Taliban in Control of 54% of Afganistan

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by DiogenesDog, Nov 21, 2007.

  1. DiogenesDog
    Offline

    DiogenesDog Zen Bonobo

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    186
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Wady-Peytona Sector
    Ratings:
    +21
    How can this possibly be? Was all that has gone before a charade? Did we not shoot or bomb enough mud huts, cave entrances, or did we not kill enough innocent people.

    Was it something I said? Was it the Democrats not caving in to the W_administration sufficiently? Did the troops in the field not perform to their utmost ability?

    In the face of the best the west had in its armament and tactical locker to bring to force against the political entity called Taliban, Taliban has survived, flourished and is occupying the heartland of Afghanistan unopposed. I do not believe that evil is the cause for their success from inside their ranks. The evil is outside in the way and means of forces opposing such a paternalistic and vulnerable martial group. Errors are being made every day by the west. The guard is down because the political prosecution of this war is being directed by a narrow minded and corporate mentality that has allowed corrupt business practices to become the rule. They will have their wealth at no cost to themselves. As long as the little people stand about with their remotes in their hands nothing but evil will come about.

    The world will continue to turn. The seasons will change. Dancing with the stars will continue to play to the proles. As a nation the US will no longer have a place in the world of honest interaction outside arms and destruction of others by surrogates.

    Many of you who now give lip service to this sad period in our lives will perhaps in the final moments of your conscious existence ask in pain, "What was I thinking?"

    I AM
     
  2. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    I've posted, here or elsewhere that while Iraq is won in the main, Afghanistan is more than a challenge. Is Petraus available?
     
  3. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Coalition troops can't occupy every square inch of ground and the Taliban just leaks back into areas that are left uncontrolled. Hardly a surprising strategy, nor an unexpected one.

    This is just more spin to try and paint Afghanistan as a failure, in the ongoing effort to ensure the US efforts as a whole are made to look like losing ones.
     
  4. jillian
    Online

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,555
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,432
    No, spin, Gunny. It's that our resources were diverted to Iraq. Bush didn't keep his eye on the prize. That's not a reflection on our military. That's a reflection on our civilian leadership.

    And for the record, it's the same stuff many of us said at the beginning. No Monday morning quarterbacking. Just that we were right.
     
  5. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    It is not that our resources were diverted to Iraq. It's more like, who cares if the Taliban occupies Afghanistan's version of the mojave desert?

    I disagree that you are "right" about whatever it is you are claiming to be right about.

    The fact is, we were never going to be allowed by the candyasses to annihilate the Taliban. That fact exacerbated by the fact they can hide in another country to regroup, and the only way to go after them is to invade another sovereign nation.

    If nothing else, I'm sure the "leadership" has gotten the message about doing THAT from the aforementioned candyasses.
     
  6. jillian
    Online

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,555
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,432
    Hogwash. Yes. There are people for whom no provocation is enough for war. And on the other side, there are people who want to go bomb A-rabs for the fun of it. Most people are more like me. And most people wanted to blow the bejeesus out of the Taliban and parade Bin Laden's head around on a stick.

    The only one who didn't want to do that was the admin. They wanted to go do what the neo-cons wanted for the five years prior.

    You had full international support for anything you did in there too. (less that little percentage of no war -- never -- types).
     
  7. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    The problem with the Taliban is their ability to run and hide in Pakistan, then come back when they are ready.

    I don't think this was a failure on the part of US or needing more troops. The problem is Afghanistan's lack of a legitimate economy. The US and Afghanistan has been shutting down the poppies, so that is a problem.
     
  8. Gunny
    Offline

    Gunny Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2004
    Messages:
    44,689
    Thanks Received:
    6,753
    Trophy Points:
    198
    Location:
    The Republic of Texas
    Ratings:
    +6,770
    Just to clarify ... I am not the administration, so let's don't personalize this by saying "you." I had nothing as I am not in the decision-making process.

    Since Afghanistan is and has been a UN coalition action, Us troop strength is not as much a factor as you wish to make it out to be.

    And just to clarify my stance there, I would NOT have opened a second front until I had completely secured the first one. I did NOT think invading Iraq when we did was the strategically correct thing to do, and I have repeatedly said so since the decision was made.

    I'm just not buying the argument that the invasion of Iraq is hampering our effort in Afghanistan. I'd say the single-most factor would be the fact that we cannot pursue into Pakistan. Troop strength has little to do with that since at no time did we have enough troops in Afghanistan to occupy every square inch of the country.
     
  9. DiogenesDog
    Offline

    DiogenesDog Zen Bonobo

    Joined:
    May 1, 2006
    Messages:
    186
    Thanks Received:
    21
    Trophy Points:
    16
    Location:
    Wady-Peytona Sector
    Ratings:
    +21
    A wise and resourceful commander never over extends his front, exposes his flanks in error or engages in two major campaigns with insufficient resources. I know you served as well as your capabilities allowed. I fear that you do not understand that you should be outraged and very vocal about those errors being committed against your Corps, your flag and your Constitution. Our seeming failures and the inability to take and hold territory has one principal sponsor and many half assed experimental architects. The supporting cast of Americans-in-the-Mall have no idea how ill they are being used.

    I attempt to avoid this

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apologetics

    I do a great deal of work in this

    www.theology.edu/theology/glossary.htm

    I have some innate abilities in this. It is why I was a shit hot communications analyst.

    This site is a gold mine of contradiction and pathology. I love it so.

    I AM
     
  10. jillian
    Online

    jillian Princess Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2006
    Messages:
    69,555
    Thanks Received:
    13,012
    Trophy Points:
    2,220
    Location:
    The Other Side of Paradise
    Ratings:
    +22,432
    First. Apologies. I didn't mean to personalize in that fashion. I was writing quickly. Am I forgiven?

    I am not alone in my view. And I think it isn't reasonable to think that our diversion of resources to Iraq had no net effect on our efforts in Afghanistan.

    http://www.govexec.com/story_page.cfm?filepath=/dailyfed/1206/121106ol.htm

    And lest you have issue with the site, you can check it out here:

    http://www.govexec.com/about.htm
     

Share This Page