Massacre in Kandahar

Originally posted by FMF
Are you sure about that? I thought the U.K. spent about $1.5 billion , the U.S. less than $1 billion and France about $0.5 billion (although they alone flew a third of the airstrikes).

edit: One of the sources Wiki cites suggests that the U.K. spent £1.25 billion which would be how much in US$?

more: There seems to be a dud table on one of the wiki pages w at.

more: It would appear that France, Norway and Denmark flew about 60% of the airstrikes.

Nickle and dime aside, the US has the bulk of the military might in the world so without their support nothing flies. If you ask me, UN intervention is a cabal of elite countries with the political and military might to do as they wish with the justification of "saving" the world.

Originally posted by FMF
Are you suggesting NATO gave President Obama the Nobel Peace Prize? Surely it was the Norwegian Nobel Committee?

Did I say NATO? No, I said Europe. Everyone knows there was no real justification for the award being given to him, or do you think otherwise?

If there was no justification for giving the award, then I would presume alterior motives.

Originally posted by whodey
Did I say NATO? No, I said Europe.

NATO and the Norwegian Nobel Committee are one in the same in your mind?

Originally posted by FMF
NATO and the Norwegian Nobel Committee are one in the same in your mind?

The award, as with most awards, is pure politics that goes far beyond the little country of Norway.

I still await your answer, does Barak Obama deserve the award?

I only wish I could win the award. I would pull a Mohammad Ali and throw the thing in the river for all to see.

Originally posted by whodey
Nickle and dime aside, the US has the bulk of the military might in the world so without their support nothing flies.

But your claim on the previous page about "the bulk of the military might" was about the intervention in the Libyan Civil War specifically. Not about the size of the U.S. military "in the world". You're now saying the U.S contribution to the Libyan operation was "nickle and dime"?

Originally posted by whodey
The award, as with most awards, is pure politics that goes far beyond the little country of Norway.

Your idea that "Europe" is one big monolithic thing is one of your cartoons that make you sound like a country bumpkin.

The fact that award has a political flavour and almost always does, does not make NATO and the Norwegian Nobel Committee one in the same.

Originally posted by FMF
But your claim on the previous page about "the bulk of the military might" was about the intervention in the Libyan Civil War specifically. Not about the size of the U.S. military "in the world". You're now saying the U.S contribution to the Libyan operation was "nickle and dime"?

The source I saw on Wiki was misleading if my numbers were indeed wrong. So even if you are correct, the US spent close to what countries like the UK spent. This does not change the fact that without the US none of this would have occured. If the US is not on board then nothing happens. In fact, the US at times does its own thing independent of the UN, like what we saw in Iraq.

Originally posted by FMF
Your idea that "Europe" is one big monolithic thing is one of your cartoons that make you sound like a country bumpkin.

The fact that award has a political flavour and almost always does, does not make NATO and the Norwegian Nobel Committee one in the same.

Elitists make the world go round FMF. It's a global phenomenon.

Originally posted by whodey
If the US is not on board then nothing happens. In fact, the US at times does its own thing independent of the UN, like what we saw in Iraq.

At times?

Originally posted by whodey
Elitists make the world go round FMF. It's a global phenomenon.

This is just a silly cardboard cut out world view. Europe is "Elitists" now? Do you also think North America is a single entity with no separate entities or institutions or sovereign states. Do you see Asia in the same way?

Originally posted by FMF
At times?

I still await your answer. Did Obama deserve the award?

Originally posted by whodey
I still await your answer. Did Obama deserve the award?

As I said several times back when it was awarded, as you well know, I thought it was bordering on laughable, embarrassing even - and this sort of thing has been the case all too often stretching way back in the history of the Nobel Peace Prize - plenty of clangers and cringeworthy moments. What does it have to do Libya's dictator massacring his own people? What does it have to do with NATO? How does it make NATO and the Nobel Peace Prize one in the same thing in your mind? What does it have to do with the massacre in Kandahar?

Originally posted by sh76
Oh, well Waheed Tanha says it.

Must be true.

And it doesn't appear from the last words of the quote itself that Waheed Tanha has any agenda that s/he is supporting.

That there have been numerous massacres and (as it turned out, unjustified) mass killings involving airstrikes, drones, village meetings or weddings being strafed or bombed, or innocents killed in other circumstances, or bystanders wiped out, rogue units murdering civilians (for which some have been prosecuted), in Afghanistan in the south, up by the border with Pakistan, in Pakistan itself, it's been in the news over and over again for years, incidents that the U.S. has had to apologize for, others they've had to spin - 'errors of intelligence' and 'it was the fog of war', and the likelihood that there were others that we maybe don't yet know so much about, is hardly in dispute. You seem to be a bit dismissive of Waheed Tanha when what he is saying seems not to be particularly at variance with the reality, and even if you are apparently scornful of his desire to see the U.S. withdraw from his country.