Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 08-31-2011, 02:37 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,488,450 times
Reputation: 1775

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
Our goal there, boxcar, is to get the Afghan forces to a level of proficiency to where they can defend themselves and keep Taliban elements from retaking the country when we leave.
But that is not realistic, nor was it originally why we went in.

They had to give up UBL or we would attack. They refused, we attacked. Then we drove out the Taliban. Now we are trying to make it sustainable, etc.

A bridge too far. We got who we came for, we never signed up to make sure they would become a flourishing liberal democracy. We will never have more influence than Pakistan there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-31-2011, 02:39 PM
 
45,347 posts, read 26,923,599 times
Reputation: 23731
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTOlover View Post
what are you talking about Libya is a diffrent war than afghanistan you see enforcing a no fly zone but not having ground troops means we need to use air strikes and the rebels in Libya are doing fighting on the ground..
Ohhhhhh - OK - it's different now.



Air strikes are air strikes - what's the difference to the people on the ground?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 02:42 PM
 
12,997 posts, read 13,603,476 times
Reputation: 11187
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
But that is not realistic, nor was it originally why we went in.

They had to give up UBL or we would attack. They refused, we attacked. Then we drove out the Taliban. Now we are trying to make it sustainable, etc.

A bridge too far. We got who we came for, we never signed up to make sure they would become a flourishing liberal democracy. We will never have more influence than Pakistan there.
Boxcar, believe me, I understand your greivances. Afghanistan is just so muddled. You're right. The war should have been limited in scope and focused on killing Osama and disbanding Al Qaeda. However, if you recall, months into it, the Bushies decided to "liberate" the Afghans and create a liberal democracy -- a loony, wingbat moonbeam idea that no serious person who understood Afghanistan and the situation there ever thought was possible.

I think we're off that now. Now, we're just trying to get it to be "Aghani ok" -- meaning give the Afghans a fighting chance against lettting the Taliban overtake their country.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 02:46 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,488,450 times
Reputation: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by WestCobb View Post
Boxcar, believe me, I understand your greivances. Afghanistan is just so muddled. You're right. The war should have been limited in scope and focused on killing Osama and disbanding Al Qaeda. However, if you recall, months into it, the Bushies decided to "liberate" the Afghans and create a liberal democracy -- a loony, wingbat moonbeam idea that no serious person who understood Afghanistan and the situation there ever thought was possible.

I think we're off that now. Now, we're just trying to get it to be "Aghani ok" -- meaning give the Afghans a fighting chance against lettting the Taliban overtake their country.

The great irony? We are spending so much treasure and lives to keep the radical islamist from taking over Afghanistan, while we are practically encouraging them to take over the rest of the middle east.

If we don't mind radical islamist running Libya, Egypt, Tunisia, etc., then why are we putting up such a fight in Afghanistan?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 02:49 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,188,856 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by MTAtech View Post
If you care about facts, you might appreciate that Obama has actually stepped up fighting in Afghanistan. That's why there are more casualties.

If you remember 2001, the U.S. invaded Afghanistan because they harbored al Qaeda, who attacked us. Bush quickly shifted resources from Afghanistan to fight the unneeded Iraq War. Obama put the emphasis, rightly, back to Afghanistan. There were more drone attacks in Obama's first year against al Qaeda than in all of Bush's term.

No serious person can conclude that Obama doesn't care about Afghanistan.
He better care about Afghanistan since he proclaimed it his war during the days after the election. There aren't that many more troops there than before he did his little "Surge" but so many of them are getting killed. My former foster daughter, a MSG in the National Guard, recently returned from a year in Afghanistan and she said it is some of the silly rules that have been established under Obama as to warfare that are causing the most trouble, but then what does she know?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Vancouver, B.C., Canada
11,155 posts, read 29,213,176 times
Reputation: 5479
the soviet Union is us now we are making the sam mistakes they made..

Soviet Afghanistan war "Extreme ways" - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 02:55 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,488,450 times
Reputation: 1775
Ya know how Ronnie Reagan supposedly got in a spending war with the Russians on a military buildup, and the Russians couldn't compete so they went broke?

A Russian at RT said we are doing the same thing again... this time to ourselves. We are doing to ourselves what we did to the Russians, building a military so big we can't possible afford it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 03:01 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,188,856 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
But that is not realistic, nor was it originally why we went in.

They had to give up UBL or we would attack. They refused, we attacked. Then we drove out the Taliban. Now we are trying to make it sustainable, etc.

A bridge too far. We got who we came for, we never signed up to make sure they would become a flourishing liberal democracy. We will never have more influence than Pakistan there.
But, it seems to me, that our President wants to create one of those Muslim controlled democracies with something other than Afghans in charge. Does that sound like I am talking about Muslims? Well, yes dammit that is what I am talking about. National building.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 03:04 PM
 
Location: OKC
5,421 posts, read 6,488,450 times
Reputation: 1775
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy View Post
But, it seems to me, that our President wants to create one of those Muslim controlled democracies with something other than Afghans in charge. Does that sound like I am talking about Muslims? Well, yes dammit that is what I am talking about. National building.

I don't know why were are losing lives keeping the radicals out of Afghanistan when at the same time we are encouraging them to take control of Egypt, Syria, Libya, and other nations in that region.

If it's not important to keep the radicals out of those countries, why do we care if they run Afghanistan?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-31-2011, 03:16 PM
 
Location: Southcentral Kansas
44,882 posts, read 33,188,856 times
Reputation: 4269
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxcar Overkill View Post
I don't know why were are losing lives keeping the radicals out of Afghanistan when at the same time we are encouraging them to take control of Egypt, Syria, Libya, and other nations in that region.

If it's not important to keep the radicals out of those countries, why do we care if they run Afghanistan?
I think much of that has to do with the selection of Afghanistan as his war by Obama. He was so sure it would be easy and not take many men and he wanted something like that on his resume.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top