We Have Lost Afghanistan

Let me say this. I want everyone and anyone who wants to kill me, to be killed first. Plain and simple. However we have to show that they want us dead first. I do not believe the sovereign nation of Afghanistan or the Taliban ever wanted to kill me. Furthermore i do not believe they had the resources to wage a war that would allow them to kill anything effectively. The cost of human lives from our actions is greater than the cost of not acting.

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Vegita wrote:

I’ll say what I think it is. Our arrogance and unwillingess to admit we made a fucking tactical error. We used the wrong strategy to get this enemy and we are too fucking stubborn to say, Yea we fucked this up, lets pull out, re-group and hit these people smarter, faster and harder. Get the fucking boots off the ground. And for the umpteinth time so someone who just got out of thier labotomy procedure doesn’t accuse me of “giving up” or letting “the terrorists win” I want them dead too, I just think our current gameplan is retarded, way too costly in terms of human life, both ours and other innocents, and money wise. We can and need to do better. Smaller footprints, invisible agents, stealth. I think it’s highly possible we can do this. We are going deer hunting with a tank. How many deer are you going to see driving around the woods in a tank?

V[/quote]

So I take it you where more for Bidens plan?

Edit*

Lets continue this with PM’s.[/quote]

I’m not familiar with what specific plan of his you are referring to?

V

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

Why do you want YOUR thread to die? What was your expectations of this thread?

Speaking of expectations
do you honestly think we are going to “change” Afghanistan??

If soldiers will be dying for nothing from this point on
what have they been dying for since '03?[/quote]

This thread went TRUTHER and it needs to die.

Read through this thread and you will see my plan, and yes I do think we can change Afghanistan. I have faith in my military.

What I am saying is, if we pull out all the soldiers that have died did so for no reason.

[/quote]

I see what you’re saying about the conspiracy stuff
BUT the thread seems on topic at this point. Don’t know why you want to bow out of your own thread. Anyways


Can you answer why we haven’t had success in Afghanistan??..serious question.

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

I see what you’re saying about the conspiracy stuff
BUT the thread seems on topic at this point. Don’t know why you want to bow out of your own thread. Anyways


Can you answer why we haven’t had success in Afghanistan??..serious question.[/quote]

Nation building is what is causing us problems in Afghanistan. They are not a nation they are tribes.

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

I see what you’re saying about the conspiracy stuff
BUT the thread seems on topic at this point. Don’t know why you want to bow out of your own thread. Anyways


Can you answer why we haven’t had success in Afghanistan??..serious question.[/quote]

Nation building is what is causing us problems in Afghanistan. They are not a nation they are tribes.
[/quote]

Partially agree
but, we’ve been trying to install a cooperative central government which provides the smaller units of the population (tribes) with a voice as well. But yes, nation building in the traditional sense will get us the same outcome as the USSR.

Lots of good reading on the subject here, recommended for anyone interested in what the new strategy entails.

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/Assessment_Redacted_092109.pdf

[quote]bigquig wrote:

[quote]John S. wrote:

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

I see what you’re saying about the conspiracy stuff
BUT the thread seems on topic at this point. Don’t know why you want to bow out of your own thread. Anyways


Can you answer why we haven’t had success in Afghanistan??..serious question.[/quote]

Nation building is what is causing us problems in Afghanistan. They are not a nation they are tribes.
[/quote]

Partially agree
but, we’ve been trying to install a cooperative central government which provides the smaller units of the population (tribes) with a voice as well. But yes, nation building in the traditional sense will get us the same outcome as the USSR.

Lots of good reading on the subject here, recommended for anyone interested in what the new strategy entails.

http://media.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/Assessment_Redacted_092109.pdf[/quote]

Wow very good read indeed. I agree with that new strategy very much so. Seems similar to the position I was taking, perhaps the military should hire me to think out thier operations for them. LOL

V

[quote]Deorum wrote:
Reasserting my questions, why exactly are we in Afghanistan? What is our goal to accomplish? And, Who is our enemy(specifically)?

Discussing a victory before establishing these seem ridiculous.[/quote]

Humanity needs war as a release for our innate violence. Wars are now to be fought on the periphery of civilisation due to the scale of weaponry. Somalia is next.

Until something to replace war is invented, we’ll have wars. We’ve had roughly 4400 wars in human history. We love war.

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
that’s no reason to denigrate people who fought believing they were doing the right thing.
[/quote]

He did no such a thing. That was your interpretation and spin on his post.

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]AlisaV wrote:

The US has fought a number of unjust and unsuccessful wars
[/quote]

Name them.[/quote]
To stay out of everyone’s hair I’ll just go with the Mexican War. (I know you’re old Push but hopefully not that old.)

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

If soldiers will be dying for nothing from this point on
what have they been dying for since '03?[/quote]

An uncomfortable question to ask, and one with an unpleasant answer, to say the least. [/quote]

Wouldn’t you say they’ve been dying to protect us against a plethora of possible attacks on our homeland? I’d like to think our presence over there has at least thwarted more terrorist attacks on our homeland, though I can’t be sure either way.

[quote]LankyMofo wrote:

[quote]PRCalDude wrote:

[quote]Big_Boss wrote:

If soldiers will be dying for nothing from this point on
what have they been dying for since '03?[/quote]

An uncomfortable question to ask, and one with an unpleasant answer, to say the least. [/quote]

Wouldn’t you say they’ve been dying to protect us against a plethora of possible attacks on our homeland? I’d like to think our presence over there has at least thwarted more terrorist attacks on our homeland, though I can’t be sure either way.[/quote]

Well, Nidal Hasan just attacked us militarily, didn’t he? And we’re still “over there.”

The reality is that the more of “them” we have move here, the more terror we will have, regardless of whether or not we fight “them” over there.

Muslims wage jihad against infidels, end of story.

Look, I went back to the 1840’s, partly as a joke, to avoid hitting too close to home; I don’t want to offend anybody who’s had a personal stake in more recent wars. I would prefer not to get into it.

I’d categorize the Mexican War as unjustified, not unsuccessful. (I think Michael Walzer has some common-sense examples for what justifies war: self-defense, defense of an ally, opposition to genocide, one or two others that I forget; anyhow that’s the framework I start from.)

To put an alternative spin on it – do you think EVERY military action that the US has engaged in has been just? Do you think EVERY American military action has been successful? What explains our uniquely brilliant track record, if so?

The Mexican war was amongst the most just we’ve ever fought:

[quote]pushharder wrote:

[quote]storey420 wrote:


Please tell me how their holy war will end with us staying
grabbing popcorn
this should be good.[/quote]

Ahhh
 I see
the holy war must end for there to be success in Afghanistan? If it can’t we must beat our swords into plowshares? Now?[/quote]

You do understand with the previously quoted thread that I was countering his flawed logic. I don’t believe what you just wrote HE believes the inverse of that. He said the the holy war wouldn’t end if we left
get it?

[quote]Gettnitdone wrote:
Yes, I’ve been to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iraq a couple of years ago, going around with my father and an Arab friend of his. I lived in Algeria when I was 4 until I was 6. You really have to be around these people to really understand what is going on there. It’s a tough place to live and actually sustain a normal lifestyle, the environment is so volatile and and you feel like you’re on your own, there’s hardly any structured local government and political system. Sometimes I wonder that if it wasn’t for religion what kind of society would exist in these regions. Religion molds the fabric for life in these countries and towns, its the foundation for any shaky society that we see on top. I was around there for a relatively short amount of time so I didn’t really see any of the corruption that you see on the news. However with the kind of environment there there is little wonder why it goes on. Security wise, if you know the right people and the right places to go you should be fine.

More importantly its my opinion that through the grief and anger that many of these kids and adults go through, whether it be from the poverty stricken lifestyles they live or from some internal source, that they look for a diversion in their religion. That basically leads them to extremism. Many of the people in rural areas and even in the urban ones are highly uneducated. They get manipulated very easily as you can imagine. That’s why its my opinion that Al-Qaeda is not a tangible entity, its an intangible virus that constantly spreads and moves, some say in cycles. The Middle-East in general, especially Afghanistan, Iraq and the other northern 'stans need capitalism. They need education and the building of a capitalist society. I think this would severely threaten Al-Qaeda and other extremists, possibly producing an affect greater than a military assault. Can you imagine the negative impact on Al-Qaeda’s recruiting if people actually had good choices and opportunities? This is where Saudi Arabia, the UN and the USA need to come in.

The situation we have in the Middle-East is different from any war in the last century. Its propoganda streamed through religion thats greater than people fighing in Afghanistan for jihad. The 9/11 terrorists planned the attack from Afganistan but they would of easily done it in Jordan, Eqypt, Somalia, or even Iran. For obvious personal feeling that I have on the region I would never want to see war continue on in Afghanistan and else where. But without an increased emphasis on wealth creation you need other measures to create some sort of stability. I do believe what the US is doing there is good, particularly the training of local forces. Al-Qaeda sometimes gets wrapped up its its own ideologies that is shuns fundamental parts of Islam and turns against its own people. However prolonged war in that region is just ignorant. Let me make a point: Al-Qaeda doesn’t hide. Its not going hide and to wait 18 months until it resurfaces. Anytime its absent it loses control, and control is what its fighting so hard for.

[/quote]

Probably the best post on this yet. Bravo

I’m going to let this be, because I’m actually very weak on military history. There’s a debate to be had here, but I’m not the best person to do it.

Sorry about all this, really. My initial post was just because I was irritated with John S.'s “died for nothing” business which seemed flippant and unfair.

“Look, if you’re willing to lob the ol’ “The US is an unjust, unsuccessful warrior nation” diatribe out there you need to be willing to back it up.”
I don’t think that’s true as a general rule. Sorry for the ducking manoeuver but the fact is, a number of you folks have a much better command of the history than I do, and it’s really the kind of subject where I can’t hold my own. Sometimes you have to fold.

I probably shouldn’t have brought up “unjust, unsuccessful wars,” except that I thought it was pretty commonly accepted that not everything we’ve done has been golden – and even you made some examples of “debatably” unjust or unsuccessful conflicts.