Dems should be very happy with Afghanistan policy

[nodoginnafight]

Sheesh. I was talking about the Warlords. You know the ones that helped you over throw the Talliban?

So you are now saying that the warlords chose the Taliban because we were there blowing stuff up?

The Taliban was chosen BEFORE we got over there.

Quote:

They chose the Talliban in the first place. Mostly because there was an invading army in their country running around and blowing shit up.
Sound familiar?

NOPE - the Taliban was in control of their government BEFORE we got there.


What is it you are trying to say about the warlords and the Taliban?

 

[nodoginnafight]

None of that changes the fact that blowing shit up is not the way to win this war.

On that I agree with you. Blowing up SOME stuff helps us meet our objectives but it is not the only part of the formula.

 

[geauxtohell]

Skeptical Dems resign themselves to Obama war plan - Yahoo! News

But instead, they have to "resign" themselves to the plan set in motion.

Seems like they win the battle, so to speak, as our brilliant military minds have concluded that we will tell them when we're coming, how many are coming and when they will be leaving.

Why don't we just NOT go? What good is it doing us to give the enemy ALL the information they need to make their plans to defeat the infidels?

Obama has killed no birds with one stone. He got support from the right for sending troops and he got support from the left for bringing them home in a year and half. By the way, a year and a half is not nearly enough time to beat back the taliban, much less teach the Afghans how to protect themselves.

But it was a very well delivered speech. You can at least credit the silver tongued master for his ability to read well.

I just wish it made sense.

I am not. I don't think more troops are the answer. My only relief is knowing that Petreaus is over seeing this. I think he's a sharp man and knows how to approach this.

Other than that, I see more troops in Afghanistan as the same manuever of putting more troops in Iraq.

I move to make the American people think we are doing something proactive to change matters.

In reality, the local people in the country will determine if and when the violence stops. In Iraq, there was all that oil money to fight over. Once they got that all hashed out among the fat wallet crowd, surprise, surprise, the violence dropped off drastically.

In Afghanistan there is no economy.

We are screwed.

We should have been in and out in four years with maximal effort focused on the country. I have no idea why we decided to half ass a war in the "graveyard of super-powers", but I long ago stopped trying to apply logic to the Bush Administration's foreign policy.

I don't know what we can do at this point. Our shelf life is expired. The ISI-D is going to continue to protect their warlords. Direct combat has always been futile there.

It really, to me, just seems like a band aide that we are trying to apply to a massive bleed.

 

[geauxtohell]

It's the same story from the Democrats. Nothing has changed. We must set a schedule and we must let the entire world know what it is. And to hell with it if the enemy knows all our plans. It's only fair after all.

I've never been so glad to say I am US Army RETIRED.

And I was never so glad to resign my commission under that idiot Bush.

Works both ways.

 

[geauxtohell]

I love the hyperbole used by the OP and Ollie. So, Obama has given AQ and the Taliban ALL of our plans?
What are they - beyond the obvious, number of troops and a tentative date to begin removal? Both of which, btw, are not set in stone.
You guys crack me up. Or maybe I'm all wrong. Did both of you attend a military academy and war college? Please accept my apology which I will tender after reading your CV's and more detail on everything that will be done in Afghanistan.

Actually, giving a concrete re-deployment date is smart. The common screw up with Iraq and Afghanistan is looking at them through the lens of a conventional war. They are not. There is no clear end state. We could literally lager in both countries and slow bleed forever. Eventually you have to cut the cord and go.

Letting the Afghans know that we are not going to be there forever counters one of the enemies strongest propaganda lines; that we are there as conquerors and will be there forever.

If the "we can't tell them we are leaving, it's a tactical blunder!" talking point had any traction, why did things get better in Iraq as soon as we gave a timeline for withdrawal?

Why have things not gotten worse?

BTW; most officers in the Army do not attend military academies and only senior officers go to the war college.

 

[geauxtohell]

Do people really think that increasing our presence in the region will make them less inclined to kill Americans?

No - the objective right now is NOT to get them to stop shooting at us. Right NOW the objective is to kill a whole lot more of them than they kill of us so they will think long and hard about sheltering terrorist organizations in the future.

And THAT is what will save American lives.

By killing their families, occupying their country, and making them hate us?

That's like the Romans sending their armies to suppress a rebellion onto to find that their actions spark revolts in the rest of Gaul.

You idiots are going to get us all killed someday.

But eventually the Romans conquered Gaul.

Just making the point for historical accuracy.

This is nothing like that. Especially since we've long given up on "destroying" the Taliban.

 

[geauxtohell]

So, how do we plan to indocrinate all the children so they grow up as loya Westerners and lover of the USA?

Or are we just going to pretend that the military alone can sway the hearts of the people and make them love us- and then act surprised the next time someone kills a bunch of us?

You're worrying about changing the hearts of people who didn't support Talibalqueda (or whatever we're fighting now)in the firsty place. The elements that want us dead, you're simply giving more reason.

Given your hammer and sickles, I find your concern about the Afghan people a little bit amusing.

Read "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" to find out about all the goodness the Soviet Union did in Afghanistan.

If you think Afghans hate Americans, ask them about the soviets.

They really fucking hate soviets. A close second is paks.

One of my funnier moments was getting introduced to a local village champion who had "killed more Russians than Cheranobyl".

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Nope - we deposed their last government because they sheltered the 9/11 criminals. Nuff said.

Yet Iran stands... and what's your excuse for Iraq?

 

[☭proletarian☭]

NOPE - the Taliban was in control of their government BEFORE we got there.

Sheesh. I was talking about the Warlords. You know the ones that helped you over throw the Talliban?

I was thinking of the Russians

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Sheesh. I was talking about the Warlords. You know the ones that helped you over throw the Talliban?

So you are now saying that the warlords chose the Taliban because we were there blowing stuff up?

The Taliban was chosen BEFORE we got over there.

you're really slow, aren't you?

 

[blu]

It's the same story from the Democrats. Nothing has changed. We must set a schedule and we must let the entire world know what it is. And to hell with it if the enemy knows all our plans. It's only fair after all.

I've never been so glad to say I am US Army RETIRED.

the army feels the same about you

 

[nodoginnafight]

Letting the Afghans know that we are not going to be there forever counters one of the enemies strongest propaganda lines; that we are there as conquerors and will be there forever

I agree - I think there is also the added benefit of lighting a fire under the Afghan gov't. to get their stuff in order ASAP because we aren't going to prop them up indefinitely.

It also reassures our allies that we aren't trying to drag them into a never-ending quagmire.

 

[nodoginnafight]

Sheesh. I was talking about the Warlords. You know the ones that helped you over throw the Talliban?

So you are now saying that the warlords chose the Taliban because we were there blowing stuff up?

The Taliban was chosen BEFORE we got over there.

you're really slow, aren't you?

Maybe - but I obviously don't get what Alvin was trying to say.

 

[Alvin]

So you are now saying that the warlords chose the Taliban because we were there blowing stuff up?

The Taliban was chosen BEFORE we got over there.

Quote:

They chose the Talliban in the first place. Mostly because there was an invading army in their country running around and blowing shit up.
Sound familiar?

NOPE - the Taliban was in control of their government BEFORE we got there.


What is it you are trying to say about the warlords and the Taliban?

Ok, Quick and dirty history lesson:
The Mujahideen = Talliban + Warlords + Foreign fighters. AKA the principal resistance to Soviet occupation.
The Talliban = Religious sect that cropped up in Pakistan in the 80's, supposedly in the refugee camps just over the border from Pakistan.
The Warlords = Drug barons = Northern Alliance.

Right after the Russians pulled out, the Mujahideen Warlords fought each other for power in the Afghan civil war. Lots of stuff getting blown up. The Afghanis turned to the Talliban to end the corruption and violence because they promised stability.
The Talliban came to power through a sort of revolution, but the Warlords didn't like that. You see The Talliban banned them from growing opium (their main cash crop and source of wealth) So they banded together again and formed the Northern Alliance.

Who do you think the Afghani resistance to the Talliban was? And why were they resisting?

 

[nodoginnafight]

So you are now saying that the warlords chose the Taliban because we were there blowing stuff up?

The Taliban was chosen BEFORE we got over there.

Quote:

They chose the Talliban in the first place. Mostly because there was an invading army in their country running around and blowing shit up.
Sound familiar?

NOPE - the Taliban was in control of their government BEFORE we got there.


What is it you are trying to say about the warlords and the Taliban?

Ok, Quick and dirty history lesson:
The Mujahideen = Talliban + Warlords + Foreign fighters.
The Talliban = Religious sect that cropped up in Pakistan in the 80's
The Warlords = Drug barons = Northern Alliance.

Right after the Russians pulled out, the Mujahideen Warlords fought each other for power in the Afghan civil war. Lots of stuff getting blown up. The Afghanis turned to the Talliban to end the corruption and violence.
The Talliban came to power through a sort of revolution, but the Warlords didn't like that. You see The Talliban banned them from growing opium (their main cash crop and source of wealth) So they banded together again and formed the Northern Alliance.

Who do you think the Afghani resistance to the Talliban was? And why were they resisting?

Thank you for clarrifying just how far back into history you were going. I am familiar with the history, I just didn't realize how far back you were going - I understand your points much better. I still disagree with with a couple of your derivatives and most of the information coming out of Afghanistan claims the opium trade is funding the Taliban ...

... but nothing you said so far reputiates the point that going after terrorists and those who shelter them is not a legitimate military exercise.

I rarely advocate war - the vast majority of them are pointless and settle nothing. But there are a few, rare occassions when it is the necessary thing to do. In the very begining, this was one of those times. Not Iraq, but AFGHANISTAN - the capture or confirmed death of as much of Al Qaida as we can lay our hands on and OBL. AND justice for those who harbored and sheltered them.

On one of the other points that I believe you are trying to make, (depending upon how historical your other posts are) that you cannot defeat terrorism until you understand how a terrorist is made (and NOT just focus on how a terrorist is killed) I agree with.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

So, how do we plan to indocrinate all the children so they grow up as loya Westerners and lover of the USA?

Or are we just going to pretend that the military alone can sway the hearts of the people and make them love us- and then act surprised the next time someone kills a bunch of us?

You're worrying about changing the hearts of people who didn't support Talibalqueda (or whatever we're fighting now)in the firsty place. The elements that want us dead, you're simply giving more reason.

Given your hammer and sickles, I find your concern about the Afghan people a little bit amusing.

Read "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" to find out about all the goodness the Soviet Union did in Afghanistan.

If you think Afghans hate Americans, ask them about the soviets.

They really fucking hate soviets. A close second is paks.

One of my funnier moments was getting introduced to a local village champion who had "killed more Russians than Cheranobyl".

The soviets have nothing to do with socialism

 

[geauxtohell]

So you are now saying that the warlords chose the Taliban because we were there blowing stuff up?

The Taliban was chosen BEFORE we got over there.

Quote:
NOPE - the Taliban was in control of their government BEFORE we got there.


What is it you are trying to say about the warlords and the Taliban?

Ok, Quick and dirty history lesson:
The Mujahideen = Talliban + Warlords + Foreign fighters.
The Talliban = Religious sect that cropped up in Pakistan in the 80's
The Warlords = Drug barons = Northern Alliance.

Right after the Russians pulled out, the Mujahideen Warlords fought each other for power in the Afghan civil war. Lots of stuff getting blown up. The Afghanis turned to the Talliban to end the corruption and violence.
The Talliban came to power through a sort of revolution, but the Warlords didn't like that. You see The Talliban banned them from growing opium (their main cash crop and source of wealth) So they banded together again and formed the Northern Alliance.

Who do you think the Afghani resistance to the Talliban was? And why were they resisting?

Thank you for clarrifying just how far back into history you were going. I understand your points much better. I still disagree with with a couple of your derivatives and most of the information coming out of Afghanistan claims the opium trade is funding the Taliban ... but nothing you said so far reputiates the point that going after terrorists and those who shelter them is not a legitimate military exercise.

I rarely advocate war - the vast majority of them are pointless and settle nothing. But there are a few, rare occassions when it is the necessary thing to do. In the very begining, this was one of those times. Not Iraq, but AFGHANISTAN - the capture or confirmed death of as much of Al Qaida as we can lay our hands on and OBL. AND justice for those who harbored and sheltered them.

On one of the other points that I believe you are trying to make, that you cannot defeat terrorism until you understand how a terrorist is made (and NOT just focus on how a terrorist is killed) I agree with.

I wouldn't say the Taliban were inherent to the Mujhadeen. The Taliban became prominent after Afghanistan fell.

I would lump the Muj into the Pashtuns and non-pashtuns (in the North).

We supported the Pashtuns. After we pulled out, there was a battle between the two groups of Muh over control.

The Pashtuns grabbed the Taliban, destroyed Kabul, and took control. The rest is history. We supported the wrong freedom fighters.

I also think it's a misnomer to say that the drug lords were the major opposition to the Taliban. The Taliban started in the Helmand province. The Helmand province is where most of the poppy crop in Afghanistan comes from.

The non-Pashtun drug lords were from the North, where little drugs are cultivated.

 

[geauxtohell]

So, how do we plan to indocrinate all the children so they grow up as loya Westerners and lover of the USA?

Or are we just going to pretend that the military alone can sway the hearts of the people and make them love us- and then act surprised the next time someone kills a bunch of us?

You're worrying about changing the hearts of people who didn't support Talibalqueda (or whatever we're fighting now)in the firsty place. The elements that want us dead, you're simply giving more reason.

Given your hammer and sickles, I find your concern about the Afghan people a little bit amusing.

Read "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" to find out about all the goodness the Soviet Union did in Afghanistan.

If you think Afghans hate Americans, ask them about the soviets.

They really fucking hate soviets. A close second is paks.

One of my funnier moments was getting introduced to a local village champion who had "killed more Russians than Cheranobyl".

The soviets have nothing to do with socialism

So you are a socialist? Your symbolism is confusing me.

Either way, I find it ironic that you are concerned about the plight of the Afghan people while flying the hammer and sickle, the symbol of the soviets.

 

[☭proletarian☭]

Given your hammer and sickles, I find your concern about the Afghan people a little bit amusing.

Read "The Bear Went Over The Mountain" to find out about all the goodness the Soviet Union did in Afghanistan.

If you think Afghans hate Americans, ask them about the soviets.

They really fucking hate soviets. A close second is paks.

One of my funnier moments was getting introduced to a local village champion who had "killed more Russians than Cheranobyl".

The soviets have nothing to do with socialism

So you are a socialist? Your symbolism is confusing me.

Either way, I find it ironic that you are concerned about the plight of the Afghan people while flying the hammer and sickle, the symbol of the soviets.

Like the Red Star, the H&S is used much more widely nowadays by many communist and socialist persons and entities. It represents the union of different aspects of the working class.

 

[geauxtohell]

The soviets have nothing to do with socialism

So you are a socialist? Your symbolism is confusing me.

Either way, I find it ironic that you are concerned about the plight of the Afghan people while flying the hammer and sickle, the symbol of the soviets.

Like the Red Star, the H&S is used much more widely nowadays by many communist and socialist persons and entities. It represents the union of different aspects of the working class.

Okay fine.

When it was flown over Afghanistan, it represented the whole sale slaughter of innocents, rape, destruction of agricultural resources and starvation of the working class.