Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With all the other news and domestic pressure of the current economic situation it seems almost everyday more sound bites either from the Secy of Defense or various generals come out announcing ever increasing levels of planned troop commitments into the fray of Afghanistan. Now that Bush will be gone in a month no doubt the debate over the entire Iraq misson will continue to be hashed out, but based on all accounts Obama is entering into a conflict which could dwarf Iraq. Of course nothing is official until Obama is actually in office and signs off on war plans, but it would be interesting to get some opinions and comments going on this. I actually have a personal vested interest in this issue since both myself and my son are slated for deployment later in '09. Neddless to say I have done extensive reading on the current and past operations in Afghanistan. What concerns me the most is the notion that many seem to have that this is the "right war" and that with troop levels numbering in the tens of thousands the Taliban can be defeated. Considering the total geo-political landscape of Afghanistan and the lack of absolute resolve and commitment of our NATO partners I would find it interesting to see what insights and comments this issue could generate.
I absolutely dread any further involvement in Afghanistan. The only way this could be construed, in my mind, as "the right war" is for the troops to go after Bin Laden as their sole purpose. But, as in Vietnam, the drug war has become even more of a quagmire, our involvement in cutting deals with warlords has become more bureaucratic parlay than definitive goals and good resource utilization, and the topography and in-country patriots will become our ultimate downfall. Killing our own soldiers so that independent contractors, profiteers, and their and our government can make millions while pretending to 'make the world safe for democracy' and feel self-righteous, is NOT what this country was founded on, does NOT promote liberty or free thought, and makes us exactly what our enemies say that we are - an empire thrusting itself into conflicts to profit on the backs of dead warriors on both sides.
Yes, yes, everyone points to the girls attending school in the protected zones of Baghdad, the fact that markets are open again, the fact that some areas are 'safe' from insurgents now - but we either will have to stay and treat them just as Great Britian did India (with much more militant resistance, there are no Gandhis THERE) - or ultimately leave, as we did in Vietnam, and let the insurgents take back whatever they want. The fact is that - again, just as in Vietnam - Americans have absolutely no conception of the locals' beliefs, attitudes, and core perceptions and inclinations.
To me, the only way to stop the terrorists is not to 'feed' them - to pull out and to refuse to deal with them or anyone in their coutries fiscally until they get their countries onto a level where they can participate in real 'free trade' without our aid at all. Unfortunately this will never happen; we ourselves have gone too far down the path of socialization to demand that others become more republic. We wrap ourselves in our oil dependence as an excuse to overtake and intimidate, threaten, cut deals, and cajole... and ultimately, to try to overpower.
God help you and your son - and all of our sons and daughters. Instead of being a swift and terrible force to be reckoned with, our troops are used as pawns in a huge economic chess game - and our bureaucrats are not the ones inventing the rules.
Did no one pay attention to the fact that the Russian Army spent 10 years in Afghanistan, got their butts kicked, and left defeated.
Initially Bush & Co. treated Afghanistan as if it were a cake walk at the county fair, and now we are building on the failures of incompetent leadership with the lives of American ground forces.
What concerns me the most is the notion that many seem to have that this is the "right war" and that with troop levels numbering in the tens of thousands the Taliban can be defeated. Considering the total geo-political landscape of Afghanistan and the lack of absolute resolve and commitment of our NATO partners I would find it interesting to see what insights and comments this issue could generate.
i also worry that this is being called "the right war". there is no doubt in my mind that we have the best trained,equipped, and motivated soldiers in the world...but i do have doubts about the missions they have been asked to undertake....it seems we are always fighting with 1 hand behind our back and an "eager" media that is always looking for an incident to blow out of proportion...sometimes i wonder if WWII could have been won under the same conditions as we see now.
you have listed all of my "concerns"; geo-political--basically a tribal land with no solid history of a central government...not to even mention any democratic flavor; nato resolve/commitment-- still not impressed with the response of nato up to this point and why would we be expecting a major change???Obama???don't hold your breath; and i would add i have no confidence in "allying" with any of these "war lords" they all have their own agendas and the "idea of democracy" is not in the top 10.
you have my thoughts and prayers with you and your son and i hope for a quick,decisive battle plan that spares casualities to our "boots on the grounds"
Afgansiatan is much more like vietnam than Iraq, It has never been under any centralised rule that included the british empire or the soviet union. Looking at the terrain we might as well be in a jungle war.
Afgansiatan is much more like vietnam than Iraq, It has never been under any centralised rule that included the british empire or the soviet union. Looking at the terrain we might as well be in a jungle war.
Both Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom were mere skirmishes. And of course the later followed the former and the son followed in his fathers footsteps. However Afghanistan and it's conflicts including funding the Taliban back in '79 to fight the Soviets tells an more interesting tale of power and struggle. Our troops are already in Afghanistan and while troops are withdrawn gradually from Iraq, they are being shifted into Afghanistan. This phase will be done come 12/31/2011. I think that spells something is "under construction" in Afghanistan. Most of the conflict there is on the border of Afghan/Pakistan. Obama once said that our leaders travel to other countries as guests of the affluent, yet he was been to places like Pakistan as a college boy and knows what it's really like as a commoner, yet he does not detail in his view what it's really like. I guess we'll just have to wait and see what the buildup is for and what the president elect decides to do come his second term.
I prefer "The Art of War". Fortunately, unlike our current Commander in Chief, I have read it cover to cover and understand what all of the implications and ultimate results are, and do not merely pull out a phrase or two to interpret solely to justify my machinations.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
