlement to them.

We've sunk how many billions of tax dollars into feeding the people of foreign countries?  Half the friggin countries in this world have become accustomed to that "entitlement".  Instead of a "thank you very much your kindness and generosity" we get planes smashed into our buildings and Anthrax mailed out to everyone and their brother.  I am just floored that anyone still holds some guilt complex (that they tell themselves is compassion) that drives them to demand feeding these people.

The charity and compassion needs to go to every single family who lost a loved one needlessly at the hands of these monstors.  There are over 10,000 children who lost a parent on Sep 11th.  That's where our kids should be sending their one dollar bills to.  Not to some Afghani child who's going to grow up and still hate my child, soley because he/she is American.


(Edited by Christy at 12:52 pm on Oct. 18, 2001)

 

[hartline]

PmoneyandTT - "Like I said - It really doesn't matter what anyone does with their money - Don't give a Damn
..."  I guess you can not teach a pig to sing after all.  Thank God it is a free country. - GOD BLESS AMERICA

 

[gojugin]

Christy.... You go girl!!!  

 

[BigBrothaCon]

TT
Slow your roll because you are jumping the gun again.  Just a little touchy on some of these topics.  I do not believe there was any intentional attacks on you about blondie saying that you should volunteer to be a better person.  When you volunteer you are doing something freely from the heart without direct compensation.  It has a special meaning and I know it has helped me understand what giving is all about.  I have been involved with meals on wheels programs that have fed the elderly and disabled within the community and it gave me a warm, fuzzy feeling inside that I was making a difference for someone.  The inspiration you feel by helping people voluntarily has eternal rewards.  You learn to appreciate life more.  I think that is the point she was trying to bring to head.

Back to feeding terrorists,
That kind of charity is the wrong kind.  Hartline, I see that you feel very strong about letting your kids send money to Afghanistan and I respect that.  Your kids are learning a valuable lesson and it has a beneficial effect on them.  The thing I am saying is that those kids over their are apart of a country that we are fighting.  Nothing against those kids, but who the hell is going to make sure those kids benefit from our giving?  It seems that the Taliban and the Blackmarketers are already taking advantage of our good will.  So I have to disagree with the President's resolve on this issue.  We should help these people after the Taliban is gone and exterminated, but not now.  Until every terrorist is rooted out of that country, I will not support the humanitarian effort in its current course.

BTW TT,

The money the President is getting is charitable donations not tax revenue, so the 2003 budget does not have anything to do with that.  They can use that money whenever they want.

Christy you are right on point with your post.

 

[Frank]

There IS one thing these air-drops ARE accomplishing, and I've brought this up before (as someone ELSE has, too, but I forget who it was). Wars are not just *won* with guns, bombs, bullets and blood. They are won with dollars, with propaganda, with misinformation and with covert intelligence. They are won by cutting supply lines. They are won many ways. Dan Rather mentioned last night on TV just how poor and remote some of these people are, relating some of his experiences way back with the mujaheddin in the war with Russia. One such story was that a commander sent a messenger on a 30-mile walk to get to listen to a BBC broadcast on a radio. Because there WASN'T one any closer.

What do we accomplish? It's a propaganda war. The Taliban tell the Afghani people, the Americans are bombing YOU. The airdrops say, no we are NOT. Sure, the food is dumb - I saw one report where a kid didn't know that peanut butter was food, thinking it was clay to be played with - but it also makes the line clear as to whom we are fighting. I understand we are also dropping wind-up radios, and broadcasting into Afghanistan. A war can be won much faster when you can't recruit replacements, because the people don't see it as their fight.

Wasteful? Hardly. Check out the costs involved. You think a few million is a lot? Wait till they lose some aircraft over there. Wait till we've deployed whole fleets for months. This airdrop is *cheap*. The US has an annual budget of around 3 trillion dollars. That's a MILLION million. This airdrop is chump change, and pales in comparison to the billions we spend at home on our own. Using this money at home is like dropping an extra penny in the tip jar - it has very little effect.

 

[gojugin]

Frank...Mmmmmm.  What is the difference if we send "fleets" over to Afghanistan or have them sitting in other ports around the world.  The sailors are still getting paid, we are paying for fuel, and so forth, regardless of where they are.  They could be sitting in Norfolk, Va... we still have to fork over money.  

I also know what you are saying and I compliment your opinion.  There is also many ways to deal with this situation which has confronted us on Sept. 11th, but what is the "right" choice?  

Those bombs being dropped has to be replaced.  Who gets the contract to do it?  Hopefully some America manufacturer who will then hire more employees and increase their sales on a currently very, very poor economy.  The same goes for the bullets, tanks, equipment and so forth.  
Will it cost us more in the long run?  Depends on your view.  The government spends millions of dollars on weapons to be used, which increases sales, which opens more jobs, which helps the economy.  People are making more and spending more.  Tax revenue is back to normal and every thing is almost back to staus quo.
Americans are working again, terrorists are dead and everyone is happy.  
Yes Frank, I know... terrorism is a form of hate and we can not control or totally eliminate it from this planet.
At least we can put a big "dent" in it for a while and we learned from this thus (hopefully) Americans will be a little safer and we won't get caught with our pants down again.  

Back to the Afghanisani people... As President Bush stated "Either you are with the terrorist or with us".  Well, the Taliban resides in a country call Afghanistan.  Has the Afghanistan government turned over the Taliban?  Also, there are "millions" of Afghanistani people running around with guns.  Can't they kill a couple thousand Taliban?  Does the term "outnumbered" ring a bell?
Heck, at the Alamo, a "handfull" of Americans took on the Mexican Army.  Also, American farmers fought the British for their freedom.  At least Americans have "guts" and will stand up for what they believe in.  If the Afghanistani government and people don't want to, then pay the price for your actions.    

 

[pilot]

gojugin:

Does the term "Northern Alliance" ring a bell? From what I hear, they've been putting up a pretty good fight.

Just because a group of people can't win a war doesn't mean that they lack "guts" or are supportive of the govt. that's in power. Going by your logic, those people below the Mason Dixon line were a bunch of spineless wimps just because they lost the Civil War.  Or should I call it the War Between the States?  

Oh, and while we're on the subject of history, I suppose I should point out that the Americans didn't win against the British all by themselves.  They had a little bit of help...from the French and some German mercenaries...(Do the names "Lafayette" or "von Steuben" ring a bell?)

In any case, the war in Afghanistan isn't over yet.  The Northern Alliance just may succeed in overthrowing the Taliban...

BTW, they're the ones we're trying to help.

 But I guess if you'd read a history book or newspaper once in a while, you wouldn't need me to explain all this...




(Edited by pilot at 11:04 pm on Oct. 19, 2001)

 

[gojugin]

Pilot... Yes, I heard of the Northern Alliance.  Good point.  They come in from the north and the MILLIONS of others come in from the south.  Taliban all gone.

Where did I say that people below the Mason/Dixon line were wimps?????  They stood up for what they believed in and fought for it. as with the North.  Yes, the south lost... but that does not make them wimps.  Where did you get that from???????

Yes, we are helping the Northern Alliance.. duh!  And we are also helping/feeding the Afghanistan people and Taliban.  If YOU stayed on top of things, you will see that the Taliban did indeed obtain many of the supplies which were dropped over Afghanistan and much of it was fed to their animals and others are selling it on the black market.  

Finally...your statement of "But I guess if you'd read a history book or newspaper once in a while, you wouldn't need me to explain all this... "  was really uncalled for.  
I was under the impression that these forums are for "adult" intelligent discussions where people express their views on subject matters.  There was no need to be rude.  
I am fully aware of the assistance that the French offered during the era in which the United States was fighting for it's freedom from the British.  It appears that you missed my point on my posting (I'm not surprised).  
Also...I don't need you or anyone to "explain" anything to me!   Thanks anyway.
Finally..I have been to Afghanistan.    Lovely place and people... NOT!!!!  Go there... you might enjoy it.  

 

[Frank]

Well, aside from the fact that you haven't been exceedingly polite in your own posts to me, I can understand occasional rudeness. But I'm not here for that.

He DID make a point which you did not get - it appears to me, and probably him, that you have no sympathy whatsoever for the common folk of Afghanistan, because if they REALLY were against the Taliban, and they REALLY wanted to, they'd overthrow them. So since they are NOT doing this, it must mean complicit support. With which I vehemently disagree. There have been oppressive regimes the world over, where the people lacked the ability to cast off their leaders, because they had been beaten, impoverished, starved and disarmed. From Eretria to Cambodia to Uganda to Nicaragua to Panama to Rwanda to Armenia to Kashmir to Sierra Leone....on and on and on. You think people LOVED it, under Stalin? Failed overthrow of oppressive regimes are everywhere.

And MANY, MANY times - like our own revolution - they were doomed without outside help. We were losing badly in that war. Every major city except Boston was lost. We didn't even get New York back until AFTER the Treaty of Paris. Militia were never enough to fight the British, we had NO Navy to speak of. The South was lost. The Continental Army was impoverished, starving and under or unpaid. EVEN SO - the American colonists were still some of the wealthiest people on earth at the time. You make it sound as if we won it with squirrel guns and pitch forks. We did NOT.

The British even then used a weapon we are using now - they enlisted aid from Loyalists, and left loyal subjects alone. Even after Cowpens, the South was easily taken. We were fighting a superior power, who was so far overstretched as it was, they could not commit all of their forces against us.

I think it's you who is missing the point - and that is, it is entirely possible to crush a populace to the point where they cannot fight. Eventually, the British WOULD have done that to us - we fought back when they weren't ready. When the British entered Concord, they were going through the city to take away the guns. Individually - they beat the crap out of the Americans. They lost men on the trip back to Charlestown, but only with the aid of THOUSANDS of militia. Without supplies, food and equipment, we would have lost quickly. Fortunately, some of the wealthiest men in the colonies had pledged their fortunes to the cause.

Now - who among the Afghani people has the guns, missiles, tanks and aircraft to fight the Taliban? If I lived as poor as they do, I'd get my a$$
out of there too. I just don't understand why you believe because they are UNABLE to overthrow their oppressors - you know, like the South was with the North, here in the US - that it must indicate that they support them. How happy do you think people were under the Roman Empire? Why didn't THEY overthrow them? They must have liked it that way, right?

 

[vraiblonde]

Let me jump in here.  Are you saying the TV clips of Afghan citizens calling for the death of Americans and burning the U.S. flag are made up?  Frank, I hear you saying (read you writing?) that the Afghan people would like to get out from under the Taliban and can't.  If that's so, then why aren't they more supportive of the U.S.?  And the Northern Alliance?

Whether the Afghan civilians <i>can't</i> overthrow the Taliban is a moot point - I'm getting the distinct impression from news reports that they <i>don't want to</i>.  They are loyal to their Muslim brethren and seem to have nothing but animosity toward us.  Unless what I'm seeing on TV and reading in the newspapers is a complete fabrication.

The problem is that we see the burnt out refugees on television, starving to death and living in tents.  But that's only a portion of the population of Afghanistan.  They do have cities, you know.  And those cities are filled with people who have promised to drag our U.S. soldiers' bodies through the streets.

So to hell with them - blow their a$$es to Allah and quit sending them our tax bucks.

 

[pilot]

Vrailblonde:

I don't understand what's so confusing.  Some Afghanis hate the United States, some don't. I seem to remember that during the American Revolution, roughly a third of Americans were Tories, a third were Patriots, and a third couldn't have cared less who won.  I can just imagine the French watching a news broadcast of the Tories cheering for the British and saying, "Why should we send money to America.  They just want the British to win!"  Fortunately, the French did send some help or we might now be singing "God Save the Queen" instead of "My Country Tis of Thee".

We send money to Afghanistan in order to help the people who are on our side and maybe persuade those who aren't to join us.  

BTW, there's an actual word for this that military strategists use:  it's called "PSYOPS".  





(Edited by pilot at 12:21 am on Oct. 21, 2001)

 

[gojugin]

Frank...
Yes, I totally understand what you are saying about being "suppressed", etc. within a country.  I am not taking that from you and that is a good point.
And as vraiblonde pointed out.... what about the flag (American) burning?  

The life style within Afghanistan is nothing like it is here in America (goes without saying).  Turmoil and war is all they know and have known for years on end.  Picture within your mind, yourself living there, in that environment.  To skin someone alive, is nothing to you.
To ride around on horse back with the carcass of a slaughter animal is a "game".  This is only a sample of their world, which is totally different from the world in which we live.  
Could it be the intent of the US to try to tame this wild beast with food/money and kindness?  The food is fed to animals, the money is used to buy more guns,  the kindness is looked upon as a sign of weakness.
There is "hate" in the world and sometimes no matter what you try to do to get rid of it, it will not go away.
Back to the food which was dropped for a minute:  Many of those people see it as junk/garbage which is only to be fed to their animals.  "How dare America send me garbage!!"  Oooooops.  Here we are, trying to be nice but it gets slapped back in our faces.

Suppressed.....  They choose to remain in their country, because it is their country.  It is their life style and contains their beliefs.  The people are free to leave, as they have been doing lately since they do not want American bombs dropped on them.  Duh.... I'd leave too!
But once the smoke settles... many of them will return to their homes and continue with their lives as they have done for centuries.  The cycle will continue until the fall of America, then it will be another country they hate or go to war with.  

 

[Ken King]

The Afghani people (not those associated with the Taliban) are not much different then most people around the world and their lack of action in throwing out the Taliban is similar to how we acted prior to the Revolutionary war.  A phrase from our Declaration of Independence written more than 225 years ago sums it up, "...and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind is more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed."

Given time and aid maybe they too can exact a change that will lead them from their current state and take them towards a path that will bring them into a better world.

 

[AnonymousPenguin]

First, As far as the flag burning and other anti-America practices....yes, you may see that on T.V.  It does not mean that is how all the ppl of Afghanistan feel.  It's all propaganda.  They show you what they want you to see.  It does not mean that that is the only thing happening there.  For example, when we are attacked...we show innocent ppl flying out of windows...it creates sympathy.  When we attack them, do we see the ppl suffering and dying on our T.V...  NO!!
You read and watch images that are selected for you to read/view.

Second, is anyone reading????  America is doing this for America also.  It is not all in an effort to help those there.  We are covering our own backs.  So, if you don't like it because we are helping them...realize that we are mostly helping ourselves...that is why it doesn't really matter what the people in Afghanistan use the droppings for... or who/what it is feeding.  Once, you realize it's for our own good...you can just accept it and move on.

 

[BigBrothaCon]

You know whats good for Americans.  Helping Americans.

AP, I can't agree that wasting millions of dollars worth of food is good for Americans.  That money should be used for the victims of the WTC/Pentagon.  Some wish to believe that that money is a small chunk compared to the trillions Congress has, but all those funds add up to a great cause for victims in the US.  How could you believe that feeding the enemy is for our own good?  We need to starve those bastards into surrender.  That worked in desert storm and it would work now if we would stop trying to be so compassionate.  Are we France or Britain that we have to make concessions and attempts of appeasement to the enemy or the international community.  We are the world's superpower and you expect me to believe that we have to kiss anyone's butt.  They should be paying us to keep their butts safe.  We have the most powerful military in the world coupled with a 10 trillion dollar economy that swallows all of Europe's economies.  If it had not been for the United States, Europe might have a different face today.  So when you say dropping food to terrorists is a good thing for America, take a real good look at New York City and the Pentagon and decide for yourself if the genorousity has paid off.