After almost 9 years & a worsening situation in that god-forsaken country, is it time to declare victory & leave?
After almost 9 years & a worsening situation in that god-forsaken country, is it time to declare victory & leave?
The difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is that Afghanistan was legitimate target after 9/11. We should have never left there and gone off to fight some retard war in Iraq.
I'm not so willing to say Afghanistan wasn't our war, but we screwed the pooch hard on this one.
Good God no! The only reason Afghanistan began to go poorly in the first place was the lack of focus given to it by the military in favor of Iraq. Despite what you say, Devil, this is a war US and international forces are capable of fighting. If it weren't for the Bush administration's focus on Iraq I would have bet dollars to donuts that Afghanistan would be a fairly stable region (by middle eastern standards) by now.
I am always amused when Liberals think that one can just declare a victory then run away from an unfinished job.
Yeah...Don't you just hate it when liberals do that!
This is quite simple actually. The problem is that people have no idea how to define "victory" in today's wars. We are already victorious. Staying and finishing the job implies that there is still work for us to do on the ground, but when the host government is as corrupt as what Vietnam's was in 1971, there is no job left to finish. Leaving a mobile force in the area will only leave them stranded without proper support as the host government continues to remain dependant on American muscle. And only part of this is and always was our fight.
Our mission in Iraq was to destroy the dictator and offer Iraq an opportunity at democracy. We accomplished our mission and it is up to Iraqis to follow through on their end for the rest. It will be their success or failure.
The same is true for Afghanistan. The Tali-Ban was removed from power and Al-Queda's base shattered in quick fashion and Osama Bin Laden is no longer a physical player. But the vast corruption in the Afghani government has not allowed the Afghanis to step up. Afghanis have failed. We have not. It is time to stop fooling ourselves into thinking that we have to "fix what we break," especially considering that this region was already broke.
When it comes to this Afghani/Pakistani region, our roles need to be relegated to punishment. We should pull our troops out and strike as needed via UAVs, missiles, and special forces launched from sea bases.
Our role as a "nation builder" must be defined into more practical terms. We have to understand that no matter what we do, we can and always do come home. The failed will always be these people who can't fathom a world beyond tribal allegiance, religious extremism, and corruption and oppression.
Afghanistan's $23 billion gross domestic product is the size of Boise's. Counterinsurgency doctrine teaches, not very helpfully, that development depends on security, and that security depends on development. Three-quarters of Afghanistan's poppy production for opium comes from Helmand. In what should be called Operation Sisyphus, U.S. officials are urging farmers to grow other crops. Endive, perhaps?
Great post but way to deep & thoughtful for the simple minded far-right-wingers! (Their attention span only allows for simple one line talking points & jingoistic slogans.
What you say requires thought, which is simply beyond their capability!
I find the left even more confused.
The difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is that Afghanistan was legitimate target after 9/11. We should have never left there and gone off to fight some retard war in Iraq. What should we do now? Well now it's hard to say. Can we make a difference? Maybe. Can we clear up the mess which led to the freedom the Taliban enjoyed in the country? Maybe not so much any more. It will be tough, I don't know how it would be done, and who knows we may get side tracked into a different war while doing it.
I'm not so willing to say Afghanistan wasn't our war, but we screwed the pooch hard on this one.
This again is false; we never "left" Afghanistan, it was turned over to the NATO by the UN to manage.
Gee, sounds like the UN can't seem to do anything right eh?
I am always amused when people think that wars can be fought without mistakes, without cost, without sacrifice and in the time it takes to order a burger at Burger King. :doh
I am always amused when people think that strict adherence to failing policies will actually lead to a solution.
Also if I was waiting at a Burger King for close to 8 years...I'd be a little pissed off and I don't think that would be unwarranted.
Well obviously you think wars can be fought without mistakes,
This is quite simple actually. The problem is that people have no idea how to define "victory" in today's wars. We are already victorious. Staying and finishing the job implies that there is still work for us to do on the ground, but when the host government is as corrupt as what Vietnam's was in 1971, there is no job left to finish. Leaving a mobile force in the area will only leave them stranded without proper support as the host government continues to remain dependant on American muscle. And only part of this is and always was our fight.
Our mission in Iraq was to destroy the dictator and offer Iraq an opportunity at democracy. We accomplished our mission and it is up to Iraqis to follow through on their end for the rest. It will be their success or failure.
The same is true for Afghanistan. The Tali-Ban was removed from power and Al-Queda's base shattered in quick fashion and Osama Bin Laden is no longer a physical player. But the vast corruption in the Afghani government has not allowed the Afghanis to step up. Afghanis have failed. We have not. It is time to stop fooling ourselves into thinking that we have to "fix what we break," especially considering that this region was already broke.
When it comes to this Afghani/Pakistani region, our roles need to be relegated to punishment. We should pull our troops out and strike as needed via UAVs, missiles, and special forces launched from sea bases.
Our role as a "nation builder" must be defined into more practical terms. We have to understand that no matter what we do, we can and always do come home. The failed will always be these people who can't fathom a world beyond tribal allegiance, religious extremism, and corruption and oppression.
I am amused that you think people are arguing for strict adherence to failing policies; no, it is actually ironic in that all your arguments suggest an adherence to the failed policy of never finishing anything we start and abandoning our allies while falling for terrorist propaganda.
Bin Laden had it right; I was hoping that 9-11 would prove him wrong; I guess I had too much faith in the American people's ability to remember anything past the last episode of Survivor.
Well obviously you think wars can be fought without mistakes, without cost, without sacrifice and in the time it takes to order a burger at Burger King.
Do me a favor, when you find one historic example of a war being fought without mistakes, without cost and without sacrifice in less than a year, get back to me okay?
I don't think ANYONE believes that to be true of the Bush Administration.
(but quite possible for the neocons to fight wars with nothing but mistakes however!)
Well maybe you and your BFF Obama can text each other back and forth on how stupid America is. I am amused that people argue for forever war thinking somehow to make a situation better through engaging in the actions which made it bad in the first place...horrible intervention. I am amused that people can look at an incompetently run war with no real forethought to victory and shoring up the region and call it "mistakes". I am not amused that some continually call for the deaths of Americans in wars which had little to do with us, or which were terribly run, handled, and planned. But hey, that's just me.
Well obviously thinking isn't your strong suit. Because instead of idiotic knee jerk reactions like "obviously blah blah blah", you could have thought of other conditions. But I guess it's like blood from a stone that one. I don't think things can be fought without mistake. But things can be fought overall in an intelligent manner with forethought and proper use of the military. Maybe not everything in other wars went according to plan, but there were plans and some had reasonable conditions.
But your sentences are nothing more than deflect jargon full of mind rotting tripe and propaganda best left ignored.
I will take your empty hyperbolic blather as a concession and admission that you cannot counter my arguments with anything substantive or that can be supported by the facts and historic record. .
Your trite simplistic hyper partisan remarks are hardly anything to take seriously.
Carry on; you continue making yourself completely irrelevant on this forum. :roll:
I will take your empty hyperbolic blather as a concession and admission that you cannot counter my arguments with anything substantive or that can be supported by the facts and historic record.
I will take your empty hyperbolic blather as a concession and admission that you cannot counter my arguments with anything substantive or that can be supported by the facts and historic record.
As stated earlier, when you can provide me ONE instance of a war that was fought without mistakes, without sacrifice and without great cost get back to me and perhaps we can have an intelligent debate.
How ironic based on the mindless hyperbolic nonsense contained in your comments above to suggest that I am the one who is engaging in mind rotting tripe and propaganda best left ignored.
By all means, carry on; substantive and informed debate is apparently not your forte’.
You have an argument?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?