Page 326 of 346

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 1:23 pm
by jhu72
Wesley Clark weighs in.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 2:48 pm
by Typical Lax Dad
cradleandshoot wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:46 am Of course when the bloodletting takes place in Afghanistan when they win and take control. Will CNN, MSNBC or FOX or any of the rest of the bloodsucking parasites of our networks be there to cover the atrocities that will happen? Will anybody even care? Maybe all of you heck liberals that post here will be happy that Pete was banned from this forum for 30 days. The brownshirts in Germany were back in the day the equivalent of the trolls that the Blackshirt liberals of this forum rail against today. Sadly this forum has quickly gone to chit.
Timely


Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 6:54 pm
by Brooklyn
Taliban's stunning, lightning advance in Afghanistan continues


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taliban-af ... 021-08-13/


The Taliban have captured another three provincial capitals in southern Afghanistan, including in Helmand, the scene of some of the heaviest fighting in the past two decades, as the insurgents press a lightning offensive that is gradually encircling the capital, Kabul.

And the United Nations is warning that a "humanitarian catastrophe" may be emerging in Afghanistan as civilians flee the oncoming Taliban.

The loss of Helmand's provincial capital comes after years of toil and blood spilled by American, British and allied NATO forces. Hundreds of foreign troops were killed there over the course of the nearly two-decade war.


The insurgents have taken more than a dozen provincial capitals in recent days and now control more than two-thirds of the country just weeks before the U.S. plans to withdraw its last troops.

While Kabul isn't directly under threat yet, the losses and the battles elsewhere further tighten the grip of a resurgent Taliban, who continue to press their offensive.

"The U.S.-backed Afghan military has been no match for Taliban fighters who are taking advantage of the vacuum left by the U.S. troop withdrawal," says CBS News correspondent Roxana Saberi. "With stunning speed, Taliban fighters are sweeping across Afghanistan."


With security rapidly deteriorating, the United States planned to send in 3,000 troops to help evacuate some personnel from the U.S. Embassy in Kabul. Separately, Britain said about 600 troops would be deployed on a short-term basis to support British nationals leaving the country, and Canada is sending special forces to help evacuate its embassy.

The staff drawdown at the U.S. Embassy "is sure to embolden the Taliban even more," Saberi says.

Attaullah Afghan, the head of the provincial council in Helmand, said Taliban fighters captured the provincial capital of Lashkar Gah following heavy fighting and raised their white flag over governmental installations. He said three national army bases outside of Lashkar Gah remained under control of the government.

Atta Jan Haqbayan, the provincial council chief in Zabul province, said the local capital of Qalat fell to the Taliban and that officials are in a nearby army camp preparing to leave.

Two lawmakers from Afghanistan's southern Uruzgan province said local officials have surrendered the provincial capital, Tirin Kot, to the rapidly advancing Taliban. Bismillah Jan Mohammad and Qudratullah Rahimi confirmed the surrender Friday. Mohammad says the governor is en route to the airport to depart for Kabul.


The latest advances came hours after the insurgents captured the country's second and third largest cities in a lightning advance. The seizures of Kandahar and Herat mark the biggest prizes yet for the Taliban.

The fighting has pushed hundreds of thousands of people to flee in recent months, Saberi says.

"Many are coming to Kabul seeking safety. They've left behind their homes, their belongings and even loved ones killed in the fighting," she adds.

Those fleeing fear the Taliban will again impose a brutal, repressive government, all but eliminating women's rights and conducting public executions.

At the United Nations, U.N. Secretary General António Guterres did not mince words about the "grave situation" in Afghanistan, CBS News' Pamela Falk reports.

"Even for a country that has tragically known generations of conflict, Afghanistan is in the throes of yet another chaotic and desperate chapter — an incredible tragedy for its long-suffering people," Guterres said. "Afghanistan is spinning out of control."

The Reuters news agency reports that Thomson Phiri of the World Food Program told a U.N. briefing Friday, "We fear the worst is yet to come and the larger tide of hunger is fast approaching ... The situation has all the hallmarks of a humanitarian catastrophe."

"They are sleeping in the open, in parks and public spaces," Reuters quotes U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs spokesman Jens Laerke as saying. "A major concern right now is simply finding shelter for them."

Peace talks in Qatar remain stalled, though diplomats are still meeting, as the U.S., European and Asian nations warned that any government established by force would be rejected.

The latest U.S. military intelligence assessment suggests Kabul could come under insurgent pressure within 30 days and that, if current trends hold, the Taliban could gain full control of the country within a few months. The Afghan government may be forced to pull back to defend the capital and just a few other cities in the coming days if the Taliban maintain momentum.

The onslaught represents a stunning collapse of Afghan forces after the United States spent nearly two decades and $830 billion trying to establish a functioning state after toppling the Taliban in the wake of the September 11 attacks. The advancing Taliban ride on American-made Humvees and carry M-16s pilfered from Afghan forces.

Afghan security forces and the government haven't responded to repeated questions from journalists, instead issuing video communiques that downplay the Taliban advance.

Bill Roggio, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the Afghan army has rotted from within due to corruption and mismanagement, leaving troops in the field poorly equipped and with little motivation to fight. The Taliban, meanwhile, have spent a decade taking control of large swaths of the countryside, positioning themselves to rapidly seize key infrastructure and urban areas once President Joe Biden announced the U.S. withdrawal.

The difficulty of moving troops out to the provinces means the government is likely to focus all its efforts on defending the capital.

U.S. Central Command has acknowledged carrying out several airstrikes in recent days, without providing details or commenting on the concerns over civilian casualties.

A United Nations agency warned that civilians in southern Afghanistan faced cut-off highways and mobile phone outages. It described aid groups as being unable to determine how many people had fled as intense fighting and airstrikes continued there.

In Kabul and surrounding central provinces that remain under government control, the U.N.'s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said "the security situation remained unstable and unpredictable with elevated conflict and violence."





Not stated in the online article is a matter discussed on the nightly CBS news broadcast: it was reported that Afghan forces are simply dropping their weapons and giving them to heroic Taliban patriots. Not only are many surrendering to them, they are joining the Taliban forces and using weaponry given by the US to the puppet regime imposed by traitor Bush. That's right, your tax dollars are now paying for the Taliban's weapons. Patriotism at work in Afghanistan where the majority will soon rule again as it always should.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 9:49 pm
by old salt
jhu72 wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 1:23 pm Wesley Clark weighs in.
20 years of navel gazing & 2nd guessing is fine, but the issue at hand was what could be sustained going forward.

In Afghanistan, as in Iraq & NE Syria, we had reached a point where stability could be maintained with minimal US force levels, investment, risk & casualties. We even had a robust involvement by NATO & other allies, even Germany, ...who were willing to stay.

We are presenting China & Iran a potential ally which can link them geographically, provide the right of way for the new silk road. allow the exploitation of critical mineral resources & harbor the poppy field which will supply the west's illegal drug demand.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 10:50 pm
by Typical Lax Dad
Brooklyn wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 6:54 pm Taliban's stunning, lightning advance in Afghanistan continues


https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taliban-af ... 021-08-13/


The Taliban have captured another three provincial capitals in southern Afghanistan, including in Helmand, the scene of some of the heaviest fighting in the past two decades, as the insurgents press a lightning offensive that is gradually encircling the capital, Kabul.

And the United Nations is warning that a "humanitarian catastrophe" may be emerging in Afghanistan as civilians flee the oncoming Taliban.

The loss of Helmand's provincial capital comes after years of toil and blood spilled by American, British and allied NATO forces. Hundreds of foreign troops were killed there over the course of the nearly two-decade war.


The insurgents have taken more than a dozen provincial capitals in recent days and now control more than two-thirds of the country just weeks before the U.S. plans to withdraw its last troops.

While Kabul isn't directly under threat yet, the losses and the battles elsewhere further tighten the grip of a resurgent Taliban, who continue to press their offensive.

"The U.S.-backed Afghan military has been no match for Taliban fighters who are taking advantage of the vacuum left by the U.S. troop withdrawal," says CBS News correspondent Roxana Saberi. "With stunning speed, Taliban fighters are sweeping across Afghanistan."


With security rapidly deteriorating, the United States planned to send in 3,000 troops to help evacuate some personnel from the U.S. Embassy in Kabul. Separately, Britain said about 600 troops would be deployed on a short-term basis to support British nationals leaving the country, and Canada is sending special forces to help evacuate its embassy.

The staff drawdown at the U.S. Embassy "is sure to embolden the Taliban even more," Saberi says.

Attaullah Afghan, the head of the provincial council in Helmand, said Taliban fighters captured the provincial capital of Lashkar Gah following heavy fighting and raised their white flag over governmental installations. He said three national army bases outside of Lashkar Gah remained under control of the government.

Atta Jan Haqbayan, the provincial council chief in Zabul province, said the local capital of Qalat fell to the Taliban and that officials are in a nearby army camp preparing to leave.

Two lawmakers from Afghanistan's southern Uruzgan province said local officials have surrendered the provincial capital, Tirin Kot, to the rapidly advancing Taliban. Bismillah Jan Mohammad and Qudratullah Rahimi confirmed the surrender Friday. Mohammad says the governor is en route to the airport to depart for Kabul.


The latest advances came hours after the insurgents captured the country's second and third largest cities in a lightning advance. The seizures of Kandahar and Herat mark the biggest prizes yet for the Taliban.

The fighting has pushed hundreds of thousands of people to flee in recent months, Saberi says.

"Many are coming to Kabul seeking safety. They've left behind their homes, their belongings and even loved ones killed in the fighting," she adds.

Those fleeing fear the Taliban will again impose a brutal, repressive government, all but eliminating women's rights and conducting public executions.

At the United Nations, U.N. Secretary General António Guterres did not mince words about the "grave situation" in Afghanistan, CBS News' Pamela Falk reports.

"Even for a country that has tragically known generations of conflict, Afghanistan is in the throes of yet another chaotic and desperate chapter — an incredible tragedy for its long-suffering people," Guterres said. "Afghanistan is spinning out of control."

The Reuters news agency reports that Thomson Phiri of the World Food Program told a U.N. briefing Friday, "We fear the worst is yet to come and the larger tide of hunger is fast approaching ... The situation has all the hallmarks of a humanitarian catastrophe."

"They are sleeping in the open, in parks and public spaces," Reuters quotes U.N. Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs spokesman Jens Laerke as saying. "A major concern right now is simply finding shelter for them."

Peace talks in Qatar remain stalled, though diplomats are still meeting, as the U.S., European and Asian nations warned that any government established by force would be rejected.

The latest U.S. military intelligence assessment suggests Kabul could come under insurgent pressure within 30 days and that, if current trends hold, the Taliban could gain full control of the country within a few months. The Afghan government may be forced to pull back to defend the capital and just a few other cities in the coming days if the Taliban maintain momentum.

The onslaught represents a stunning collapse of Afghan forces after the United States spent nearly two decades and $830 billion trying to establish a functioning state after toppling the Taliban in the wake of the September 11 attacks. The advancing Taliban ride on American-made Humvees and carry M-16s pilfered from Afghan forces.

Afghan security forces and the government haven't responded to repeated questions from journalists, instead issuing video communiques that downplay the Taliban advance.

Bill Roggio, a senior fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, said the Afghan army has rotted from within due to corruption and mismanagement, leaving troops in the field poorly equipped and with little motivation to fight. The Taliban, meanwhile, have spent a decade taking control of large swaths of the countryside, positioning themselves to rapidly seize key infrastructure and urban areas once President Joe Biden announced the U.S. withdrawal.

The difficulty of moving troops out to the provinces means the government is likely to focus all its efforts on defending the capital.

U.S. Central Command has acknowledged carrying out several airstrikes in recent days, without providing details or commenting on the concerns over civilian casualties.

A United Nations agency warned that civilians in southern Afghanistan faced cut-off highways and mobile phone outages. It described aid groups as being unable to determine how many people had fled as intense fighting and airstrikes continued there.

In Kabul and surrounding central provinces that remain under government control, the U.N.'s Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs said "the security situation remained unstable and unpredictable with elevated conflict and violence."





Not stated in the online article is a matter discussed on the nightly CBS news broadcast: it was reported that Afghan forces are simply dropping their weapons and giving them to heroic Taliban patriots. Not only are many surrendering to them, they are joining the Taliban forces and using weaponry given by the US to the puppet regime imposed by traitor Bush. That's right, your tax dollars are now paying for the Taliban's weapons. Patriotism at work in Afghanistan where the majority will soon rule again as it always should.
Advancing like Desert Storm.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 10:54 pm
by Brooklyn
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 10:50 pm
Advancing like Desert Storm.

And unlike Desert Storm, the patriotic Taliban liberator soldiers are being greeted with flowers and candy!

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm
by old salt
Brooklyn wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 10:54 pm
Typical Lax Dad wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 10:50 pm
Advancing like Desert Storm.
And unlike Desert Storm, the patriotic Taliban liberator soldiers are being greeted with flowers and candy!
Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
by Brooklyn
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:22 am
by old salt
I am hard pressed to recall a time when so many American citizens were in jeopardy & we were so powerless to protect them. Their safety is now primarily at the discretion of the Taliban. We now have zero leverage. We surrendered it before our withdrawal was complete, with no protection for our Afghan allies.

President Ghani's tv address indicated that a deal might be in the works between the govt & the Taliban for a "peaceful" transfer of power,
(which means the corrupt Afghan govt officials will be allowed to join their bank accounts in Doha).

Ismail Khan's surrender & deal with the Taliban in Herat may become a trend.
https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/afghan-wa ... y-taliban/
...less than a week after he vowed to fight the Taliban to the end.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/2 ... iban-again

We must rely on the tender mercies of the Taliban for the safety of US citizens still trapped inside Afghanistan, for our troops enroute to protect them, & for our loyal Afghan allies who stood with us.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
by tech37
Brooklyn wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 8:10 am
by old salt
old salt wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:22 am I am hard pressed to recall a time when so many American citizens were in jeopardy & we were so powerless to protect them. Their safety is now primarily at the discretion of the Taliban. We now have zero leverage. We surrendered it before our withdrawal was complete, with no protection for our Afghan allies.

President Ghani's tv address indicated that a deal might be in the works between the govt & the Taliban for a "peaceful" transfer of power,
(which means the corrupt Afghan govt officials will be allowed to join their bank accounts in Doha).

Ismail Khan's surrender & deal with the Taliban in Herat may become a trend.
https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/afghan-wa ... y-taliban/
...less than a week after he vowed to fight the Taliban to the end.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/2 ... iban-again

We must rely on the tender mercies of the Taliban for the safety of US citizens still trapped inside Afghanistan, for our troops enroute to protect them, & for our loyal Afghan allies who stood with us.
Even if Pres Biden changes his mind, I fear it may be too late for this :
https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... an/184512/
John Allen: Biden Must Reverse His Decision to Quit Afghanistan
The administration must act now. Here’s what they must do.

Afghanistan stands on the knife’s edge and history may hold President Joe Biden and his administration personally responsible if the worst comes to pass.

History’s judgment of this moment will be swift and harsh about who lost Afghanistan. Given the president’s clear and long-held commitment to American values and his important leadership in so many other areas, such an outcome in Afghanistan is simply baffling, and would be devastating to the credibility of his critical message that “America is Back”.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 8:50 am
by MDlaxfan76
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
Brooklyn wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.
[/quote]



Post by admin » Tue Jun 29, 2021 8:31 am

Added to forum rules within Unsportsmanlike Conduct
SECTION 4. No post-er shall:
...
d. Troll and/or commit other Russian 'bot and/or other Putinesque behaviors. A troll is someone who uses over-the-top opinions or unverified claims to incite others, stir up controversy, and change a civilized discussion into a battleground.


Indeed, Brooklyn's post veered pretty darn far off topic.
That said, he's retorting to a post that said he'd be cheering Taliban slaughtering other Afghans and any Americans they find.

Trolling is typically when someone posts something unrelated to an actual discussion simply to inflame other readers, typically with a really out there view coupled with straight out disinformation/misinformation baloney. Brooklyn sometimes does so in terms of his perspective, but not very often with something factually not true, on purpose. One may disagree with his view (as I do on this topic of Afghanistan) but he's not likely to purposely post something provably false. If he did, then sure, that'd be trolling (IMO).

Does that explain the difference?

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 8:54 am
by NattyBohChamps04
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
Brooklyn wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.
Report it to the admin if it offends you or you think it's breaking the rules. That's what the report button is for and how things get enforced. Admin isn't reading every little post.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 9:00 am
by MDlaxfan76
old salt wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 8:10 am
old salt wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:22 am I am hard pressed to recall a time when so many American citizens were in jeopardy & we were so powerless to protect them. Their safety is now primarily at the discretion of the Taliban. We now have zero leverage. We surrendered it before our withdrawal was complete, with no protection for our Afghan allies.

President Ghani's tv address indicated that a deal might be in the works between the govt & the Taliban for a "peaceful" transfer of power,
(which means the corrupt Afghan govt officials will be allowed to join their bank accounts in Doha).

Ismail Khan's surrender & deal with the Taliban in Herat may become a trend.
https://nypost.com/2021/08/13/afghan-wa ... y-taliban/
...less than a week after he vowed to fight the Taliban to the end.
https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/2 ... iban-again

We must rely on the tender mercies of the Taliban for the safety of US citizens still trapped inside Afghanistan, for our troops enroute to protect them, & for our loyal Afghan allies who stood with us.
Even if Pres Biden changes his mind, I fear it may be too late for this :
https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2021/0 ... an/184512/
John Allen: Biden Must Reverse His Decision to Quit Afghanistan
The administration must act now. Here’s what they must do.

Afghanistan stands on the knife’s edge and history may hold President Joe Biden and his administration personally responsible if the worst comes to pass.

History’s judgment of this moment will be swift and harsh about who lost Afghanistan. Given the president’s clear and long-held commitment to American values and his important leadership in so many other areas, such an outcome in Afghanistan is simply baffling, and would be devastating to the credibility of his critical message that “America is Back”.
Salty, you and I appear to agree pretty strongly on this one and have for some time.
Indeed, it's been my chief warning/concern about Biden's early leadership/decisions in his Presidency.

I'm not trying to stir up a disagreement, but do you agree that had Trump done what he committed to do, withdrawing by this past May, this same outcome trajectory would have been much the same?

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 9:25 am
by tech37
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 8:54 am
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
Brooklyn wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.
Report it to the admin if it offends you or you think it's breaking the rules. That's what the report button is for and how things get enforced. Admin isn't reading every little post.
Your lack of comprehension is astounding.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 9:44 am
by tech37
MDlaxfan76 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 8:50 am
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
Brooklyn wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.


Post by admin » Tue Jun 29, 2021 8:31 am

Added to forum rules within Unsportsmanlike Conduct
SECTION 4. No post-er shall:
...
d. Troll and/or commit other Russian 'bot and/or other Putinesque behaviors. A troll is someone who uses over-the-top opinions or unverified claims to incite others, stir up controversy, and change a civilized discussion into a battleground.


Indeed, Brooklyn's post veered pretty darn far off topic.
That said, he's retorting to a post that said he'd be cheering Taliban slaughtering other Afghans and any Americans they find.

Trolling is typically when someone posts something unrelated to an actual discussion simply to inflame other readers, typically with a really out there view coupled with straight out disinformation/misinformation baloney. Brooklyn sometimes does so in terms of his perspective, but not very often with something factually not true, on purpose. One may disagree with his view (as I do on this topic of Afghanistan) but he's not likely to purposely post something provably false. If he did, then sure, that'd be trolling (IMO).

Does that explain the difference?
[/quote]
Thanks, I guess. Didn't realize the autocrats had gone this far with rules changes. Talk about "over-the-top." Quite broad and leaves much to interpretation/subjectivity. Good luck with that.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 10:07 am
by NattyBohChamps04
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 9:25 am
NattyBohChamps04 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 8:54 am
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
Brooklyn wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.
Report it to the admin if it offends you or you think it's breaking the rules. That's what the report button is for and how things get enforced. Admin isn't reading every little post.
Your lack of comprehension is astounding.
Your lack of comprehension about how the rules get enforced is astounding.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 10:09 am
by seacoaster
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
Brooklyn wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 12:52 am
old salt wrote: Fri Aug 13, 2021 11:11 pm Yes. They are beloved. How soon do they fill their stadiums, stoning women & playing buzkashi polo with the head of an enemy ? Cheer them on.

Oh don't worry, I won't be cheering. This unlike those who rejoiced when Derek Chauvin murdered George Floyd in cold blood and continue to do so as other criminal cops do the same.
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.
I agree with tech here about the Brooklyn post. Not advocating any action; I am just saying that there is no effort at discussion, only indictment based on a false narrative.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 10:38 am
by Brooklyn
tech37 wrote: Sat Aug 14, 2021 7:56 am
Apologies for veering off-topic but I have to ask... how is the above post not trolling? This is not a whiny complaint on my part like others on this board who consistently respond with that charge when unhappy or frustrated with what has been posted, especially when it comes to PB (quite unfairly IMHO). This is simply a question regarding the subjective/nebulous term "troll" and how it's being applied by people with autocrat temperaments on here in order to control discussion.

Don't get me wrong, as far as I'm concerned, the poster above has every right to post outrageous or stupid content (and often does). Their credibility will take a hit either by push back from others or simply by being ignored. Unless clearly stated board rules ("troll" could not be further from clearly stated) are broken, then posters and their posts should not be censored, canceled, boycotted, or penalized. This should apply to everyone.

Seems like there are already sufficient board rules...don't fix what ain't broke.
Now wait a second pal. I mentioned previously that I've had some exchanges with hate filled bigots on youtube who indeed applauded Chauvin and laughed at Floyd. That's a fact whether you choose to believe it or not.

When I initially wrote this reply I challenged you to check out Fox network chats and comments about the trial and the cop's action. I just did so and (surprise!) comments and chats were deleted. That's too bad. Had they not been deleted you would have seen all the hate filled comment by your fellow right wingers. Here is just one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=12ShR5cEtwE
I also checked for the ultra conservative OAN videos on the trial but, evidently, they are gone. I guess the harsh comments from far right radicals were too much for YT. Wouldn't surprise in the least if this is the reason why they are gone.

Posting facts like those are not stupid comments as you say. Rather making ignorant attacks on the truth is the true stupidity.




As for my reply to Salty, I share in his concern over the Taliban government's abuses. But that is their problem, not ours. And it is their choice to have such a government and ruling system. We have enough problems of our own with government police killing people on the our streets. That's what we need to concern ourselves with. That's not trolling, that is the truth.

Re: The Politics of National Security

Posted: Sat Aug 14, 2021 10:50 am
by Brooklyn
Two more provinces captured:

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/taliban- ... a700f62837

The Taliban seized two more provinces on Saturday and approached the outskirts of Afghanistan’s capital while also launching a multi-pronged assault on a major northern city defended by former warlords, Afghan officials said.

The insurgents have captured much of northern, western and southern Afghanistan in a breakneck offensive less than three weeks before the United States is set to withdraw its last troops, raising fears of a full militant takeover or another Afghan civil war.

The Taliban captured all of Logar province, just south of the capital, Kabul, and detained local officials, said Hoda Ahmadi, a lawmaker from the province. She said the Taliban have reached the Char Asyab district, just 11 kilometers (7 miles) south of Kabul.

The insurgents also captured the capital of Paktika, bordering Pakistan, according to Khalid Asad, a lawmaker from the province. He said fighting broke out in Sharana early Saturday but ended after local elders intervened to negotiate a pullout. He said the governor and other officials surrendered and were on their way to Kabul.



more ...




Note the lightning speed of these successes. After a 20 year occupation by the USA and despite hundreds of billions of your tax dollars given to the corrupt puppet regime who ruled in that land, they do not even try to fight back.

Note also how despite the successes of the Taliban forces, they are still referred to as "insurgents" by the news media. Why do they persist in this when it is clear that the Taliban enjoys majority support from the people of Afghanistan?

I challenge the right wing critics to address this issue.