BF2S Forums Russia seeks U.S. help in fight against heroin epidemic

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

whatever you are doing - that is if you are doing anything at all - it doesn't work. whatever taliban were doing it did work. the rest, quite frankly, i do not give a shit about.

It's good to know that you're open-minded....

i'm as open-fucking-minded as it gets, dude. when i see some results i'll be the first to shout kudos to whoever manages to take care of that opium production.

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

"Colombia's problem"? /facepalm.

You recognize that the drug trade in Afghanistan is a problem, so logically, you should be able to see that it is a problem in Colombia as well.

what does the place where coca's grown have to do with anything? it's usa's problem with drugs that made them go all the way there to fix it, not colombia's. if it wasn't usa's own problem they wouldn't do shit just like they do not give a damn about afghani's opium production.

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

i'm as open-fucking-minded as it gets, dude. when i see some results i'll be the first to shout kudos to whoever manages to take care of that opium production.

And what exactly constitutes as results?  Cybargs already pointed out that the time the Taliban spent curbing opium trade was very brief.

well, we won't be able to tell if taliban could have curbled that opium trade any longer because in came you and they became unable to control it.

Turquoise wrote:

Since the Taliban currently is willing to aid in the opium trade, our willingness to fight them stifles it somewhat That may not be an end to all opium trade there, but it's certainly better for Russia than us just leaving the place.  Quite frankly, our continued presence in Afghanistan does more for you than it does for us, so I don't know why you're bitching.

"stifles somewhat"? i already asked this: how about russia covers the fucking plantations with napalm?
don't bother answering, that's a rethorical question. usa does their business in afghanistan, that business does not include dealing with opium production - that would even be detrimental to your efforts there. usa won't deal with this, admit it, and we'll have agreed here.

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

what does the place where coca's grown have to do with anything? it's usa's problem with drugs that made them go all the way there to fix it, not colombia's. if it wasn't usa's own problem they wouldn't do shit just like they do not give a damn about afghani's opium production.

Do you really think the U.S. is the only place that buys their product?  After you figure out the obvious answer to this question, you'll realize yet again that our intervention in Colombia actually helps more than just us.  Now, admittedly, it might help for America to legalize and regulate some drugs to decrease the market value of them.

stop playing jedi, turq, i know you are better that this. would usa interfere in columbia if drugs grown in there wasn't usa's problem? no? then your "we help others" argument just went out the window. no nation "helps other" in this world without getting something in return.

The US used Afghanistan to break Russia before, wouldn't be surprising if they did it again.

Shahter wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Well, Shahter, if I could have it my way, I'd pull our troops out of there along with the rest of the coalition forces...

really? you'd have them pull out and abandon your resource war in which afghanistan is a principal strategic location?

Well, when it comes to resources, Afghanistan doesn't offer much other than opium.  You can use that argument for Iraq, but not them.

As for strategic locations...  well, you could say Afghanistan is strategic for fighting the Taliban and for possibly invading Iran, but I think our public has grown tired of this war.  We're sick of fighting the Taliban, and we thankfully weren't dumb enough to invade Iran.

Shahter wrote:

who said russia would kill those fuckers? russia does not need that, man. the only thing russia needs done there is opium production slowed enough for heroin prices go up so that it becomes unavailable to most russians again.

Well, the brute force method is one of the only ways to stop the opium trade.  We aren't taking that route because of the backlash that would occur.  Instead, we're attempting to install a functional government to handle this, but unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be working.

Maybe a more successful approach would be to subsidize these farmers to grow something else.  I don't know if we'll take that approach or not, but I hope we eventually do.

Shahter wrote:

yeah, sure, there are those who benefit from usa's military adventures. but there are also those who die from heroin, while usa beats their chest calling themselves "world police" and "terror fighters".

Every country plays the patriotism game.  Russia is no exception.  As long as we both agree that no one is the white knight here, I think that's good enough.

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Well, Shahter, if I could have it my way, I'd pull our troops out of there along with the rest of the coalition forces...

really? you'd have them pull out and abandon your resource war in which afghanistan is a principal strategic location?

Well, when it comes to resources, Afghanistan doesn't offer much other than opium.  You can use that argument for Iraq, but not them.

As for strategic locations...  well, you could say Afghanistan is strategic for fighting the Taliban and for possibly invading Iran, but I think our public has grown tired of this war.  We're sick of fighting the Taliban, and we thankfully weren't dumb enough to invade Iran.

you are forgetting the bloody pipelines that are being planned.

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

who said russia would kill those fuckers? russia does not need that, man. the only thing russia needs done there is opium production slowed enough for heroin prices go up so that it becomes unavailable to most russians again.

Well, the brute force method is one of the only ways to stop the opium trade.  We aren't taking that route because of the backlash that would occur.  Instead, we're attempting to install a functional government to handle this, but unfortunately, that doesn't seem to be working.

Maybe a more successful approach would be to subsidize these farmers to grow something else.  I don't know if we'll take that approach or not, but I hope we eventually do.

all that is tilting at windmills. no sence to be nice to them, they won't appreciate it. no sence in building "civilization" and "democracy" for them - they cannot sustain them. beat the crap out of them untill they yeild and make sure they know what happens if they try something stupid again - that's the only way to handle this situation.

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

yeah, sure, there are those who benefit from usa's military adventures. but there are also those who die from heroin, while usa beats their chest calling themselves "world police" and "terror fighters".

Every country plays the patriotism game.  Russia is no exception.  As long as we both agree that no one is the white knight here, I think that's good enough.

never said otherwise.

M.O.A.B wrote:

Dilbert_X wrote:

The US used Afghanistan to break Russia before, wouldn't be surprising if they did it again.

Yeah they're totally trying to kill the Russian youth intentionally by allowing heroin into the CIS, yeah.

i don't think usa had been planning stuff like that - or counting on it for that matter - but i'm pretty sure they do not mind russians dying from heroin at all.

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

you are forgetting the bloody pipelines that are being planned.

I'm aware of the pipelines, but that's still a weak argument.

Shahter wrote:

all that is tilting at windmills. no sence to be nice to them, they won't appreciate it. no sence in building "civilization" and "democracy" for them - they cannot sustain them. beat the crap out of them untill they yeild and make sure they know what happens if they try something stupid again - that's the only way to handle this situation.

That didn't work when you guys ran the place.  Granted, part of the reason it failed is because of us.

No Empire has ever conquered Afghanistan with force... Shahter you just show sheer Russian ignorance when it comes to handling the Afghan's. Protecting and integrating with the population will win the war. Winning hearts and minds, maybe some lips.

Dilbert_X wrote:

Owning Afghanistan screws Iran and Russia.

too bad it's not doing so well for the Afghan's . . .

aw, my bad. i feel more informed now about sovereign rights, despite being American.

Shahter wrote:

why? tell me, what do you think usa are doing over there? don't tell me they are chasing that osama-dude, ok? - that's just ridiculous.

I knew a guy who was killed a year ago in Afghanistan during an operation to ensure the local populace would be able to vote in 2009's national elections.

How's that for doing something?

Turquoise wrote:

Shahter wrote:

all that is tilting at windmills. no sence to be nice to them, they won't appreciate it. no sence in building "civilization" and "democracy" for them - they cannot sustain them. beat the crap out of them untill they yeild and make sure they know what happens if they try something stupid again - that's the only way to handle this situation.

That didn't work when you guys ran the place.  Granted, part of the reason it failed is because of us.

basically, soviets made exactly the same mistake you are making now - they went in, installed a government they thought they'd be able to control, but failed to obliterate the opposition. but soviets had an excuse - they didn't have usa's economical might behind their military operations, and nukes where out of the question too, obviously. today usa can do just about anything they want in afghanistan, with only a bunch of loosers opposing them - that's the difference.

Fuck your ignorance is astounding.

We are going in circles here - I don't know why this thread is still open.

How widespread is opiate abuse in Afghanistan?

FEOS wrote:

Shahter wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

I'm aware of the pipelines, but that's still a weak argument.

why? tell me, what do you think usa are doing over there? don't tell me they are chasing that osama-dude, ok? - that's just ridiculous.

2,973 victims...died as a result of the attacks.

SOURCE

That's why we're there. Not fucking pipelines, you fucking Woody Harrelson acolyte.

yeah, yeah, heard that crap. now, why don't you go tend to your jedi business, we are trying to discuss stuff here.

FEOS wrote:

Shahter wrote:

FEOS wrote:

SOURCE

That's why we're there. Not fucking pipelines, you fucking Woody Harrelson acolyte.

yeah, yeah, heard that crap. now, why don't you go tend to your jedi business, we are trying to discuss stuff here.

Irony is ironic.

You say you're trying to discuss something serious and you bring up pipelines as the reason for the war. Conspiracy theory tinfoil hat fucking nonsense. Three thousand people die and you find internet trolling pipeline conspiracy bullshit more compelling.../facepalm.

thirty thousands russians die to heroin every year since you went in afghanistan "looking for justice". should russia nuke usa now or what?
really, move along. for a military dude your knowledge about war and its causes is completely absolutely ridiculous.

Shahter wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Shahter wrote:

yeah, yeah, heard that crap. now, why don't you go tend to your jedi business, we are trying to discuss stuff here.

Irony is ironic.

You say you're trying to discuss something serious and you bring up pipelines as the reason for the war. Conspiracy theory tinfoil hat fucking nonsense. Three thousand people die and you find internet trolling pipeline conspiracy bullshit more compelling.../facepalm.

thirty thousands russians die to heroin every year since you went in afghanistan "looking for justice". should russia nuke usa now or what?
really, move along. for a military dude your knowledge about war and its causes is completely absolutely ridiculous.

FSB needs to step it up.