AI-Jane Political, And Economic Forums

Full Version: Afghanistan
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Afghanistan bomb attacks kill twenty-one US soldiers in 48 hours -- looks like the natives are smelling the blood of withdrawal...
OR we're moving out into Indian territory more,this happened in all of 2007 in Iraq. More contact,more deaths on each side.
Funny comments about the recent Stratfor's article can be found on Spengler's forum.
That is sort of a hilarious debate.

Believe me,that Taliban is much more likely to enjoy a boy's tail than the Brits with wigs on based on my listening to every Afghan vet I have spoken to.

I really do not share the view that a gay guy makes lesser of a soldier in all honesty.

I just question what would happen if it is legalized as it is in the UK on straight recruiting. Might cause a dramatic loss of Army and Marine numbers. Might not,war is the wrong time to find out.

I share Stratfor's view of the conflict and since I am so pessimistic about the ability of that culture to repeat what Iraq did,I think we can't win.
I don't want to switch this to gays, but yes, I suppose Ernst Roehm was a fine soldier. How much good he did for the army is another issue.

On Taliban: ATM the invaders have 30k more troops than the Soviets had, and the natives do not have any serious external backers. But they seem to be doing just as well as during the Soviet invasion. While it is impossible to attribute this to gays, I wonder if the Afghanistan problem is indicative of the general decline of the Western civilization.

Quote:I share Stratfor's view of the conflict and since I am so pessimistic about the ability of that culture to repeat what Iraq did

I don't know what Iraq did.... suppress a minority Sunni uprising primarily by paying off Sunni chieftains? This is temporary, and Sunni's are not the problem anyway.

the article in question -- enjoy. Wink1
MV,

No one has suppressed the Afghans that I ever read of.

Alexander failed to do more than tactically win and that barely. I don't think failure there has anything to do with western civ myself.

In order to win,we have to kill all of them plus all of their friends in Waziristan and we are not going to do that. We could,but,we won't and there has never been a time in our culture when we would have either.

We didn't handle the Indians like that and we won't people 5000 miles away.

I see Iraq other than you,the Sunnis were largely our problem and while we rented them,the timeframe gave the non terrorists time to grow up.

Most policy makers don't see the shia like you do and minimizing their abilities wasn't a US policy goal. Minimizing the Sadr's part was and the Sunni revolutionaries was our goal.

I think we achieved that. Sunnis return to 2007 and they'll all die. Simple as that,there will be no mercy given by the shia and we're out of the fight.

The only logic I know of to stay in Afghanistan is it's better to let Afghans suffer our fight with jihadis than our wives and kids. Might be good logic if there are as many as I suspect there are.
Palladin Wrote:I see Iraq other than you,the Sunnis were largely our problem and while we rented them,the timeframe gave the non terrorists time to grow up.

Suppressing Sunnis turns Iraq into Iran's playground... not the desirable outcome... so we not just suppressed Sunnis, we also paid them and armed them. This weaponry may come to use once the civil war resumes in a big way.

Whatever the outcome is, it is not as beneficial to the US as simply keeping Saddam would have been.

As for Sadr, no reasons to think he is more pre-Iranian devil than other Shia players.
MV,

I don't disagree with this logic. But,"keeping Saddam" was not possible once we crossed the LOD.

My response was based on the fact we already had crossed the LOD.

I wish we never had.

I recall thinking back in 03,"why not make a deal with Saddam to run all Arabia EX Jordan"?

I wouldn't have opposed such an arrangement.
LOD = ?
Line of Departure. Military term.
Got you. I thought LD was the usual abbr.

Anyway, I agree: once we invaded Iraq, good options were lacking. (and that Bush & co did not bother to realize this goes to show that incompetence is not limited to one party).
Worse than Bush who believed in this as good even if mistaken,what about the slugs that voted to go to war who never believed in it at all? Like Kerry and that Republican clown from Nebraska(can't recall his name)?



These soldiers go join up as brave,naive youngsters(generally 17 and HS juniors) thinking it is at least to protect their people's freedom and we use them like menstrual rags sometimes.

Man I'd hate to try and sleep if I sent those kids to war and I didn't even think it was appropriate. Heck,I'd probably have a nervous breakdown if I did believe in it and saw all these wounded personally.

I give Bush great credit there,all along he and his wife spent countless hours at Walter Reed praying with soldiers and comforting them best they could and most leaders wouldn't have.
Palladin Wrote:I give Bush great credit there,all along he and his wife spent countless hours at Walter Reed praying with soldiers and comforting them best they could and most leaders wouldn't have.

No, he only said he did. Bush went into some motions to show that his psychology is human... but this is what expected from Republicans.

As for the congressional creeps... of course. I think you meant Lugar? Well, don't forget our registered hawk McSwine....he was quite loud too...

The solution to the problem is simple... a bipartisan hanging. Wink1
G-d Damned acronyms, is all I can say about that. :evil:
John L Wrote:G-d Damned acronyms, is all I can say about that. :evil:
Hey, these were military acronyms, you are supposed to know them by heart!
MV,

Not Lugar. He's from Indiana.

Chuck Hagel of Nebraska,I looked it up. This clown acted like Kerry and endorses democrats for office.
mv Wrote:my bad :oops: Hagel is still around -- check this.

This is all about the Ruling Class, and their support for each other, regardless the party. If anyone ever doubted this concept, take the time and read the article. It's all there for the reader to absorb.

These Elitists absolutely have to be expunged from the ranks of both parties, if we are to regain our country, with any resemblance to what the Founders intended for us. They have to go, even if they need to follow a cement block affixed to their ankle, as they are pitched from a boat.
Right now,polls indicate this endorsement was worth 2 pieces of heavily used toilet paper so far.
John L Wrote:This is all about the Ruling Class, and their support for each other, regardless the party. If anyone ever doubted take the time and read the article. It's all there for the reader to absorb.

These Elitists absolutely have to be expunged from the ranks of both parties, if we are to regain our country, with any resemblance to what the Founders intended for us. They have to go, even if they need to follow a cement block affixed to their ankle, as they are pitched from a boat.
Mr. Hagel is sacrificing his integrity and principles for his career, endorsing a Democrat in order to secure a position in Obama's government. I feel this is a very common practice in the United States, as there is absolutely no party loyalty among politicians. This would simply not be possible in Canada's parliamentary system or in many European countries where politicians are committed to a single party.
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7