Two Apaches rip Taliban to shreds

[peshooter]

The only foreign intelligence we need is the military keeping track of foreign troop movements. We don't need a separate department for that.

Beyond that all domestic security should be handled by the states. There's no need to have domestic spying, period. Terrorists kill so few and attack so infrequently there's no reason to be spending billions of dollars on special agencies. All that happens is what we currently have with DHS. You have 2 weeks of food and your on a list. STUPID.

Guard the border and prevent invasion. That doesn't require 20 federal agencies.

To quote Osama:

We are continuing this policy in bleeding America to the point of bankruptcy. Allah willing, and nothing is too great for Allah

All that we have to do is to send two mujahedeen to the furthest point east to raise a piece of cloth on which is written al Qaeda, in order to make generals race there to cause America to suffer human, economic and political losses without their achieving anything of note other than some benefits for their private corporations

Seems like he knew us all too well.

 

[xtry51]

Yeah it's weird. It's almost like he was well educated and studied history or something...

 

[mikem317]

I didn't. I just pointed out you can't simply cut out key points simply because they don't give you the result you want.

The US government refused to give up the US solider that murdered 16 Afghanistan civilians a couple of months ago. Does that give the Afghani government permission to invade and occupy the United States?

 

[Martlet]

The US government refused to give up the US solider that murdered 16 Afghanistan civilians a couple of months ago. Does that give the Afghani government permission to invade and occupy the United States?

Do you think we would have gone into Afghanistan if the government had arrested, tried, and convicted those responsible for 9/11 and agreed to work to keep it from happening again?

 

[mikem317]

Do you think we would have gone into Afghanistan if the government had arrested, tried, and convicted those responsible for 9/11 and agreed to work to keep it from happening again?

I don't know. There's a lot of "ifs" there. Perhaps it would have been a more measured response, similar to the tactical raid that killed bin Laden.

 

[Martlet]

I don't know. There's a lot of "ifs" there. Perhaps it would have been a more measured response, similar to the tactical raid that killed bin Laden.

Or perhaps we wouldn't have done anything. Either way, it fits my point.

 

[mikem317]

Or perhaps we wouldn't have done anything. Either way, it fits my point.

You're suggesting no military action would have occurred? Sheesh, I nearly fell out my chair!

 

[Martlet]

You're suggesting no military action would have occurred? Sheesh, I nearly fell out my chair!

Wait, weren't we just talking about proof by logical definition?

 

[ericcif]

Really, All this over a video? Wow

Sent from my BlackBerry 9810 using Tapatalk

 

[dannyac]

I wish I was on the other end of that gun

 

[william_munny]

The only foreign intelligence we need is the military keeping track of foreign troop movements. We don't need a separate department for that.

Beyond that all domestic security should be handled by the states. There's no need to have domestic spying, period. Terrorists kill so few and attack so infrequently there's no reason to be spending billions of dollars on special agencies. All that happens is what we currently have with DHS. You have 2 weeks of food and your on a list. STUPID.

Guard the border and prevent invasion. That doesn't require 20 federal agencies.

Good point on DHS. We should consolidate that into the same agency as the NSA and the CIA. There should be new guidelines as to what constitutes a threat that are more rooted in logic rather than pants-shitting hysterics. I do not agree with the system as it works now, particularly when it comes to DHS. I had tunnel vision on foreign threats, so I overlooked it.

At the same time, I have to disagree. Not all intelligence is based on troop movements. I won't pretend to know shit about shit when it comes to the intelligence community, but I'd bet good money that hardly any intelligence about impending threats against the nation is gathered by troop movements. As expensive as it may be, we do need to have people on the ground gathering intelligence, listening in on our enemies and potential foreign dissidents. If someone is going to strike us under the radar, troop movements aren't going to tell us anything. Also, I don't think the military is really cut out for this role. This isn't a knock against them, but their skills aren't focused on espionage, they're focused on pounding the living shit out of their objectives. Let them stick to what they're good at.

 

[Jsfitzgerald85]

i look at it this way is the cost worth whats gonna happen in the end. And the answer for Afghanistan is NO. Short of Nuking the whole country it will be impossible to attain any sort of goal. Look at Iraq we pulled out and nothing has changed and how long till that country erupts in total civil war. Bottom line is the way we (the west) looks at life is completely different then how they view it. All we are doing is beating our heads against a brick wall. Our guys die, their people die but nothing changes. Whats the point of continuing a presence in that country? We are not solving anything by being there. We should withdraw not just from Afghan but from the Middle East in general. Recall the 5th fleet and base them here on our own soil. They entire region doesnt want us there so why should we be there........ Just my two sense though........ oh and BTW anything having to do with an Apache gunship is badass