Proof the Taliban are cowards and they covet the USA

[Haris]

I believe so. A lot of people say "dude...it's a job man."

When given the "authority" to shoot on a target, hell yea you are going to shoot. However, that's the same to be said of drone attacks. Once given the "authority" to attack, you do it, just with a computer instead of a gun.

A

I do not believe so because you are fighting on behalf of your government and your leader who are the elected representatives of your country.

You follow their orders and you fight on their behalf. So what distinction should be made between you and your government and your country?

[MDresden]

I mean it's become like a "rinse and repeat" factor for most people. Year on, year off. Year on of killing anything that moves that's labeled taliban, year off of doing household chores. haha.

[Haris]

You speak in riddles MDresden.

That is irrelevant and does not answer my point.

[MDresden]

I'm referencing the fighting spirit behind both parties.

The taliban are small groups of militants fighting back what they call an agressor...so they have a sort of value set.

The americans are here fulfilling their contract/job. They're here to do a job and the job is to rebuild Afghanistan and kill everyone labeled Taliban/Haqqani/Group/etc. (namely, terrorist.)

Yes, for the overall goal, the americans should try to minimize collateral damage since those are the people we are protecting while we build up security forces and ensure security forces are in Kabul's federal budget.

For the overall goal of the taliban is only to remove the "aggressors." The collateral damage is their own people, but they view that as worth because they are disabling a vehicle (which gets repaired in 2 weeks or less, fully functional, new-like. Heck, if a vehicle has a damaged bumper prior and gets hit by an explosion, it gets repaired to better then working condition...haha.)

That's the beauty of fighting the Taliban.

"Beauty" being multi-faceted good things.

[Haris]

I'm referencing the fighting spirit behind both parties.

The taliban are small groups of militants fighting back what they call an agressor...so they have a sort of value set.

The americans are here fulfilling their contract/job. They're here to do a job and the job is to rebuild Afghanistan and kill everyone labeled Taliban/Haqqani/Group/etc. (namely, terrorist.)

Yes, for the overall goal, the americans should try to minimize collateral damage since those are the people we are protecting while we build up security forces and ensure security forces are in Kabul's federal budget.

For the overall goal of the taliban is only to remove the "aggressors." The collateral damage is their own people, but they view that as worth because they are disabling a vehicle (which gets repaired in 2 weeks or less, fully functional, new-like. Heck, if a vehicle has a damaged bumper prior and gets hit by an explosion, it gets repaired to better then working condition...haha.)

That's the beauty of fighting the Taliban.

"Beauty" being multi-faceted good things.

Ok. I understand that.


But that does not answer why the "soldiers = leaders = government" belief is innacurate.

[MDresden]

The "equal" part is where the confusion is...nothing more. We're not equal. That's our command structure...and without a command structure there would be anarchy...unless all people lived the same boring lives with everyone having the same food, level of trade, etc.

[Haris]

The "equal" part is where the confusion is...nothing more. We're not equal. That's our command structure...and without a command structure there would be anarchy...unless all people lived the same boring lives with everyone having the same food, level of trade, etc.

But surely you act on behalf of the government and leader?
You follow their orders in order to achieve the same thing.

Therefore is it not understandable that you would be classed as equal to them in terms of your goals in Afghanistan? If that is the case then wouldn't "soldiers = leaders = government" be valid?

[ScimitarXEdge]

but they weren't targeting the civilians they were obviously targeting the convoy


but regardless we know the Taliban are cowards, but so are the Americans ..a coward calling others coward ...

[MDresden]

Cowards? Not at all. We are couped up on bases, waiting on the word. Not exactly coward.

[MDresden]

But surely you act on behalf of the government and leader?
You follow their orders in order to achieve the same thing.

Therefore is it not understandable that you would be classed as equal to them in terms of your goals in Afghanistan? If that is the case then wouldn't "soldiers = leaders = government"be valid?

You are blurring the lines between orders and intentions.Yes, of course we want the order executed finely and perfect. The intention behind the order is lost on the order as the order is being executed. There's no need for the one to be intertwined with the other.
To "debate" on such an intermingled thing for your own interests is futile.

[Haris]

You are blurring the lines between orders and intentions.Yes, of course we want the order executed finely and perfect. The intention behind the order is lost on the order as the order is being executed. There's no need for the one to be intertwined with the other.
To "debate" on such an intermingled thing for your own interests is futile.

There is no distinction between you and your masters. You might disagree with certain aspects of their grand plan but your intentions ultimately are aligned with theirs (i.e. to serve your country's interests as ruthlessly and as efficiently as is possible).

[MDresden]

No, personal intentions are personal. Anything you write here may be on "the right track" but a personal intention is personal.Keep trying to blur that line.

[Haris]

Your personal intention is to serve your country as best as you can, is it not?
Is that not the intention of your government and your leader?
Hence no distinction.

You might disagree with them on smaller aspects but overall, you are one and the same.

[MDresden]

Again, you blur the intentions. We were talking about the intentions of the government on a mission and you delve into our personal intentions.

[Haris]

You mentioned personal intentions.

I was referring to your shared intentions regarding the whole Afghan campaign and what you want to achieve there.

I already acknowledged that you might differ with your government regarding a specfic mission but that does not matter when your overall intention is the same as the government's. Otherwise you would not have signed up to be a soldier.