General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Nobody is going to change their mind about Snowden. [View all]RC
(25,592 posts)Our government uses the difference between the two systems as a weapon.
We invaded their (Afghanistan) country. They were/are civilians, fighting invaders (US) in their country. What is so hard to get here? We invaded them!
If we were not in their country, they could do us no harm. Besides, what did they have to do with our reason for we being in their country in the first place? Nothing, absolutely nothing.
bin Laden was a Saudi Arabian, not an Iraqi, nor an Afghanistan. Was he military? Not hardly. Why didn't we lay waste to Saudi Arabia, instead of invading the paper tiger, Iraq and after that, a country so stone aged they barely had a government? And then, once we had bin Laden trapped in Tora Bora, we let him escape! Our military on the scene, were told to stand down. They watched the helicopters come in, pick up bin Laden and his lieutenants and and fly back out, unimpeded. If we had caught him, we would have lost our excuse for war there. Couldn't be having any of that, now could we?
Picture this: This country, The U.S., gets invaded. You, as a civilian fight back, defending your country against this foreign invader. You get captured and transported to their country. Should you be tried in their military courts, because they said you broke their laws? You wore no uniform. All you did was try to defend your own neighborhood from this outsider. So now you are an enemy combatant, for daring to fight an invader that was killing your follow country men?
Or do you think we should just let them come in and take over?
To truly understand a situation, you must see and understand it from the other perspective. You don't have to agree, just understand where they are coming from.