×

Loading...
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务
Ad by
  • 推荐 OXIO 加拿大高速网络,最低月费仅$40. 使用推荐码 RCR37MB 可获得一个月的免费服务

For those who say the Afgan war should never have started, my question is what you think we should do after 911.

Don't just give idealogical concepts, what are your detailed action plan? Call Bin Laden to surrender? Bush's mistake is trying to change Iraq and Afgan into democratic countries, the 'Japan of middle east' as he said. Now we realize this is impossible, those people are hopeless and can't be changed. That's what Haper's comments really means. But the wars have achieved the results of seriously weakening or eliminating terrorist operations in these countries. Al Qaeda and many other groups can no longer use these nations as the launching pad of more attacks against us. Without the wars, we probably have already seen 1,2 or many 911s on North American soil. For that, Bush still deserve the credit. And Obama is right to keep significant US troops in both countries for a long time.
Report

Replies, comments and Discussions:

  • 枫下茶话 / 政治经济 / “如果我们认为我们要为了阿富汗人而统治阿富汗,或者认为通过长期负责阿富汗每日安全,就会让这个国家改善,那么我们就错了。”...“我们不会战胜叛乱。我看阿富汗历史,那里大概叛乱不断”——经过多年枪炮弹药的高消费,和上百条我军人命,哈珀总理好像才想明白。
    "We're not going to ever defeat the insurgency. My reading of Afghanistan in history is that it's probably had an insurgency forever of some kind," Harper told Fareed Zakaria of CNN.

    "If we think that we are going to govern Afghanistan for Afghans, or over the long-term be responsible for day-to-day security in Afghanistan and see that country improve, we are mistaken," Harper said.
    • 他比你明白的早, 只是说地晚了....
      • 代价啊
    • 阿富汗,伊拉克是反恐战争的前线,没有这条前线,战争不会消失,不过是推进到美国本土开打而已。所以,战争经费是和平发展的必须,不是烧钱。 -szs11(Hedge); 2.28 17:29
      • 你没有看新闻吧?哈珀说阿富汗赢不了。这个是左派早就说了的。反恐有很多方法。靠军事力量是低级手段。美国和加拿大扔了万多亿美元,不过是灰溜溜说“军事打击赢不了”。这么愚蠢的政治领导人,你也佩服?
        • 赢不了,不代表就输了。现在寻求“不输”的政治解法。
        • 美国增兵,加拿大倡议政治解决,不过是一软一硬控制塔利班而已。至于阿富汗,他们什么政治体制和我们没关系。加拿大把最优秀的儿女送去,帮助他们维持一个公平民主的体制,他们拿路边炸弹来回报。这种民族就应该让红色高棉去管理他们好了。
          • 你倒是很有白人高高在上的种族优越心态,漂白的不错啊。靠着一些军事优势,以解放者的姿态,到处去消灭邪恶势力,你很白嘛. 比极右白还白,真是小看你了。
            • 我建议让邪恶政权接管阿富汗,你能得出结论说,“到处去消灭邪恶势力”。你的逻辑很奇怪,正好能理解一个反的。
              • 非黑既白的二分法,你学的很好啊。我只是说军事手段是低级手段。有很多其他手段可以运用。和平的方式很多。这也是目前OBM政权在做的,首先撤军。然后不设条件的和伊朗等所谓邪恶势力面谈。
            • 你逻辑不行,理解得正好相反,扣帽子倒是很在行。
            • 说得好, 顶
    • 阿富汗战争本来就没有胜利的可能,美国加拿大也不可能轻易的撤军。所以反恐还将继续,又一场越南战争而已。
      • 这帮贪生怕死的家伙,死几个人就腿软的家伙,就不要到处逞能。
      • 哈珀现在寻求解套,还算聪明。
    • Harper is just to try to justify the reason why canada wants to withdraw the troops from Afghanistan
      By all means, with the support from parkistan, the taliban will be never defeated. This is more or less like you are fighting with a person, but only allowed to hit his fists(the taliban) but not his body(parkistanis, taliban hiding there) .
    • For those who say the Afgan war should never have started, my question is what you think we should do after 911.
      Don't just give idealogical concepts, what are your detailed action plan? Call Bin Laden to surrender? Bush's mistake is trying to change Iraq and Afgan into democratic countries, the 'Japan of middle east' as he said. Now we realize this is impossible, those people are hopeless and can't be changed. That's what Haper's comments really means. But the wars have achieved the results of seriously weakening or eliminating terrorist operations in these countries. Al Qaeda and many other groups can no longer use these nations as the launching pad of more attacks against us. Without the wars, we probably have already seen 1,2 or many 911s on North American soil. For that, Bush still deserve the credit. And Obama is right to keep significant US troops in both countries for a long time.
      • 我并没有说不该打。在我看当初打是对的,邻居受欺负了,怎么着也得帮把手,而且贼寇太强大了,袖手旁观可能自己遭殃。。。现在撤也是对的,敌人已经没有越洋还手之力,只能躲在山沟里杀自己同胞制造恐怖,我们扶植了一个政府,现在是时候让我们豢养多年的打手出招了
        我是在帮哈伯解套。。。
        • 呵呵, 当初打也对, 现在撤也对, 政客就是政客.
      • 如果要追本溯源,那就要长话了。先要问问911前发生了什么?今天世界的格局是如何形成的。美苏两国40中造就了今天的格局。顺便提一下你最失望的事情:今天世界的经济危机又是如何产生的。既然要看问题的深层次,不如看得更高些。
      • 没错。就是布什在意识形态的路上走的太远,一心输出自己的意识形态。这点是错误的。早就应该打完就回家了。
      • 911是美国惹的祸, 恩恩怨怨让他们自己处理. 加拿大人要想卷进去, 就不要怕死, 怕死就别掺和. 问题是掺和以后把多年经营的和平,包容,民族和解的形象全毁了, 并树立一个可怕的敌人.
      • 所以按照你的思路推演,结果是,战争还会继续,并且注定失败。恐怖主义会盛行,因为一个很简单的逻辑,只要那块土地上的人还没有被灭绝,他们就是始终是你的敌人。
        • If someone beat you up, what will you do? In an ideal world, you will call the cop. But what if there's no such a cop who is capable or willing to solve your problem?
          so your choices are: 1. Quietly walk away as if nothing happens, if you know you can't fight such a strong opponent. 2. If you know you are strong enough, beat him back to a degree that he is unable or does not dare to attack you for a long, long time. Maybe this is not a great way to solve the conflict, but there's really no third option
          • Did anybody beat you? Are you American????
            • Put yourself in other's shoes, and you will understand things better. Throughout the history of mankind, wars and conflicts never stop. We all know it's sad but fighting against each other is just part of human nature that we can not avoid
              • Why not Put yourself in Afghanistan's shoes???
          • 我不会去想对策,不在其位,不谋其政。我没有招惹过伊拉克和阿富汗,他们也不会认我做敌人。我当然有被殃及的危险,但是始作俑者不是我。恐怖主义就是战争,只是交战的一方完全不具备应有的实力。
            不可能战胜:1、矛盾无从化解(矛盾从何而来,在哪片土地上滋生的,那片土地又是谁的)2、种族无法灭绝,既然要包装自己,就不可能行使种族灭绝这样的事情。恐怖分子是谁组成的,拿着美国粮食的阿富汗平民。(绝妙的讽刺,吃着别人的打别人,事实就是这样)3、恐怖主义的根基存在,谁在背后支持恐怖分子,大量的美国公司,现代经济社会本来就是我中有你,你中有我,如果不能学会共存,更本就是无解。恐怖分子的资金无处不在,以美国政府这样的强力机构,都不可能完全掌握其资金来源和动向。
            • Impossible to eliminate terrorrism does not mean we should do nothing. Just like impossible to cure death does not mean we should do nothing to prolong people's lives
              • 我支持奥巴马对话的选择,如果一开始就是对话而不是对抗,什么恐怖主义根本就不会有。不过奥巴马的一套在美国社会真的可行吗?需要继续观察才是。
                我当然是反对恐怖主义的,但是我看不出人命还有贵贱的,无论死的是哪方,都是不义的。要不让发动战争的布什高官们以及塔利班的各位老大们亲自背着枪上阵。否则都是在扯淡。再高的高调也无法隐藏其后的利益和立场。
                • At the root, there's some problem that is impossible to solve, not through wars, not through dialogues either. Such as the Isarali-Arab conflict.
                  The West tried to appease the Arabs before, but it never worked. Believe it or not, the only way to satisfy many Arabs is eliminating Israel, expelling the Jews and converting much of the West world to Islam.
                  • 不要忘了,阿联酋同样属于伊斯兰世界,萨达姆曾经是美国扶持的政权,没有什么不可能解决的问题。或许是有些人不愿意解决而已。至于死去的都是和那个原因无甚关系的普通人。
                    以色列是美国和伊斯兰国家交恶的关键,但是本来中东问题曾经有过好的可能性,是被人强行打断的。谁暗杀了拉宾?(一个小人物,呵呵。真巧,每个被暗杀的总统总是可以对应一个疯子)。大家都有立场,甚至神都不能裁决谁是对的,谁是错的。不过人如果没有解决问题的思维,自我毁灭也就见怪不怪了。站在美国的立场上,它做的都是保卫了自己的国民,可是结果是,恐怖主义更加盛行了。塔利班不是被消灭了,而是被压制了。只要压制的力量一弱,它可以卷土重来。人可以消灭,组织可以,国家可以。但是人心不可以,而美国的对手恰恰是人心。
                    • Good point!
                    • Let's make it simple, there's only one small land, either you give it to Jews or you give it to the Palestenians. If both want it, they have to fight.
                      On another matter, either you allow Iran to have nuclear weapon so that they can wipe out Israel, or you stop it. No other option. If you don't believe, let's see if Obama can make any difference with his dialogues. With this economic crisis, the world will surely become a more chaotic place, not less.
                      • 这种属于简单的两分世界,非正即邪,非黑即白。如果中东问题只是领土问题,那要放弃的只是耶路撒冷一地,作为共同的圣地。可以谁也不名义上拥有。
                        本文发表在 rolia.net 枫下论坛灭绝犹太人的心思,的确存在,可是你有没有研究过以色列建国前的中东生存态,为什么当时可以共存,现在不行?走极端的本就是少数人群,因为相互的仇恨日渐加深,他们变得更加的具有话语权,以色列如此,巴勒斯坦亦然。普通的民众要的不是死亡和惊吓,而这两项恰恰是可以用来绑架民众的最好口舌。(布什就这么做了)如果只会选择运用暴力,任何暴力的一方都不可能展现其文明,只能展现其实力。可是实力可以是互易的。如果伊朗过了几百年强大了,它是否可以定义美国为异端呢?一个国家的文明只可能是内在的显现,当别人都心甘情愿的追随。否则不过是武力的一时强大,好比罗马帝国。伊朗想拥有核武器是为了摧毁整个世界吗?美国禁止伊朗拥有核武器就是为了拯救整个世界吗?要知道迄今为止,唯一一次运用核武器对付敌人的国家只有美国。中国也是曾经的红色国家之一,为什么中国拥有了核武器以后,世界格局会发生变化。武器当然可能被疯子乱用。问题是那个疯子是谁有权定义的?印度和巴基斯坦试射了核武之后为什么没有受到足够的惩罚,当一件事情发生了一次,为什么不会发生第二次?科索沃的问题发生后,俄罗斯上演了南奥塞梯。一出一摸一样的戏嘛。区别只是北约演习,还是俄罗斯演习。这个世界不可否认还是强权的。但是如果是对抗的,那就不幸了。现在不是二战时期了,人类发明的东西已经足以消灭我们的这个星球了。只需要一个疯子。而逼出一个疯子,看似不难。要不怎么经济危机下,有那么多灭门的故事呢?更多精彩文章及讨论,请光临枫下论坛 rolia.net
    • 其实很简单,那里没有足够的兵力,这回老美增兵几万人,形势就会越来越好。塔利班潜伏的边远山区就算是在最和平的时期政府军势力也没有完全控制得了当地的局势,全是些部落长老说了算。