TERROR 'HAVEN' Taliban is ALREADY offering ‘safe haven’ to Al Qaeda in Afghanistan in bid to create

Conceding to terrorists creates more terrrorists. Allowing terrorists victories creates more terrorists. And working with Afghans for 20 years, and then abandoning them to be tortured and killed WILL create more terrorists.

In fact, the way Biden treated these people is going to be the biggest terrorist recruitment tool in history.

 

And then there is the real world where the Taliban was founded in 1994. The Taliban are a product of the Deobandi sect of Islam and Pakistan.

 

a "cradle of jihad".

 

The war in Iraq was, and always will be, the biggest recruitment tool in history. Us leaving Afghanistan won't create terrorists, but it might give existing terrorists a home base, although our departure will give them one less reason to hate us.

 

Ahahaha .... This is the British press lagging behind. Britain, as you know, is the older brother of the United States. So, all the claims to them.

 

Terrorists will use the way we treated our Afghan partners to their advantage for decades to come. We will deal with these repercussions the next time we have to put boots on the ground in any part of the Islamic world, which given enough time, is very likely.

 

How exactly did we treat them? By rebuilding their infrastructure? By pouring trillion dollars of taxpayer money on their country? What is the Taliban going to tell them? That we treated them badly by agreeing to put them in power? Think about what you say.

 

We abandoned our allies on the battlefield.
Afghans were willing to fight. But we abandoned them on the battlefield.

...about Afghans giving up the fight, we should not forget who was the first to leave the battlefield: It ...
Elliot Ackerman

 

LMAO, dude your version of history is an illusion

 

LMAO, dude your version of history is an illusion

 

Wrong again. !!!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban

 

Learn first, then post. From the link in #33:
". . . .Afghanistan is not my war. It’s our war. As much as we’ve heard about Afghans giving up the fight, we should not forget who was the first to leave the battlefield: It was us. Tell the Afghan soldiers who fought until they ran out of ammunition and were then slaughtered by the Taliban in Faryab province that they didn’t fight hard enough, or perhaps tell the same to the Afghan commandos who fought all summer in a desperate battles in Lashkar Gah. And we weren’t fighting only the Taliban in Afghanistan. We were also fighting their Pakistani and Iranian proxies who armed and trained them, as well as the interests of the Chinese and the Russians who in coming days will surely be among the first nations to recognize the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan."

 

BS. Those losers not only laid down their arms without a fight, but actually joined the Taliban, because they never saw them as enemy. They were our "allies" only because we paid them better.

You are basically arguing that they supposedly hate the Taliban, but will will join them because they hate us for putting Taliban in power. Your argument is 100% void of logic.

There were some elite Afghan commandos who were serious about the fight, but why on earth would they suddenly join them?

 

The Afghans suffered every year more KIA than we suffered throughout our Afghanistan deployment.
From the link at #33:
". . . If the Pakistanis had withdrawn their enduring support to the Taliban and denied them sanctuary within their borders at any point during this 20-year war, it would have been the Taliban, not our Afghan allies, who collapsed swiftly. But we decided it was time for our war in Afghanistan to end. Fair enough. But now, to accuse our Afghan allies of not fighting hard enough, then to use their alleged incompetence as a smokescreen for our own, is the height of arrogance, and dishonor. To abandon an ally is bad enough. To insult an ally from the East Room of the White House as Biden did in his speech creates a lasting moral injury. . . . "

 

So? That's what we paid them to do. We were the suckers who they took advantage of. Now they are with the Taliban and in control of their country, and they get to rape even more 'dancing boys' than they did while we paid them.

We should have left a loooooong time ago. Why do you insist we should keep pouring money and lives to prop up people who don't give a rats ass about us? Please explain.

 

We abandoned them. No amount of excuse-making can remove the dishonor.

 

Good!! We should have done is 15 years ago. There is no honor in being a perpetual sucker.

Its ironic as hell to see people who spent 4 years parroting after their leader "bring the troops back home" suddenly cry and whine about it and call it a dishonor.

 

???? .. the Taliban "IS" ISIS. .. Just now this group of Saudi Spawn - has their own Country ... or should we say the caliphate has added another nation under its fold.

 

ISIS=Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (the Levant), so no, Taliban is not ISIS.

Of course Afghanistan has always been an Islamic state, and from 1994 - 2001 it was the most strict enforcer of Sharia law. It was pretty much a 'caliphate'. Now (in 2020) that we agreed to put Taliban back in power, it will most likely become a strict enforcer of Sharia again, and radical muslims from other countries will most likely be attracted to such place.

 

Yeah right. Russia is not a capitalist state, it is run by a dictator.

The USA did not create the Taliban.

 

I voted against Trump twice, but I served 34 years and spent time in Afghanistan. I know dishonor when I see it.

 

That is a post that makes no point.

 

Iraq wars, going back to the 90s was biggest recruitment tool in history for Islamic terrorists against the US. Pales in comparison to the tools of the koran and hadiths for all Islamic terrorism.

From an Iraqi Newspaper 2 months before 9/11

"Meanwhile America has started to pressure the Taliban movement so that it would hand them Bin Ladin, while he continues to smile and still thinks seriously, with the seriousness of the Bedouin of the desert about the way he will try to bomb the Pentagon after he destroys the White House.. It seems that they will be going away because the revolutionary Bin Ladin is insisting very convincingly that he will strike America on the arm that is already hurting. That the man will not be swayed by the plant leaves of Whitman nor by the Adventures of Indiana Jones and will curse the memory of Frank Sinatra every time he hears his songs"

Arguably identifying the targets of 9/11. And after 9/11 from an Iraqi Newspaper

On the front page of the paper's four-page edition for Nov. 14, 2002,
there was a picture of Osama bin Laden speaking, next to which was a
picture of Saddam and his ''Revolutionary Council,'' ....
On the back page was a story headlined ''List of Honor.'' In a box
below the headline was ''A list of men we publish for the public.''
....Halfway down the middle column is written: ''Abid Al-Karim Muhamed
Aswod, intelligence officer responsible for the coordination of
activities with the Osama bin Laden group at the Iraqi embassy in
Pakistan.''
http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=17205

History repeating itself?

In 1993

The moment of confrontation had come. President Bush warned Saddam Hussein that if he continued to interfere with United Nations weapons inspectors and to shoot at American warplanes over Iraq, he would have to pay the consequences. So Islamic radicals from all over the Middle East, Africa and Asia converged on Baghdad to show their solidarity with Iraq in the face of American aggression. Chechens in Persian-lamb hats, Moroccans in caftans, delegates who hailed “from Jakarta to Dakar,” as one Senegalese put it, poured into Baghdad’s Rashid Hotel, where Saddam’s minions urged them to embrace jihad as “the one gate to Paradise.” And the greatest holy warrior of all? “The mujahed Saddam Hussein, who is leading this nation against the nonbelievers,” they were told. “Everyone has a task to do, which is to go against the American state,” declared Saddam’s deputy Ezzat Ibrahim. The Americans had colonized Lebanon; they had colonized Saudi Arabia. But the line against them would be drawn in Iraq. Believers would triumph, said Ibrahim: “Our stand now can lead us to final victory, to Paradise.”

http://www.newsweek.com/authors/christopher-dickey?page=0,0,0,0,0,0,0,20

And a few weeks later in February of 93 an Iraqi bomb maker and Ramzi Youssef, traveling with Iraqi passports detonate a bomb in the basement of WTC, and flee to Iraq. Ramzi Youssef, the nephew of Khalid Muhammad who master minded the 9/11 attacks on the WTC.

 

Yeah! Bill Clinton mentioned it in a video when he was speaking on Roosevelt Island. According to Christianity you can't speak to the dead, that is unless Eleanor Roosevelt is a Saint and asked God to remain on earth to help people. I'm sure that's not the case. Eleanor though was a just and compassionate person and considering Hillary's actions as Secretary of State, her advice could never have come from Eleanor.

What this means is that Hillary was taking her advice from a demon - or in politically correct Hollywood terms, from her spiritual guide. That Bill Clinton would say it to the audience on Roosevelt Island without hesitancy means that necromancy must have been quite common among his peers.

 

Yeah mate .. we all know what the acrynom for "ISIS" is .. but is just a name ..one used more for propaganda purposes. Did you think the original planners of 911 were still around or something .

In any case .. Saudi Spawn known as ISIS is one of the tentacles of the Octopus - the Saudi Spawn known as the Taliban are another.

Stand one next to the other .. what is the difference other than the name of the soldier.

In terms of Sharia enforcement .. what is the difference between ISIS - Taliban and beloved El Saud ?

Floor is yours.