Sloth, help me here!
Obviously, there is some magic ingrediant that makes your legions SO much more effective at eliminating the enemy then the countless invaders who have been repressed by the hindukush’s rough charm.
Please don’t hold it back! What is it?!
[/quote]
I think it is because they are HEROES and they FIGHT TO KEEP AMERICA FREE.
Dont know how that is supposed to work but you must thank them for their sacrifice every fourth of July.
See?
My insights into the American culture are downright amazing!
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let’s stop stalling here. Your plan is to not have one. To do nothing. To stand paralyzed, outside of criticizing those trying to do something in the real world. In short, your plan is to reward asymmetrical and terroristic warfare. Paralysis. Hand wringing self-hatred. “Gosh, no uniforms. No claims to national support. Completely untouchable. We’re stuck not being able to do a damn thing. We’ve got to get our hands on this technology!”
[/quote]
Yeah well, if doing nothing is the least worst alternative, that is the wise course of action.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
Let’s stop stalling here. Your plan is to not have one. To do nothing. To stand paralyzed, outside of criticizing those trying to do something in the real world. In short, your plan is to reward asymmetrical and terroristic warfare. Paralysis. Hand wringing self-hatred. “Gosh, no uniforms. No claims to national support. Completely untouchable. We’re stuck not being able to do a damn thing. We’ve got to get our hands on this technology!”
[/quote]
Yeah well, if doing nothing is the least worst alternative, that is the wise course of action.
Blind actionism does noone any good.
[/quote]
It isn’t the least worst alternative. It’s THE worst alternative. And, I just refuse to join you in supporting terrorism.
The Mises and Rothbardian crowd is a group that rewards asymmetrical terroristic warfare by deeming those actors as untouchable, while screaming at western citizens for not being passive (Please Sirs, may we have another?) targets.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The Mises and Rothbardian crowd is a group that rewards asymmetrical terroristic warfare by deeming those actors as untouchable, while declaring western citizens to be passive targets.
[/quote]
Nonsense.
You can spoil attacks on your soil all you want.
A net of informers would also be good.
You could even silently remove some key figures from the playing field.
Bribe, spy, deceive and poison to your hearts delight, why must you always wreck the whole country?
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The Mises and Rothbardian crowd is a group that rewards asymmetrical terroristic warfare by deeming those actors as untouchable, while declaring western citizens to be passive targets.
[/quote]
Nonsense.
You can spoil attacks on your soil all you want.
A net of informers would also be good.
You could even silently remove some key figures from the playing field.
Bribe, spy, deceive and poison to your hearts delight, why must you always wreck the whole country?
[/quote]
Oh, it’s the 007 stragety. A couple of men, licensed to kill, will win the day! Will they enter the cave-lair of the enemy, poison pellet hidden under a fake gemstone set into a ring? Maybe when they sit next to Dear-Leader of the Day as the guest of honor, they’ll reach across his cup for a second helping of mashed potatos, delivering the payload in concealing movement.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The Mises and Rothbardian crowd is a group that rewards asymmetrical terroristic warfare by deeming those actors as untouchable, while declaring western citizens to be passive targets.
Orion:
Nonsense. [/quote]
Oh, please. Any internet capable mujihadeen probably has Lew Rockwell’s site as his homepage. “Why can’t we put out propaganda this good?!”
I assure you, I am no Mises/what ever group. I voted pyrate.
Orion has it right: this is actionism. The worst kind, since you unleash not the tame hamsters of diplomacy nor the lazy guinea pigs of bureaucracy but the vicious, evil, purebred dogs of war.
Sometimes not doing anything stupid IS the best solution.
How would I reward the terrorists, when Bush’s 2nd term was cheered by Islamists all around the globe!
By largely ignoring them they’d have nothing to profit from.
Guess what, they don’t have a real army, all they can do is bomb the occasional bus or steal a plane.
Big deal. Better to live with this then funding a neverending war which can accomplish nothing.
I meant OUR culture and education.
BTW, building schools in Afghanistan IS a possibility we could discuss.
The Taliban’s potential for blowing up schools is quite overestimated.
In theory you could build schools far, far faster then they could destroy them. And schools cost NOTHING compared to those fancy, but largely useless jets.
The Taliban’s potential for blowing up schools is quite overestimated.
In theory you could build schools far, far faster then they could destroy them. And schools cost NOTHING compared to those fancy, but largely useless jets.
Schools cost about 20-100K , let’s say 50 000.
A. needs, according to Unicef, about 2000 schools.
That makes 100 000 000. You spend well over 3 billion per month. Accomplishing very little.
So, if your army leaves just one day earlier, you can, in theory, carpet bomb A. with 2000 schools.
I didn’t say I consider this a strategy.
But it’s so much more sensible then bombing the shit out of rocks and eradicating Kalashnikovs armed shepherds with rockets launched from 350 000 000$ jets.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
what’s so lol here, exactly?
Schools cost about 20-100K , let’s say 50 000.
A. needs, according to Unicef, about 2000 schools…[/quote]
You do realize that A. still needs that many schools even with American firepower protecting them, the construction crews, and the staff?
Yet, your plan would’ve been to send in, what, the PTA? Was Suzy Homemaker and Ms. Stadanko (3rd Grade teacher) going to scold the Taliban when they stopped in to round up the construction crews (so they could be hanged in a public square)? “Now you boys turn right around and go home. These men have work to do and you’re holding them up. Shame on you!”
So, if your army leaves just one day earlier, you can, in theory, carpet bomb A. with 2000 schools.
[/quote]
Yeah. That’s exactly how it’s done. We can drop pre-constructed schools–on parachutes of course–into Afghanistan. We could also drop an airborne unit of immortal and impervious afghan teachers to carry out the lectures.
Since the UN is probably gonna spend the money anyway, and according to you, the taliban will destroy them, why bother with the army?
Do you realize how costly your military adventures are? Do you realize that your idea of quick invasion will either accomplish less or perhaps just as little, both with higher costs?
Unless you tell me, again, how you will manage to turn things around, please?
Is it, shamans or Palin’s loyal pray-warriors? A new superweapon perhaps…
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
No.
I already said it’s theoretical.[/quote]
In short, you advise paralysis, when you’re not too busy advising to do things you don’t even believe can be done. Why waste both our time? You desire to award asymmetric terroristic warfare, making it a legitimate and viable tactic, while demanding western citizens sit around passively, theorizing about “carpet-bombing” them with schools.
Maybe they should pray for schools to drop from the skies, manned by unkillable Afghani teachers?
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
what’s so lol here, exactly?
Schools cost about 20-100K , let’s say 50 000.
A. needs, according to Unicef, about 2000 schools…[/quote]
You do realize that A. still needs that many schools even with American firepower protecting them, the construction crews, and the staff?
Yet, your plan would’ve been to send in, what, the PTA? Was Suzy Homemaker and Ms. Stadanko (3rd Grade teacher) going to scold the Taliban when they stopped in to round up the construction crews (so they could be hanged in a public square)? “Now you boys turn right around and go home. These men have work to do and you’re holding them up. Shame on you!”
[/quote]
You dont need no stnking construction crews.
You prefrabricate them , airlift them in and have it assembled in less than 5 ours.
Guerrilla school building.
That way you are the school building fairies and the Taliban are the mean meanies knowcking them down again.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
No.
I already said it’s theoretical.[/quote]
In short, you advise paralysis, when you’re not too busy advising to do things you don’t even believe can be done. Why waste both our time? You desire to award asymmetric terroristic warfare, making it a legitimate and viable tactic, while demanding western citizens sit around, passively, theorizing about “carpet-bombing” them with schools.
Maybe they should pray for schools to drop from the skies, manned by unkillable Afghani teachers?
[/quote]
Why paralysis?
You could carry on enjoying life, how about that.
The only thing the Taliban really paralysed is… your economy.
They did that by letting your politicians, the neohawks, empty your pockets like crazy.
And it’s not like this hadn’t happened before. It did! And with your help!
Honestly: do you think without visiting A. in full force, there would have been another 9/11?
You played into their hands.
Asymetrical war can be ignored by somone powerful like the US.
If I’d be an american, I’d be offended by the idea of weakness and angst the chickenhawks spread so forcefully.
[quote]Sloth wrote:
The Mises and Rothbardian crowd is a group that rewards asymmetrical terroristic warfare by deeming those actors as untouchable, while declaring western citizens to be passive targets.
[/quote]
Nonsense.
You can spoil attacks on your soil all you want.
A net of informers would also be good.
You could even silently remove some key figures from the playing field.
Bribe, spy, deceive and poison to your hearts delight, why must you always wreck the whole country?
[/quote]
Oh, it’s the 007 stragety. A couple of men, licensed to kill, will win the day! Will they enter the cave-lair of the enemy, poison pellet hidden under a fake gemstone set into a ring? Maybe when they sit next to Dear-Leader of the Day as the guest of honor, they’ll reach across his cup for a second helping of mashed potatos, delivering the payload in concealing movement.[/quote]
Well, what is the worst that could happen?
They could achieve nothing, which is about the same the US army does, but far cheaper and without creating too much enemies.
[quote]orion wrote:You dont need no stnking construction crews.
You prefrabricate them , airlift them in and have it assembled in less than 5 ours.
Guerrilla school building.
That way you are the school building fairies and the Taliban are the mean meanies knowcking them down again.
[/quote]
Well, it would be at least an extremely cheap way to keep them busy.
“Allahu akbar, I fulfilled my quota this month! Three schools destroyed!”
“By the prophet’s beard, Hedr you imbecile, have you not heard! The american devils have this new superschool-rocket! One carrier system, up to six learnheads with a payload of 78 folding chairs, all assembled in mere minutes! Get back on your donkey and report you failure to the nearest cave!”