Check the link and you'll find out.
Do you really think it's fine to execute someone who is mentally retarded?
I didn't check the link and have no intention of doing so - what crime(s) did he commit? Of course it's relevant - if anything is irrelevent it's the IQ.
Check the link and you'll find out.
Do you really think it's fine to execute someone who is mentally retarded?
In what way exactly is the US benefitting from the resources of Iraq?
If he committed a crime that would otherwise have led to his execution, then yes. Presumably the alternative would have been the remainder of his life in prison - would you find this acceptable?
I was referring to Afghanistan.
The Afghan goverment (the one the US formed) had welcomed US firms and the US goverment pledge to help reconstruct their infrastructure (the one the US near destoryed). the US trade and development agency have been in Afghanistan for the last 5 years or so "aiding" with gas/oil other resources. Why? because they trade. Did they trade before?
I assume it will go the same way in Iraq. How many US firm are there now? Lots and they control almost everything including the Iraq "goverment"
It's all about control and the US have it.
These "wars" are a long term investment.
Afghanistan wasn't any where near a first world country before the invasion, so I'm not sure how much the US destroyed - maybe some caves now need renovating after the bunker busters?
To say the US invaded Afghanistan to get access to a market of 30 million people is a bit much. The per capita GDP for 2007 is ranked 172nd - ordinary Afghani's are not exactly queuing up for Hummers and iPhones.
Is the US the only country trading with Afghanistan? Do you think US companies / aid agencies etc should be precluded from trading with Afghanistan, or that it should be kept a backward country?
The US has no interest in 30 million Afghans, they are interested in the vast qamount of oil/gas/coal/copper and more.
The US will supply the technology know how to exploit all these resources.
Do you belive for one second that the US are doing this for the good of the Afghan people?
are you asking me how much of each resource they have? do you wish to refute my claim that Afghanistan is a country rich in resources?
Whats wrong with the US raping a country of its natural resources? everything
The Taliban didn't want to play ball with the US and they suffered for it.
Most of the 9/11 attackers were Saudi's, I actually don't think any were Afgans.
Why don't you think they took revenge against Saudi Arabia?
What does America do that is in any way comparable to what China does?
Sure Gitmo is a disgrace but what has happened in the past 8 years is the exception not the rule.
I suspect if it wasn't for the US you would be tying that comment in German or Russian
I suppose you'd like for it to have remained a haven for terrorists in between striking the west...
They weren't terrorists back then - they were freedom fighters, fighting Soviet invaders
Sorry, maybe I'm misunderstanding - did the US (legitimately) invade Afghanistan BEFORE September 11th?
Not everyone sees it as 'raping'. I prefer to see as giving a much needed helping hand.
Because it wasn't state sanctioned by Saudi Arabia - had the Taliban not continued to host & protect bin laden and co. then the invasion would not have occured.
which in the eyes of the US need to be watched.
What about the eyes of the rest of the world...the UN has imposed sanctions on the country, so clearly it's not just the US that has concerns.
Aren't they very picky about who they impost sanctions on aren't they.
Sure Iran has supported terrorists.
It would be the ideal place for some one like him to train.
That took me 2 seconds to find.
Thankfully so.
The sanctions are nothing to do with terrorism - they are in response to their nuclear programme.
You found the records to say bin laden attended?
I doubt very much the hundreds of thousands of dead people who depended on the UN to be impartial would be heartened with your last comment
Why shouldn't Iran have nuclear power?
rmelly you read the article didn't you?
The US has been training terrorists since 1946 where else would they send Bin Laden, if they were going to send him to be trained.
Even if he didn't go there he would most certainly have had help from that terrorist school.
If we're just going to add 2 and 2 together and come up with 22, or make giant leaps based on a few 'facts', assertions, conjecture, assumptions etc...then give me a few minutes to patch together an alternative scenario with very little basis in fact - I'll be back to prove that bin laden is actually Dick Cheney in disguise.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?