Do you think the U.S. is safer now that Osama bin Ladin is dead? ( Archived) (39)

The Americans are not the only ones out there.

In a few years everyone hopefully will have withdrawn .Will it make any difference,no. The Taliban will still be there,so basically it's a no win situation.

As I said before I wish they'd leave them all to get on with it. Probably turn into another "Killing Fields."

One of many by the looks of things.

Think you might have missed a few hot spots but I like your sentiment Ali.

Whoever is in charge has got his job cut out sorting this mess out.

hi chris.....trouble is....when other nation,s try to help.....there is a bigger outcry.......in tho,s reigons........a no win situation.....jmo.

Nice illusion!

Agreed Darren .

Given Bin Laadin's past history to apear after roumers of his ill health , and his need to embarrass the West, Where the hell is he ? I would think if he still exsists he would stop at nothing to get the word out . I haven't heard anything from him since his elimination . You have a lot of nerve saying Americans are too damned gullible .

Plenty more puppets who are brainwashed into their way of thinking. Terrorism will always be around, and nothing can stop it.

It just a different cause, that's all.

So if there is murder of thousands that is better than hearing 19 people were murdered, seems like a bad plan just to cut and run.

Stop helping the UN, nations that have been invaded and request help from the US and world and, stop defending themselves from entities from countries like Afghanistan in which they stayed well clear.

I see your non point - clear as mud.

In this movie SIMONE, Al Pacino Pulled it off nicely, Bush and Obama couldn't.

Yeah right. The holes in USA pockets are getting bigger and bigger. So it needs to "HELP" and "Liberate" more. And Imperials think they are still behind the curtain unseen. Whereas a mere glimpse of history reveals all facts of the ill-will of nations using Afghans over the centuries.

The fact is that Afghanistan was the playground for the "Great Game" between the British and Russian Empires.

"Afghanistan became a buffer state in the "Great Game" between the British and Russian empires. Following the third Anglo-Afghan war and the signing of the Treaty of Rawalpindi in 1919, the nation regained control over its foreign policy from the British.


The British Empire fought 3 wars with Afghanistan

For the British in India, Afghanistan was long seen as a potential source of threat. Not only were the Afghans themselves a threat, but for a long time the British worried about Russian intentions in the region, concerned that a possible invasion of India could be launched by Tsarist forces through Afghanistan. This period became known as the Great Game. In an effort to negate this threat, the British made numerous attempts at imposing their will upon Kabul, and over the course of the 19th Century fought two costly wars: the First Anglo-Afghan War (1838–1842) and the Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878–1880). The Third Anglo-Afghan War (also referred to as the Third Afghan War) began on 6 May 1919 and ended with an armistice on 8 August 1919.


Finally, when the British Empire had no choice but to "leave" the region, the Russians invaded Afghanistan. That brought America to fight the "COLD WAR" in the region. They never left the poor people of Afghanistan alone. Still Afghan's are suffering. Only Afghans have paid the price with the spilling of innocent blood of thier loved ones over the centuries, just because the Powerful nations had vested interests.

The new gimmick is the so called "war on terror" which actually is being fought in the same context the British were fighting, trying to grab Afghan terriroty. Just that now CHINA and parts of middle-east have also been dragged into it. Perhaps the British couldn't imagine, then, that China will be a great power one day.

I agree with some comments here that Afghanistan should be "REALLY" left alone. The Powers should choose thier own home as the playground for "GREAT GAMES" and "COLD WARS"

Those who would like to comment, may please first read some history and know what GREAT GAME, ANGLO AFGHAN WARS, TREATY OF RAWALPINDI are to get a clear picture and perspective.

That's all too pathetic and deplorable, I'm afraid.

Oh, thought we were talking about the USA. Sorry.

Now, back to what I was saying;



Stop helping the UN, nations that have been invaded and request help from the US and world and, stop defending themselves from entities from countries like Afghanistan in which they stayed well clear.

I see your non point - clear as mud.

And you think I am educating you? Impossible. You must be joking right?

My post above is for readers to gain a perspective to the current violence that has a "history". Everything has a history that is hard to bomb, nuke, shoot or "Liberate" .

Then why the hell did you quote a USA statement as to why they were there with something from when they were not? Seems rather silly and, I would appreciate you not quoting my posts to make a po0int that is totally unrelated in the future thanks.

Now have a nice day and good night.

Exactly! The new caption to the centuries old power tussle, from 1838. Read my informative post26 again, that explains historic references of the same region, Afganistan. These references are undisputed.

I see the "whole" picture more clearly given the historic perspective that you so conveniently seem motivated to ignore.