what's the difference between the Afghanistan & Iraq wars?

[mopaul]

some have suggested that the war in afghanistan is somehow more just or qualified, as opposed to the unjust, unneccessary iraqi war.

i see them both as illegal pre emptive imperialist actions by the u.s. i don't see us defeating terrorism in afhanistan anymore than we are defeating it in iraq.

i still have not seen believable evidence that afhanistan had anything at all to do with 9-11, ESPECIALLY since that is the official white house version.

we sometimes forget that there are two wars going on. how has afghanistan been put on the back burner, and how is it that it's barely even mentioned these days?

[greatauntoftriplets]

1. Since I have not yet seen them defeat gang violence...

on the streets of Chicago (which scares me more than shadowy "Islamic terrorists") in the so-called "War on Drugs", I also see the invasions and occupations of Afghanistan and Iraq as a form of neocon mental masturbation and a means of enriching the already-rich.

Perhaps some thing Afghanistan is "more qualified" because there is no oil there.

Rather, the regime should be pressing hard on the Saudi royal family to find out just how much funding they provide to groups like Al-Qaida.

[mmonk]

2. A terrorist training camp

A regime (Taliban) which thought it was alright. Whether you see justification or not, that is a fact. This particular training camp trained those that primarily target us.

[Political_Junkie]

8. Our government

trained and armed those who are now targeting us. Perhaps we should be at war with Washington.

[mmonk]

10. While we did

that doesn't make a duty to protect our citizens mute. I disagreed with training and arming mujahadeen in the first place, but I can see a clear difference in Afghanistan v. Iraq.

[Vladimir]

14. But most of the hijackers were Saudis

and the operation funded from Pakistan, and the pilots trained from within the US. The 'training camps' were just a cosmetic shooting range and a convinient excuse.

[Solomon]

3. I've always felt the same way. The invasion of Afghanistan was just

as illegal as the invasion of Iraq. It pisses me off that people have no memories or knowledge of what happened.

I remember very clearly. When we demanded of the Taliban that they turn over Bin Laden, the Taliban responded as any sovereign would respond. They said to us, "show us evidence that Bin Laden was involved and we will turn him over to you." That is a proper response.

Did we show them any evidence? Hell no! We bombed the living shit out of them. We didn't show any evidence because we don't have any evidence. They haven't shown the american public any evidence either.

This crucial starting point is continually overlooked, and it pisses me off to no end.

[mmonk]

5. sorry it does.

While I don't condone attacking another country, the links between attacks on Americans and that training camp were not even in dispute by those that run it. To do nothing about that would have been irresponsible. All they had to do was turn them over or aid in their capture.

[Deja Q]

7. Kill them with kindness is the solution.

I'm sure the Iraqis think of us as terrorists, not to mention our own terrorist camps - and usurping the camps in Iraq for our own, ironically identical, use... because all we've done is kill - and exacerbate the problem.

The US thinks of itself as an entity that can do no wrong. It's self-deluded. If that isn't a sign of a big problem...

[FloridaPat]

11. I agree complete. Also, the Afghanistan war was planned

months in advance. I am still waiting for proof al Qada did 9-11

[Deja Q]

4. The US is swatting at mosquitos, nothing more. It's rather like the war on

drugs except we're hitting symptoms of the problem with big metal weapons (instead of big jail time for offenders) rather than fighting the problem with a paradigm shift.

Except the problem is how the US does things - which means there will be no paradigm shift. Just the use of more DDT against the proverbial skeeters, which in turn harms us as much as the drug dealers or terrorists we're fighting. (Dunno if the so-called "war on drugs" has led to the creation of new drug dealers, but the fact the "war on terror" has led to the direct creation of more people hating us (ergo, more terrorists) has shown that * is an incompetent dunderhead who must be dragged away from the Oval Office as soon as possible.)

[mmonk]

6. We can't stop terrorism

with bombing campaigns. It takes diplomacy and co-operation as well. Sometimes we have to act to protect our citizens though which can be argued in the case of Afghanistan but not Iraq or Iran or Syria IMO.

[Deja Q]

9. Agreed...

For the terrorist camps which are terrorist camps, they should be bombed. That'll swat a few skeeters, but the survivors will simply re-group after convincing more people to turn into skeeters for their cause using spin and deception...

Syria, Iran, et al, will be next. With * praising Rumdrinker's dirty ass with Rumdrinker now saying that Iraq is just the beginning, we all need to be VERY afraid...

[tabasco]

12. I don't agree with how we invaded Afghanistan ...

but I certainly maintain we had every right to attack al qaeda camps and anybody that got in our way of doing it. I would support any nation's right to destroy an active, armed enemy where they are hiding. Especially after the murder of 3000+ innocent civilians.
- The Bush cabal decided to use massive bombing in Afghanistan which was not only cruel, but ineffective. We should have used air/ground assaults to surround camps, and capture or kill all that resisted. That is the only way to ensure capture of the enemy, and avoid indiscriminate killing and damage.
- The Bush cabal had already decided to launch an unjustified war in Iraq. That is why they did not want to deploy a lot of ground forces to Afghanistan.
- We had a right to attack al qaeda in Afghanistan, but, just like everything else they touch, the Bush cabal turned the attacks into a model of cruelty and inefficiency.
- I am convinced al qaeda was responsible for 9-11. To deny the US the right to respond against such a cruel and murderous attack is silly. War sucks, but so does 3000 innocent people getting murdered.
- We had international support for attacking alqaeda in Afghanistan, which is not justification in itself, but indicates that arguably the war had just cause.
- Afghanistan was not a preemptive invasion. The enemy in Afghanistan had already launched a murderous attack on us. Our attacks were in response to 9-11, so IMO, it is wrong to call attacking Afghanistan preemptive.
- Of course, we agree that the method of attack was stupid, cruel, and ineffective.

[Senior citizen]

13. No difference -- both unwinnable (nt)

nt

[moof]

15. Afghanistan - Drugs, Oil & a pipeline/ Iraq - Oil, &

make sure sadam doesn't stay in power longer than bu*sh.