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.
The shame is that Afghanistan was neglected because of Iraq, a war based upon evidence that did not exist.
Make up your damned minds, willya?!
We leave---the right says NO!!! if someone with a (D) proposes it. If someone with an (R) proposed it, the right would applaud it as the most amazing thing ever presented as most all americans want the war to be over in afghanistan, and it's time to support the troops and bring them home. USA! USA!
We stay---the right says NO!!! if someone with a (D) proposes it. If someone with an (R) proposed it, the right would applaud it as the most amazing thing every presented as al qaeda is still a threat, we don't "cut and run" and will stay in afghanistan forever until it's "won"
Basically it all comes down to the right wing politicians hate everything the democrats do no matter what, and their useful idiots, the GOP supporters are also well programmed sheep that have learned:
We leave---the right says NO!!! if someone with a (D) proposes it. If someone with an (R) proposed it, the right would applaud it as the most amazing thing ever presented as most all americans want the war to be over in afghanistan, and it's time to support the troops and bring them home. USA! USA!
We stay---the right says NO!!! if someone with a (D) proposes it. If someone with an (R) proposed it, the right would applaud it as the most amazing thing every presented as al qaeda is still a threat, we don't "cut and run" and will stay in afghanistan forever until it's "won"
Basically it all comes down to the right wing politicians hate everything the democrats do no matter what, and their useful idiots, the GOP supporters are also well programmed sheep that have learned:
Location: In a Galaxy far, far away called Germany
4,300 posts, read 4,409,483 times
Reputation: 2394
Quote:
Originally Posted by desertdetroiter
Nonsense. We NEVER could've won that war, and thinking otherwise is pure fantasy. Nothing short of a nuke could've ended in a victory for us. This cockiness and hubris is what gets us in trouble in the first place.
Some of you think that we're supermen. The Afghan's are like 100-0 as far as their won-loss record. And they'll maintain that record no matter who shows up at their doorstep. Us included.
If we would've tried to apply this "raw force" you speak of, we would've just gotten a "rawer asswhipping." That's all there is to it.
I don't think the US has had it asswhipped in Afghanistan at all. It has crushed the military opposition, ran out the Taliban (some to the mountains and the remaining to Pakistan). But then they stopped and had the military syphoned it's resources to Iraq. If the USA decided that they were going to fight the war, they would crush the nation. But, we don't fight wars - we just like to play war. We have lost all resolve to do what it takes to win because it would truly be horrible and political suicide for any administration in light of today's media ability. The only things stopping the USA from crushing Afghanistan isn't the Taliban or the Haqqani network - its the instant media. It can inflict more damage to military than any other weapon.
Good question - nothing clear was defined that I can remember. I suppose if the mission was not defined, it makes that the exit is undefined also. So I guess I have a problem with the purpose of the surge also.
I know that some would like to pretend that the war in Afghanistan didn't begin until 2009, and will get angry if I bring up the history of that war prior to that date, but I feel that I must.
In 2001, the U.S. invade Afghanistan to destroy al Qaeda's bases and cadre, unfortunately, their was this idea that not only would we destroy al-Qaeda but we would remove the Taliban as the ruling force and establish democracy because, or as the theory went at the time, democratic governments don't engage in terrorism.
In short notice the U.S. with the aid of allied countries and Afghan forces, the U.S. able achieved its first goal, although the leadership and important cadre members of both the Taliban and al-Qaeda escaped into Pakistan. That being "achieved" the U.S got busy with the building Afghanistan into a flourishing model of western democracy. Having partially achieving our first goal we went off in search for more fertile targets to spread democracy, with drawing valuable assets from Afghanistan in the process.
My opinion at the time was, "we've extracted our pound of flesh for the 911 attacks" declare victory and inform the Taliban that if they ever again harbored any person or organization that would do harm to the U.S. we would be back with with a yet bigger can of whoopass. But who listens to me?
Enter Sen Barack Obama who in 2005 argued prior to the invasion of Iraq that the job wasn't done in the far east, al-Qaeda was still in operation, the Taliban still existed, and starting another war without finishing the last one was, "dumb". Through out his campaign for the presidency this was his recurring message. Get out of Iraq and get back to the job yet to be finished (this was one of the key reasons for my support in 2008).
In 2009 Obama faced the Nixon Conundrum, how to get a long protracted war that had long ago gone south back on track, win and get out. Early on in the administration Obama was presented with two choices, the Biden Plan of VP Joseph Biden, and that of the Pentagon and super star generals David Patraeus and Stanley McChrystal who like generals before them had been shopping for political support for their plan in public and in the Congress.
The Biden plan was to withdraw the majority of American troops and concentrate on taking out al-Qaeda and the Taliban leadership. The military's plan, lets' do the Surge 2.0. The generals won the argument at least for a while. During those negotiations Obama imposed a caveat to the general's plans, he would give them the resources for the surge but he also gave him a deadline for making it work. The deadline has come and gone and the surge has not achieved what it was intended to achieve (we can debate the other surge another time and place).
So, given that much abbreviated history, what do the great wise ones who started this war suggest? That we maintain this war in definitely or we declare that we've done as much as we could and can do no more? Either way the Afghans who have not yielded to a foreign force since Alexander the Great took control of the Persian Empire in 330 BCE.
In short, they have been just waiting for this or that invader to leave for several millennium.
(spent way too much time on this, back to one liners).
The shame is that Afghanistan was neglected because of Iraq, a war based upon evidence that did not exist.
Make up your damned minds, willya?!
If we are going to be there - then we need to be there to win. Otherwise we are wasting our time and need to leave. When Obama announced he was leaving Afghanistan, I started the thread and said fine with me since we aren't doing anything and there seems to be no leadership from Obama.
We leave---the right says NO!!! if someone with a (D) proposes it. If someone with an (R) proposed it, the right would applaud it as the most amazing thing ever presented as most all americans want the war to be over in afghanistan, and it's time to support the troops and bring them home. USA! USA!
We stay---the right says NO!!! if someone with a (D) proposes it. If someone with an (R) proposed it, the right would applaud it as the most amazing thing every presented as al qaeda is still a threat, we don't "cut and run" and will stay in afghanistan forever until it's "won"
Basically it all comes down to the right wing politicians hate everything the democrats do no matter what, and their useful idiots, the GOP supporters are also well programmed sheep that have learned:
It ain't personal - it just seems like the (D)'s are wrong 99% of the time (which does not imply that the (R)'s are right 99% of the time). Again, I actually agreed w/ Obama for leaving since he wasn't really interested in winning - which is a shame.
On the contrary, telling them when we were leaving was pretty stupid.
Exactly- the only way to "win" the war in Afghanistan is to turn the country into a molten sea of glass. That obviously wouldn't be good for the thousands of innocent civilians, but anything short of that is a waste of time, money, and American lives.
Even nuclear attack won't work. Afghanistan is simply too mountainous.
The best we can hope for in Afghanistan is a decade's worth of relative peace at most.
The Afghanis have been invaded by every major world power of the east and west for thousands of years, and the terrain always defeats the invaders, time after time.
The terrain works against a strong central national government just as much as against any occupier.While there have been periods of central govt. there, for most of it's history, Afghanistan has been ruled by local warlords who arise from the tribes within the 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.
