In this IN-sane?

topic posted Thu, October 29, 2009 - 9:13 PM by  Malvado Supremo
Share/Save/Bookmark
Advertisement
You people are sane. Or so goes the tribe description.

Am I not sane for thinking this is completely fucked up?

www.cnn.com/2009/POLITIC...ay/index.html
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • Re: In this IN-sane?

    Thu, October 29, 2009 - 10:07 PM
    The whole area is completely fucked up. You either have to kill these folks or bribe them.
    • Re: In this IN-sane?

      Thu, October 29, 2009 - 10:16 PM
      That simple is it? Humanity reduced to an either/or?

      Perhaps that explains the logic of the lawmakers, too dull to comprehend another way other than paying them to try to kill us. The last time we bribed them, they turned in their own family members to be waterboarded. Real stellar event, that. Not one rightie I have seen anywhere is even touching this, despite inane caterwauling about taxes and what we can afford and yadda yadda yadda, yet NO ONE seems to be questioning this, so long as its in the cause of winning a war that was a lie in the first place. Its fucking raining ice cream for real and they still eat the shit-cones and call it choco-licious.

      Seriously, am I off base in this somehow?

      Too bad no one thought of this tactic a few hundred thousand dead people ago. That would have been sweet.
      • Re: In this IN-sane?

        Fri, October 30, 2009 - 12:15 PM
        <Too bad no one thought of this tactic a few hundred thousand dead people ago. That would have been sweet.>

        Actually they thought up this tactic about 120 years ago when the British tried to occupy Afghanistan. They paid the Afghans to join Her Majesty's service. The Brits gave them guns and ammo. After aiding the British in ridding Afghanistan of a few really unpopular warlords, the Afghans took their British guns and turned them on the Brits. The Russians tried the same plan back in the seventies, and had the same spectacularly stupid results. Now Obama is doing the same stupid thing. The Afghans must be peeing themselves laughing.

        According to Shari'a, anybody who is not Muslim is a dhimmi. Dhimmis do not have the right to participate in any government. Any secular or non-Muslim government is a violation of Shari'a. Dhimmi cannot enter contracts or agreements with Afghans. As the Brits and the Reds found out the hard way, promises and agreements with non-Muslims are non-binding under Shari'a. Afghanistan is not going to rest until the invaders are dead, subjugated, or gone. The only way to win in Afghanistan is to leave.
        • Re: In this IN-sane?

          Fri, October 30, 2009 - 8:53 PM
          Yet another reason it was a bad idea. Thanks folks.
          • Re: In this IN-sane?

            Mon, November 2, 2009 - 4:10 PM
            mercenaries were used for the past 3000 years ,,, since they still believe
            that its not yet the 21st century then we have to see them as they are,
            not as some americans want them to be,,,

            leaving that area is best in the long run,,,then we wouldn't have to
            send our soldiers home in a bodybag saying they
            were doing a good cause

Recent topics in "Sane Politics"

Topic Author Replies Last Post
The Afghanistan Plan 33 December 21, 2009
Now Some Things Are Coming Together offlineBill 14 December 11, 2009
When Society Goes Against Human Nature. 8 December 11, 2009
Give a Norwegian a Gun Dr. Awkward 1 December 8, 2009