|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
 Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 5:06 am Post subject: |
 |
|
Al Qaeda has its own enemies in Waziristan. The US can build them up and the US can build up the Northern alliance.
The Northern alliance are Afghanis too and they can be built up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 3:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Very well. I will answer my own question.
The US is allowed independent operations under Article 51 of the UN Charter
| Article 51 wrote: |
| Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. |
The issue of intervention involves more than justice. It involves self-defense. On Sept. 11th the United States was attacked. It responded by co-operating with the Northern Alliance in bringing down the Taliban. Independent American forces co-ordinating with the ISAF continue to operate in Afghanistan, largely focused on training the Afghan Army and striking at Al Qaeda whenever possible (for the most part Al Qaeda is in Pakistan).
Right now the Taliban is receiving direct assistance from Pakistan's ISI, which was begun under Pervez Musharraf. At some point in time the US needs to confront this reality. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Oct 08, 2008 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| At some point in time the US needs to confront this reality. |
When that day comes, when we dismount this tightrope and confront the thing we have been trying to manage if not avoid, things will get worse. As it is, we continue pretending our interests coincide while we know damn well they conflict.
Plan B, I imagine, centers on strengthening Indian-American relations at the expense of Pakistani security. Then, of course, China and Russia will come into play, however. What a mess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 1:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
Very well. I will answer my own question.
The US is allowed independent operations under Article 51 of the UN Charter
| Article 51 wrote: |
| Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. |
The issue of intervention involves more than justice. It involves self-defense. On Sept. 11th the United States was attacked. It responded by co-operating with the Northern Alliance in bringing down the Taliban. Independent American forces co-ordinating with the ISAF continue to operate in Afghanistan, largely focused on training the Afghan Army and striking at Al Qaeda whenever possible (for the most part Al Qaeda is in Pakistan).
Right now the Taliban is receiving direct assistance from Pakistan's ISI, which was begun under Pervez Musharraf. At some point in time the US needs to confront this reality. |
And how is bombing a far away country (one of the poorest in the world) self-defence? It wasn't the Taliban who flew planes into your country. And Al Quaeda are based all over the world. They don't need the Taliban or Afghanistan. Indeed, the attacks were masterminded from Germany - at least from what I remember.
Attacking Afghaninstan out of self defence? Sounds like sheer bollocks to me, mate. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 5:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
Very well. I will answer my own question.
The US is allowed independent operations under Article 51 of the UN Charter
| Article 51 wrote: |
| Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack occurs against a Member of the United Nations, until the Security Council has taken measures necessary to maintain international peace and security. Measures taken by Members in the exercise of this right of self-defence shall be immediately reported to the Security Council and shall not in any way affect the authority and responsibility of the Security Council under the present Charter to take at any time such action as it deems necessary in order to maintain or restore international peace and security. |
The issue of intervention involves more than justice. It involves self-defense. On Sept. 11th the United States was attacked. It responded by co-operating with the Northern Alliance in bringing down the Taliban. Independent American forces co-ordinating with the ISAF continue to operate in Afghanistan, largely focused on training the Afghan Army and striking at Al Qaeda whenever possible (for the most part Al Qaeda is in Pakistan).
Right now the Taliban is receiving direct assistance from Pakistan's ISI, which was begun under Pervez Musharraf. At some point in time the US needs to confront this reality. |
And how is bombing a far away country (one of the poorest in the world) self-defence? It wasn't the Taliban who flew planes into your country. And Al Quaeda are based all over the world. They don't need the Taliban or Afghanistan. Indeed, the attacks were masterminded from Germany - at least from what I remember.
Attacking Afghaninstan out of self defence? Sounds like sheer bollocks to me, mate. |
Taliban harbored terrorists. I know this is hard for you to accept. Yet the Taliban was hostile to the US. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bacasper
Joined: 26 Mar 2007
|
| Posted: Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
And how is bombing a far away country (one of the poorest in the world) self-defence? It wasn't the Taliban who flew planes into your country. And Al Quaeda are based all over the world. They don't need the Taliban or Afghanistan. Indeed, the attacks were masterminded from Germany - at least from what I remember.
Attacking Afghaninstan out of self defence? Sounds like sheer bollocks to me, mate. |
Military Justifies Attack That Killed at Least 33 Afghan Civilians
By Karen DeYoung
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 9, 2008; Page A15
A military investigation has concluded that U.S. forces acted in legitimate self-defense in launching an August air assault against Taliban militants in Afghanistan that it said left 33 civilians dead, including at least 12 children. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
