Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 81,591
- 163,186
Why? Did Taliban commit 9/11 or something?
In what reality was Taliban responsible for 9/11 and for what reason did it need to be taken down?
North Korea goes full retard
- Thread starter Juvarisx
- Start date
-
Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!
Go here and give us your nominations!Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
No but they were just NEVER going to turn him over peacefully because you just know how THOSE PEOPLE like to stick together.
Honestly I seriously doubt any more thought or research has gone into their opinion beyond "The war in Afghanistan was justified because of 9/11." Like that's literally 100% of it (and then it's not thought about again until some dickhead shows up in an internet thread).
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 81,591
- 163,186
No outrage here, just debunking the usual jingoistic rhetoric.
How did we get on this subject?
Oh yeah, someone implied that Afghanistan was partly responsible for 9/11.
chaos
Buzzfeed Editor
- 17,324
- 4,839
Who did that? All I said was that it was dishonest to say "they did nothing." And it is.
They did nothing, just like you said.
When al Qaida set up an immense terrorist training camp in Afghanistan that operated for over a decade, they did nothing.
When al Qaida set up a world-wide network that funded and aided terror around the world, headquartered in Afghanistan, they did nothing.
When al Qaida bombed the USS Cole and American embassies in Africa, they did nothing.
When al Qaida killed 3,000 American citizens in a terrorist attack, they did nothing.
And when the United States requested the extradition of the leader of al Qaida... they did nothing.
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 81,591
- 163,186
All pure fantasy.
The notion that Taliban didnt want to handover Bin laden because they were best buddies or that Taliban fully controlled all of Afghanistan, etc.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001...tan.terrorism3
chaos
Buzzfeed Editor
- 17,324
- 4,839
Did they not harbor and aid an international terrorist who had committed multiple acts of terrorism against the US? What the fuck are we even talking about here? You can argue our level of response was unjustified, and rightly so, but to sit here and try and argue that they did nothing is just Merlin-level stupid.
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 81,591
- 163,186
They did what any country what do in their place, including US - and that is refuse to have its sovereignty violated on a whim while the violator was making a demand at gun point.
If Taliban asked for a known terrorist suspect to be extradited from US to Afghanistan without evidence what the fuck do you think would happen?
Why are you defending this ridiculous double standard?
chaos
Buzzfeed Editor
- 17,324
- 4,839
I don't think it is a double standard, I think if something similar happened overseas we would act. I'm not defending anything, you are the one defending the motherfucking Taliban. When you find yourself on the same side as Mikhail it is time to evaluate how far down the rabbit hole you've gone.
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 81,591
- 163,186
You think that if another country came to US and said...
"hand over Bill Smith"
"For what?"
"Terrorism"
"you got proof?
"here's my proof.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forcesnow hand him over"
we would just go, "oh alright, here is bill smith for you."?
Oh and there was this. how quickly we forget.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001...tan.terrorism5
Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over
9.30pm update: * Taliban demand evidence of Bin Laden's guilt
* Second week of airstrikes starts
* Taliban urges US to halt bombing
Share 790
inShare
16
Email
Staff and agencies
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 14 October 2001 17.19 EDT
President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.
Returning to the White House after a weekend at Camp David, the president said the bombing would not stop, unless the ruling Taliban "turn [bin Laden] over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over." He added,"There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty".
"hand over Bill Smith"
"For what?"
"Terrorism"
"you got proof?
"here's my proof.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Armed_Forcesnow hand him over"
we would just go, "oh alright, here is bill smith for you."?
Oh and there was this. how quickly we forget.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001...tan.terrorism5
Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over
9.30pm update: * Taliban demand evidence of Bin Laden's guilt
* Second week of airstrikes starts
* Taliban urges US to halt bombing
Share 790
inShare
16
Staff and agencies
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 14 October 2001 17.19 EDT
President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.
Returning to the White House after a weekend at Camp David, the president said the bombing would not stop, unless the ruling Taliban "turn [bin Laden] over, turn his cohorts over, turn any hostages they hold over." He added,"There's no need to discuss innocence or guilt. We know he's guilty".
Seriously, you're a fucking retard. Did you even read his link? Does anyone know why this mental midget is a moderator?
Loser Araysar
Chief Russia Reporter. Stock Pals CEO. Head of AI.
- 81,591
- 163,186
Chaos is good people and is quite intelligent.
Which is why its so baffling why he is even trying to rationalize this.
Basically in Bush's own words, it was pure bloodlust and revenge. We wanted vengeance, and we were going to get it one way or another and no one was going to call us a pussy.
The demand that we made of Afghanistan was laughable. If they had anything more than a couple of camels and AK-47's, the US would be laughed at.
Which is why its so baffling why he is even trying to rationalize this.
Basically in Bush's own words, it was pure bloodlust and revenge. We wanted vengeance, and we were going to get it one way or another and no one was going to call us a pussy.
The demand that we made of Afghanistan was laughable. If they had anything more than a couple of camels and AK-47's, the US would be laughed at.
Try having a rational conversation with him about when life begins some time. He gets a dumbfuck idea in his head and then says whatever it takes to maintain his conclusion and then acts like I'm the one that's off the rails. He's fucking thought cancer.
Yeah some time I'll try to talk to him about the legitimacy of invading Afghanistan.
chaos
Buzzfeed Editor
- 17,324
- 4,839
Like I said, if the situation was similar and a country wanted us to hand over some guy, I think we would do it. I think our response in Afghanistan was pretty much fail, but I don't think the Taliban are innocent little angels in all of this. Even before 9/11 they knew who he was and what he was about.
and lol at Mikhail, somad bro. Keep your crying in the abortion of a thread.