Oct 22, 2009 -- 3:25AM, CharikIeia wrote:

Oct 21, 2009 -- 11:41PM, rabello wrote:

I would challange you to prove that Afghanistan attacked us on 9/11/01.

Uh, did anyone ever assert that Afghanistan attacked the US on 9/11/01?

This sounds like a misconception. The presence of Western troops in Afghanistan is not based on a declaration of war between two nations. Do you think it is? Or do you think anyone else thinks it is? If so, who / why?

As I see it, the presence of Western troops in Afghanistan is based on the principle of "you broke it, you own it".

More like "you have it, we want it"

Troops went in there because the terrorist educational infrastructure was to be wiped out, and because the anti-civilisation stone age Afghan Mullah Omar government was too reluctant to agree to that. Since then, the West owns it.

You have bought the official explanation that we went there as a reaction to some terrorist act. 

I don't believe those in power act on those bases. Empires don't go around spreading civilization and being nice.    They conquer to expand their dominions and control resources. To profit, to loot.  They wouldn't  squander the resources of a country  in an 8-year war just to punish some group.

The West (specifically the US military) simply needs the oil from that region.

Oct 22, 2009 -- 6:48AM, Semachiah wrote:

Shalom (peace and completeness),

You guys need to start a new thread if you desire to argue about whether Afganistan attacked the US on 911 or if their agents were acting independently. This thread is supposed to be about the fact that Obama won a Nobel Prize which used to be an award of value and is now just a joke; just equivalent to a toy from within a box of Cracker Jacks!

So, please, one of you go start a new post using the last posting or one shortly before that and then come back here and post a link to it so that the conversation can go on from there and this one can get back on its laugh track.

yeah, I can agree to that, although I think an 8 year "war" in one country, complete with the current debate over whether to expand that "war" as opposed to end it, is germaine to a discussion about a "peace" prize.

Uh hmm, well, I agree that this has been off topic.

Yet.

Maybe I can ask one more question.

Rabello and ariel, is there any oil in Afghanistan? I didn't think so.

Actually, I think the possible legalisation of cannabis in the US might open up a good economic perspective for Afghan peasants... think globally, also in your domestic decisions. When solving one problem (cannabis illegality & the related court- & jailhouse occupation therapy), try to solve another one simultaneously (what shall Afghan peasants do when opium is deemd no good)...

In one word  NO!!!!

Oct 22, 2009 -- 7:02PM, Wyatt wrote:

In one word  NO!!!!

Ah! So, NO!!!! I see! Good you said that! What do you say NO!!!! to?

Oct 22, 2009 -- 7:11PM, catboxer wrote:

Char, the best place to grow weed is in California, where it's the number one cash crop.

Really?

Over here, the best cannabis they sell is hashish from Nepal, Kashmir or Afghanistan. Tender, dark stuff - not like the more light-brown, hard-to-knead Moroccan or Lebanese product.

Nor like the domestic, Dutch... (they tend to sell the grass / weed without the hash detour - which I don't like, too much herb in the smoke, and you can't use it for, e.g., making cookies).

I used to think it's the mountain climate that makes hashish good - like it does with tea and wine... but then, California does have mountains, he?

-

I love completely derailed topics