why hasnt the taliban poisoned the heroin?

Look what the thread is implying: Groups using drug money to fund their activities.
It might be true that certain groups are using weaponry given to them over 15 years ago...but it is more likely they have bought newer weapons using various revenue streams.
Lets not forget, certain groups are being funded by international terrorist organisations.
One headed by a multi-millionaire with international connections.
So it is feasible that they might not be using the kinds of weapons they currently use, but it is more likely they would be anyway.

See above.

I'm not wishing to suggest it does make it better.
I'm simply saying you missed out important facts about these groups, and decided to focus on somewhat irrelevant information, simply to make other points i.e Americas chickens have come home to roost.

 

I could swear my posts weren't aimed only at america...

I know for a fact I didn't say they were using the same weapons they were given 15 years ago...

That multi-millionaire you mention... how did he become a multi-millionaire?

Those international terrorist organizations... what are they fighting against?

You say I missed important facts... and focused on certain points...

I say I ignored non-important facts and focused on the heart of the issues...

Do you think these people were sitting at home one day and said "Hey, I know, I'll join a terrorist organization and cause chaos"?

The middle eastern region of the world has been used as a punching bag by every world power for the past thousand or so years... While the major powers of the world were building up their power base by raping and pillaging these places, destroying literally thousands of years of continuous civilization in the process leaving nothing but rubble and death behind, until the last 50 100 years or so when they started leaving weapons behind as well.

The terrorists that are so easily blamed for everything that goes wrong these days, are simply people who have had their homes and families destroyed, not once, but over and over again.

Now they have taken the training (not just in fighting but also in organization and logistics) and equipment that was brought to them and turned it against the very people who have caused this chaos in the first place... and for this... for defending their homes and families, they are called criminals and terrorists and likened unto street thugs who are only interested in;

yeah... I missed something alright...

 

Fair enough.

Fair enough.

His family.
His own business activities.

Anybody that disagrees with them or is seen as complicit with those that disagree with them.
Their ideological enemies, basically.

How is the fact that certain individuals may have been part of a vast swathe of people that could have been funded by those they might be fighting relevant now?
We really have no idea if any of the people you mentioned were part of the groups funded by certain governments.
If they were it is ironic at best...nothing more.
It doesn't mean certain governments supported the current activities being carried out.
It doesn't mean those that were funded were forced to support and comply with the orders of certain governments.
It is inevitable both sides were getting something out of it.

No.
It's perfectly possible certain groups took advantage of one side to disrupt and remove elements they were ideologically apposed to in the first place.
The enemy of my enemy is my friend.
It isn't the most noble of situations either way you look at it.
It's just not quite as simple as you were implying.

and?

"...are simply"? That isn't quite true.
Lets remember that those same governments are working WITH the Afghan people and political classes...and are on joint missions to rid the land of common enemies.

Now you are saying they are using weapons brought in over 15 years ago.

It's far too simplistic to say that the same people that were once with us are now against us.
To say it is as simple as you suggest is missing important points out.
One being that they are killing the Afghan people as well as those there trying to help.
Your basically saying one side is right and one side is wrong.
Life isn't as simple as that.
That's all I'm trying to say.

 

No... actually what i said was very clearly not that...

Also, where did I imply that this was only from more then 15 years ago? The equipment has been being shipped over there from the superpowers for decades and it is STILL going on.

Where did I say that? Where did I say it was either for or against YOU (whichever side you think you may be on)

Show me where I said any side was right or wrong...

What I said, was that they are people who are fighting to defend their homes and family, regardless of whether what they are doing is right or wrong according to you or me.

How would you react if some group of people had been coming through your town for the last 1000 years, killing and destroying and then leaving and returning as they wished with no regard to you or your families health and safety? Would you stand back and say..."oh that's alright, you are the good guys, or they are the bad guys"... or would you say... "ENOUGH ALREADY FUCK OFF AND STOP THIS SHIT OR I WILL DO MY BEST TO STOP YOU"

 

I guess you meant everything but weaponry.

It was probably more me than you.
Thanks for picking me up on that point.

Which ones?

The terrorists that are so easily blamed for everything that goes wrong these days, are simply people who have had their homes and families destroyed, not once, but over and over again.

You didn't mention outside groups moving into Afghanistan.
It seemed like you were just saying it was just the poor old locals.
I do notice you are broading your opinion out a little now.
It might have helped to do that from the beginning.

I didn't say ME personally.
You didn't mention the fact that it isn't just local people.
You didn't mention the fact that Afghanis are killing Afghanis because Nato etc are helping Afghanis and some Afghanis don't like that fact.
It did feel like you were pitting only one side against another side.
It didn't feel like you were implicitly making the issue complex and multi-faceted.

You definitely painted a picture where one side is raping and pillaging etc (none indigenous people).
You've definitely not articulated the wrongs of the indigenous people...and they are just defending their homes and families etc.

It's not a stretch to assume you were painting one side as the bad guys and one side as the good guys.

I'd probably work out who best serves to help me personally...and has my interests above their own.
Many times illiterate people are being told inaccurate information and focusing their anger at the wrong people.
I'd hope I could decide who was doing the best for me personally...
..and not attach previous disputes with the here and now.
I know it would be difficult to do so.
I have the luxury of information from both perspectives.

 

Your assumptions of what I said, are not the same as what I actually said.
You are the one who put time frames onto the issue of equipment, not me.
You are the one who keep trying to frame this as being good vs evil, right vs wrong.
You are the one who in one post said I was making this issue too simple and then in the next post said I was complicating it.
You are the one who said that the locals defending their homes did nothing wrong, not me.

And most importantly, you are the one who sees things from BOTH perspectives...

To be 100% clear, so that even you can not misconstrue what I am saying on this matter... there are more then two sides to these issues... there are many many more sides to them....

but hey, you see both sides... obviously you are right and I am wrong...

 

I'm not purposely misreading you.
I've pointed out where I got certain impressions...
If others reading your posts don't see it the same way, that's upto them.

I know.
I said:
It was probably more me than you.
Thanks for picking me up on that point.

You are not helping not to, imho.

Where did I say that?

I didn't
I said:
You've definitely not articulated the wrongs of the indigenous people.

I know.

I'd say you were more wrong than right.
It's upto you to decide if I am or not.