Time to Get Out of Afghanistan

What is the exit strategy for Afghanistan?

What is the mission of our troops there?

How does he measure victory in Afghanistan?

Will he ever capture bin Laden?

Why did Gibbs refer to the "War on Terror" recently when 0by said it's over?
 
Well it seems to me the Red Army didn't have much luck there. What makes us think we will? It is that mountainous rugged terrain that they know like the back of their hand and they definitely have the advantage. Just like Vietnam also is the fact that if enough rebels want to overthrow the government, no amount of cost or troops or bloodshed can stop the inevitable. It is my opinion that we ought to protect out actual interests there and otherwise let them alone to their own devices.
 
I'm sure John Cena has a plan. What the hell is that thing where he puts his elbow in his hand and waves his hand like a moron? I wouldn't have any idea who he is at all if it wasn't for watching SVU reruns on USA network and seeing the ads.
 
randomJACKASS said:
Well it seems to me the Red Army didn't have much luck there. What makes us think we will?
Click to expand...

Because we're not the Soviets.

As for the rest of your drivel, if the left quits the anti-war media campaign, thus creating a war-weary populace, & the pols get out of the way, we'd have beat their ass then (won all the battles but "lost the war") & we can do it now.
 
Gonz said:
Because we're not the Soviets.

As for the rest of your drivel, if the left quits the anti-war media campaign, thus creating a war-weary populace, & the pols get out of the way, we'd have beat their ass then (won all the battles but "lost the war") & we can do it now.
Click to expand...

Military and foreign affairs expert Gonz has spoken!
 
randomJACKASS said:
Well it seems to me the Red Army didn't have much luck there. What makes us think we will? It is that mountainous rugged terrain that they know like the back of their hand and they definitely have the advantage. Just like Vietnam also is the fact that if enough rebels want to overthrow the government, no amount of cost or troops or bloodshed can stop the inevitable. It is my opinion that we ought to protect out actual interests there and otherwise let them alone to their own devices.
Click to expand...
Actually, there are many reasons why the military of the USSR lost and quit their campaign in Afghanistan, but we are not waging the same war they did.

As for winning or losing, I would like to believe that Afghans want independence from the tight fist of the Taliban. Afghans have a beautiful history and I'd like to see them have more power over their lives. But this is their decision to make, not ours.
 
well our puppet there did. he speaks for the people, right? i mean, golly, they want to become sorta more like us right.

or maybe they don't. maybe, as real "conservatives" they wanna live like their ancestors 1000 years ago did. and it's their choice, right?
 
You guys are freaking hilarious. This conflict is an indirect result of a string of broken promises made back in the Reagan administration. When the Soviets were here, we promised the groups fighting them that we, as a nation, would stand by them when the fight was over to help them get back on their feet. As soon as their war was over, we balked at the cost of rebuilding their damaged infrastructure, and renegged on every deal we had made. Now here we are, 20 years later, fighting the very people we promised to help, and what do I see? Calls to abandon this country...yet again. Anybody else see a pattern here?

BTW...the cost of rebuilding their infrastructure starting 20 years ago would have cost less than half of what we're spending here today.
 
Gato_Solo said:
You guys are freaking hilarious. This conflict is an indirect result of a string of broken promises made back in the Reagan administration. When the Soviets were here, we promised the groups fighting them that we, as a nation, would stand by them when the fight was over to help them get back on their feet. As soon as their war was over, we balked at the cost of rebuilding their damaged infrastructure, and renegged on every deal we had made. Now here we are, 20 years later, fighting the very people we promised to help, and what do I see? Calls to abandon this country...yet again. Anybody else see a pattern here?

BTW...the cost of rebuilding their infrastructure starting 20 years ago would have cost less than half of what we're spending here today.
Click to expand...

it's amazing how you can consistently swoop in with this kind of bigger-context wisdom, put your finger on the exact proximate cause, and laugh at the foolish squabbling little ones.
 
Gato_Solo said:
You guys are freaking hilarious. This conflict is an indirect result of a string of broken promises made back in the Reagan administration. When the Soviets were here, we promised the groups fighting them that we, as a nation, would stand by them when the fight was over to help them get back on their feet. As soon as their war was over, we balked at the cost of rebuilding their damaged infrastructure, and renegged on every deal we had made. Now here we are, 20 years later, fighting the very people we promised to help, and what do I see? Calls to abandon this country...yet again. Anybody else see a pattern here?

BTW...the cost of rebuilding their infrastructure starting 20 years ago would have cost less than half of what we're spending here today.
Click to expand...
Yep. You are right about where the Taliban got their power and partly why we are fighting them today. Charlie Wilson (Dem-TX) was Afghanistan's biggest advocate here in the US.

(Not sure why you are arguing that point, though.. I don't see anyone saying that our broken promises under Regan didn't cause these events.)

EDIT: sorry, Gato... didn't see minkey's reply below.
 
As I said before, nobody here condescends as often and as well as Gato.

What Gato seems to refuse to even consider (or at least to talk about here) is that the US has zero altruism anymore. Hasn't in years, and it supported the Taliban because it was, at the time, in our selfish knee jerk view, in our best interest, regardless of how that effects Afghanis. We do not overthrow any government, including Iraq because of what is best for them, it is always about what we perceive as best for us. Any notion of saving them from tyranny is just justification after the fact. Sometimes it is even true that we do improve that nation's fortunes, but the fact is our leaders could not care less about that.
 
Exactly- we are not there to "build a nation" or even paint their thumbs blue.
We are to kick ass and make an example- don't mess with us again!
Well, "we" aren't over there, but other people are.
 
randomJACKASS said:
We do not overthrow any government, including Iraq because of what is best for them, it is always about what we perceive as best for us. Any notion of saving them from tyranny is just justification after the fact. Sometimes it is even true that we do improve that nation's fortunes, but the fact is our leaders could not care less about that.
Click to expand...

Not what's best for us, what's best for the ruling class. If you don't believe there's a ruling class, I suggest you look again.
 
but now apparently we're going to throw a shitload of tax dollars at "nation building."

golly, i can't wait til al quada simply up and moves the remainder of their guys to sudan or some other part of africa. then we'll just nation build all over that fucking continent.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top