[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
There IS no definite end.
[/quote]
There won’t be a definite end regardless of the stategy. I’m proposing a choice to the Taliban, and then to the people. To the Taliban, you can rule an afghanistan with electricity and drinking water. You’ll have hospitals to go to when your Taliban child gets a boo-boo. All this, and you still get to kill your own apostates and ‘whores.’ Or, you can rule from caves, by candlelight. I don’t want their country, I don’t want to ‘spread liberty.’ Just hand over our targets.
To the people, If the Taliban won’t, then you are responsible for doing it. They will kill our enemies for us. They will not cower under the taliban, watching passivley as they harbor terrorists, doing nothing–NOTHING–to exact justice for our dead, only to expect ut so pull a Schwarzie (Please sir, may I have another?).
What needs to happen is a the RNC should meet with the Iranians secretly and make a plan to release them 5 minutes after Obama loses the election (in exchange for a some guns and stuff). That worked the last time.
[quote]kamui wrote:
if you don’t, you will end up with another humiliating retreat.
And two or three decades later, China will finally take care of the Ouigours, and then move on the Talibans.
[/quote]
when they do, will all these US haters bitch about them as well?
edit- I think your India idea is a good one, though what about their nuclear armed islamic neighbor in between?
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
What needs to happen is a the RNC should meet with the Iranians secretly and make a plan to release them 5 minutes after Obama loses the election (in exchange for a some guns and stuff). That worked the last time.[/quote]
If that worked, fine, but 2012 is too far off. Those kids are in solitary confinement.
The Iranian leadership needs a lesson about fucking with Americans.
Bomb and keep bombing until the kids are released.
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
What needs to happen is a the RNC should meet with the Iranians secretly and make a plan to release them 5 minutes after Obama loses the election (in exchange for a some guns and stuff). That worked the last time.[/quote]
If that worked, fine, but 2012 is too far off. Those kids are in solitary confinement.
The Iranian leadership needs a lesson about fucking with Americans.
Bomb and keep bombing until the kids are released.
[/quote]
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
What needs to happen is a the RNC should meet with the Iranians secretly and make a plan to release them 5 minutes after Obama loses the election (in exchange for a some guns and stuff). That worked the last time.[/quote]
If that worked, fine, but 2012 is too far off. Those kids are in solitary confinement.
The Iranian leadership needs a lesson about fucking with Americans.
Bomb and keep bombing until the kids are released.
[/quote]
I lol’d. Diplomacy, HH style? [/quote]
“Let us win your hearts and minds or we’ll burn your damn huts down”… LOL
[quote]Sifu wrote:
You are just a clueless kid talking shit.[/quote]
Oh yeah? How’d those WMD’s in Iraq turn out? What happened in Afghanistan in the meantime? Oh, but that’s right, we’re also supposed to be occupying Iran right about now. Yeah, we need a low threshold. We can’t button up Afghanistan, but we need to leap frog across the middle-east. [/quote]
Actually it turned out very well for me. Because I have friends in the Marines who fought in Iraq. So I am very grateful that we didn’t have WMD used on them.
Afghanistan is a basketcase that is going to involve years of low level warfare no matter how much resources we pour into it. We are not going to button up Afghanistan because it is not the kind of warfare where all we need to do is run the marines up a hill to raise a flag and then it is all over. Once we toppled the taliban and deprived AQ of a sanctuary to organize and train in it didn’t make sense to pour everything we had into it while there were other more dangerous countries to deal with that would get a pass for the next 20 years while we tried to get Afghanistan finished.
The problem with Sloth’s method is what is happening to Israel now in Lebanon.
The last time Israel attacked they bombed the hell out of the place. But Hezbollah is still there and not only adapted their strategy for next time but possibly have aquired better, longer range weapons.
So not only would you have to keep attacking and crush the terrorists, you would also have to stop their weapon supply lines and funding.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
The problem with Sloth’s method is what is happening to Israel now in Lebanon.
The last time Israel attacked they bombed the hell out of the place. But Hezbollah is still there and not only adapted their strategy for next time but possibly have aquired better, longer range weapons.
So not only would you have to keep attacking and crush the terrorists, you would also have to stop their weapon supply lines and funding.
How would you do this without widening the war?[/quote]
Not interested in crushing weapon suppy lines. If I was interested in cutting off their weapon supply line, at home I’d ground flights, ban as many explosive materials as possible, and ban the ownership of private fire-arms. Basically, they’re not chucking rockets over a border at us.
Also, might I point out that after years of occupation they’re not stuck with chucking stones at our troops? I’d have to ask you, are you willing to widen this war to crush supply lines?
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]angry chicken wrote:
What needs to happen is a the RNC should meet with the Iranians secretly and make a plan to release them 5 minutes after Obama loses the election (in exchange for a some guns and stuff). That worked the last time.[/quote]
If that worked, fine, but 2012 is too far off. Those kids are in solitary confinement.
The Iranian leadership needs a lesson about fucking with Americans.
Bomb and keep bombing until the kids are released.
[/quote]
I lol’d. Diplomacy, HH style? [/quote]
“Let us win your hearts and minds or we’ll burn your damn huts down”… LOL[/quote]
“Speaking today at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism conference, former Mossad chief Danny Yatom urged the international community to come together and form a joint air force led by the United States to launch massive air strikes across Iran.”
[quote]angry chicken wrote:
What needs to happen is a the RNC should meet with the Iranians secretly and make a plan to release them 5 minutes after Obama loses the election (in exchange for a some guns and stuff). That worked the last time.[/quote]
If that worked, fine, but 2012 is too far off. Those kids are in solitary confinement.
The Iranian leadership needs a lesson about fucking with Americans.
Bomb and keep bombing until the kids are released.
[/quote]
I lol’d. Diplomacy, HH style? [/quote]
“Let us win your hearts and minds or we’ll burn your damn huts down”… LOL[/quote]
“Speaking today at the International Institute for Counter-Terrorism conference, former Mossad chief Danny Yatom urged the international community to come together and form a joint air force led by the United States to launch massive air strikes across Iran.”
[/quote]
Translation: Let’s ask the U.S to do our (Israel’s) dirty work.
Not interested in crushing weapon suppy lines. If I was interested in cutting off their weapon supply line, at home I’d ground flights, ban as many explosive materials as possible, and ban the ownership of private fire-arms. Basically, they’re not chucking rockets over a border at us.
Also, might I point out that after years of occupation they’re not stuck with chucking stones at our troops? I’d have to ask you, are you willing to widen this war to crush supply lines?[/quote]
Sure, the first thing we should have done in Iraq was secure the borders. Same thing in Afghanistan.
In you war scenario, you go in full force. What happens next time if they’re prepared and waiting for you in ambush? The land is full of mines, barb wire, tank traps, people posing as civilians armed with rockets to shoot down your planes. They have seen how you fight and are ready to respond…just like Hezbollah did to Israel last round.
If you do not cut off their arms supply, the conflict will never end, only get worse.
[quote]Gkhan wrote:
What happens next time if they’re prepared and waiting for you in ambush? [/quote]
They get smashed. Invasions we do well. Occupation is the tricky part. Inbetween invasions (if they don’t get it the firt time) they can mine as much as they want. Buy as many surface-to-air systems as they want. I hope they do. I hope they buy alot of it, while also having to spend money getting the lights back on, putting bridges back up, and rediscovering running water. I want them to come out of hiding from their caves and villages to spend money rebuilding and rearming. Then, when they pull their crap again it’ll cost THEM money they don’t have. Eventually the Taliban will figure out they can still kill people domestically (apostates and women), AND have electricity and plumbing. All they’d have to do is kill Al Qaeda. They could have “See an atheist and whore (rape victime) die” night at the local stadium. With working stadium lights, even!
Sloth, stop here.
At this point you’re making a fool out of yourself.
You have NO idea who the Taliban or Al Qaeda is.
There is nothing you could achieve with your little “invasion” and nothing you had to show your party or the voters.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Sloth, stop here.
At this point you’re making a fool out of yourself.
You have NO idea who the Taliban or Al Qaeda is.
There is nothing you could achieve with your little “invasion” and nothing you had to show your party or the voters.
[/quote]
Nossir. I’m well aware of who they are. Hence, the absence of an occupation.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Sloth, stop here.
At this point you’re making a fool out of yourself.
[/quote]
The only fools are those paralyzed do-nothingers. Rewarding asymmetric warfare while deeming (demanding) their own citizens to be passive targets. Or, those still supporting occupation.