Post Comment   Private Reply

#1: Pinguinite    To: Horse (#0)

Very possibly a valid point. A truce would be the first thing to negotiate, instead of scheduling peace talks while combat still rages.

Pinguinite posted on 2019-09-16 00:07:19   Reply   Private Reply

#2: ghostdogtxn    To: Pinguinite (#1)

ghostdogtxn posted on 2019-09-16 00:23:57   Reply   Private Reply

#3: BTP Holdings    To: ghostdogtxn (#2)

Hard to call it raging combat.

I knew a driver for the State Transport. He was an Afghan war veteran. He told me he was at a hot air balloon festival.

They were giving helicopter rides for $50. He was sitting in a porta john and a helicopter flew overhead. He said for a minute he thought he was back in Afghanistan.

Talk about flashbacks. :-/

BTP Holdings posted on 2019-09-16 00:29:07   Reply   Private Reply

#4: Pinguinite    To: ghostdogtxn (#2)

I kind of get the sense that the combat there is pretty low-level. Kind of like Ireland during the troubles. Hard to call it raging combat.

Depends on which side of a predator drone you're on.

For the Taliban, it's probably war as usual. For the US, it's occupation as usual.

Pinguinite posted on 2019-09-16 00:36:08   Reply   Private Reply

#5: ghostdogtxn    To: Pinguinite (#4)

ghostdogtxn posted on 2019-09-16 01:33:08   Reply   Private Reply

#6: Horse    To: ghostdogtxn, Pinguinite (#2)

George Bush told our Allies that he was going into Afghanistan even before 911. So what was the real reason? Was it not for the CIA to control illegal drugs worldwide. After the 2020 elections we won't be able to afford even a small war like this.

Horse posted on 2019-09-16 01:51:20   Reply   Private Reply

#7: ghostdogtxn    To: Horse (#6)

ghostdogtxn posted on 2019-09-16 11:38:27   Reply   Private Reply