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.
I read lots of history, and it allows me to better frame the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.
Just once I would like an answer to those who say "We need to let our Generals fight this war they want to" and we have done this. You need more troops, more funding, and more rockets and missiles, you get 'em.
But none of those things win wars. That is the history I've learned.
Many of those people in important positions who help shape foreign policy are ignorant of history, or ignore its lessons.
you know what wins wars? A US Army General ( I forget who it was) said recently that you do not win wars the way we are fighting them. He says that the way to win wars is called the "Dresden Effect" where they bomb entire cities and knock down and burn them block by block by carpet bombing them with B-52's. That's how you WIN a war. You shake the enemies very foundation and you yank their will to fight right out of them. Will alot of innocents get killed? Yep you bet, but you have to remember that this enemy we are fighting will gladly kill as many civilians and innocents as they can, and be greatful that they did. We can't win the way we are fighting in Afg. Especially with a timeline announced.
You can thank Bush and his cronies for this blunder. Starting a war and then forgetting about it for 7 years. Good job there Bush.
Quote:
Originally Posted by odanny
Every single one of these deaths was preventable. Not a single soldier should be in Afghanistan without a clear understanding of the mission there. We don't know what the mission is, only that after 9 years marking the longest war in U.S. history we are no closer to a favorable outcome than we were 9 years ago.
We need an exit strategy defined for the American people. This war is a failure on every level.
17 soldiers:
SPC Joseph Johnson, 24, of Flint, Mich.
PFC Gunnar Hotchkin, 31, of Naperville, Ill.
PFC Nathan W. Cox, 27, Fremont, Calif.
PFC Benjamin Park, 25, Fairfax Station, VA
SSG James G. Hunter, 25, South Amherst, Ohio
SPC Scott A. Andrews, 21, of Fall River, Mass.
LCpl Timothy G. Serwiniowski, 21, North Tonawanda, N.Y.
SPC Joseph P. Dohrenwend, 20, Milford, Ohio
1SG Eddie Turner, 41, Fort Belvoir, Va.
PFC David P. Miller, 19, Wilton, N,Y.
SPC Andrew R. Looney, 22 Owasso, OK
Cpl Claudio Patino IV, 22, Yorba Linda, Calif.
Cpl. Kevin A. Cueto, 23, San Jose, Calif.
Cpl. Joshua R. Dumaw, 23, Spokane Valley, Wash.
PFC Anthony T. Justesen, 22, Wilsonville, Ore.
PFC Russell E. Madden, 29, Dayton, Ky.
1SG Robert N. Barton, 35, Roxie, Miss.
you know what wins wars? A US Army General ( I forget who it was) said recently that you do not win wars the way we are fighting them. He says that the way to win wars is called the "Dresden Effect" where they bomb entire cities and knock down and burn them block by block by carpet bombing them with B-52's. That's how you WIN a war. You shake the enemies very foundation and you yank their will to fight right out of them. Will alot of innocents get killed? Yep you bet, but you have to remember that this enemy we are fighting will gladly kill as many civilians and innocents as they can, and be greatful that they did. We can't win the way we are fighting in Afg. Especially with a timeline announced.
Nor can we win anything thru genocide.
Maybe it makes one think what kind of wars are just?
Now thats a question that makes the knees shake on every conservative, justifying wars of aggression.
It's a shame our media is so compromised that these questions never reach the national dialogue.
At some point in the future, people will finally learn from history lessons.
One of them being that you don't invade Afghanistan.
What a waste of lives and ressources this war has been.
Unless NATO doubles its numbers and China and Russia would join in to help, this war won't end anytime soon.
Wasn't Obama supposed to be the great uniter of nations and gain the support of other countries to help us win this war? What happened? I'm not asking to be a smartass, I really don't know... did he get any commitments from NATO countries to increase their troop levels or other assistance?
Seems to me like nothing much has changed with regard to international commitment levels since Obama took office.
Oh my you need to read more history.
LBJ: " We don't bomb an outhouse lesson I say so"
He had generals draw up a list of targets. LBJ started with the leats important and worked his way up. We lost the initative and allowed the North to build up huge inventories of weapons as a result.
Well, now that McCrystal and his 'hold your fire' policy is out the door, maybe we have a change to win.
Wasn't Obama supposed to be the great uniter of nations and gain the support of other countries to help us win this war? What happened? I'm not asking to be a smartass, I really don't know... did he get any commitments from NATO countries to increase their troop levels or other assistance?
Yes, others have committed more, but US still had 65% of the total.
The grand total has gone from 51K troops to 343K troops. That includes the locals, but practically every ally has increased their troops levels there.
Last edited by Finn_Jarber; 06-28-2010 at 06:30 PM..
I read lots of history, and it allows me to better frame the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan.
Just once I would like an answer to those who say "We need to let our Generals fight this war they want to" and we have done this. You need more troops, more funding, and more rockets and missiles, you get 'em.
But none of those things win wars. That is the history I've learned.
Many of those people in important positions who help shape foreign policy are ignorant of history, or ignore its lessons.
Do you really beleieve you understand more of the conseqauence than so many experts or know hsitroy of war better. I would never claim that myself.Mnay of these are waht you read and history doe not always reperat itself.Kind of reminds me of when we were goig to invade Iraq and so mnay said we would suffer thousands in gas attecks. Tyhen the same peopel said ;see I knew he did have them and started poitnig fingers.
The first question you need to ask is "What constitutes winning?" Then figure out how to accomplish it.
There is only one solution to the Afghanistan fiasco: Bring our military home. There is no "winning" since we have nothing to gain by being there. If your goal was bombing the place back into the Stone Age, then the US military would have a reason to be there. Otherwise, it does much more harm than good.
Maybe it's about time we noticed that we're $13 trillion in debt and need to focus what resources we have on our own Country.
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.
