The guy has the wardrobe, though. Who wears a cape except a few superheroes and Darth Vader?
Posted on 10/18/2006 8:34:39 PM PDT by neverdem
but rather because the people haven't got the patience for it.
Now there you may be on to something. This is where the likes of you and I come into the picture. Telling people what is really going on with Iraq. One thing I do is print out articles and leave them laying around for anyone one to read. I've had a number of people come up and tell my "I didn't know that" (whatever "that" happens to be).
There is only one reason that someone would believe this tripe -- they do not regulary read Strategy Page (http:\\www.strategypage.com).
The most telling line in the article is when it talks about "the Taliban's improved military performance." Bull. The only thing that the Taliban has improved is their ability to get their people killed: 2000+ dead, just this summer.
They did that with a 300 to 1 exchange rate, even if you count Afghan soldiers into the total. They are not even successful at attacking civilians.
Drat. I made the links, but I forgot to ping you.
From time to time, I’ll ping on noteworthy articles about politics, foreign and military affairs. FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
Gee how come the people on the ground asked for HUNDREDS, not THOUSANDS, of troops like this author screams?
NATO chief urges more troops for fighting Taliban in Afghanistan
Its spiritual bondage.
Some people practice sexual bondage. Jihadists do the same thing in a different mentality.
fine.
my only point is - don't say (not you) that this is "just a few snipers and car bombers". if that's all it was, then we could leave, since we can't leave, its more then that.
its not about a timetable - its about seeing a progression, a path to closing it out. take iraq for example, are we going to do anything there different tomorrow, that we didn't do today, to make things better? this "major operation" to secure baghdad has failed, yet we just keep doing the same thing day after day and expecting a different outcome.
post 19 is right on - unless the bases of operation in Pakistan are attacked with air power, we won't be able to close this out.
" we have poured foreign aid in, we have begged for reconciliation, hosted elections, built schools and hospitals, and the jihadists would prefer muslim misery to westernized joy."
Sooner or later the leaders of our fair country need to say "sorry, we're busy" when misery comes knocking at these ungrateful nations' doors...Earthquakes, tsunamis, genocides, pestilence, etc., these places of violence and desperation might have to burn themselves out.
No more "we are the world" fundraisers, no more "we love you" fests....these countries are akin to termite nests under our back steps. Containment and defensive postures might be all we can pursue until they produce some rational leaders.
Give Karsai and areas of tranquility some protection and civilization and hope, and make the outsiders so wanting that they will try to sneak into the light. And hope they aren't wearing explosives.
We need to start busting the heroin dealers, let them grow it, pay the locals, and than swoop in and take down the booty and the dealers.
Please,take some time and learn about the Vietnam War and the NVA stratagy. The same thing is going on today. Prolong the war till America quits. The political enemies of the US President will slant the news, a few American troops will cross a line, the "world will protest" Americans will forget why we are at war, soldiers will die, the President and/or his supports lose an election and we end the war by leaving. Neat deal.
The problem is that the reason we went to war in the first place is still there. Millions died or are still imprisioned in Southeast Asia. Iraq will become the headquarters for terrorism. And with their victory over us, and the oil, they will continue to threaten the world.
yes, but there is also another lesson of Vietnam - the US has to fight to win. that's the missing piece in this, 20% of the americans who "oppose the iraq war" are republicans who want us to either fight to win, or leave. when they don't see the "fight to win" part being executed, they sour on it.
If we take what you have written at face value (and I do), then what must be done if we are to ultimately defeat them?
- John
Thanks for the ping!
"He said the Russian authorities also assured of their cooperation in training, equipping and strengthening of Afghan police and military."
These are the same Cut and Run traitors calling for withdrawl from Iraq. Now they want to cut and run from Afghanistan as well. They even want to cut and run from South Korea, so they won't be able to stop North Korea when they invade the South.
I believe they are trying to make a warning about Afghanistan? How do you draw any of those unrelated conclusions?
"You don't fight a guerrilla war the same way you fight a conventional war."
I just finished reading Tom Clancy's "Shadow Warriors", a factual study of Special Forces troups and actions. He points out that the "Big Army" generally has a low opinion of SF and does not use them well. Panama and the seizure of Noriega was a brilliant exception. Unfortunately, both Iraq and Afghanistan are influenced too much by the Big Army viewpoint, which is favored by Rumsfeld.
My son, who just came back from 8 months in SF in Afghanistan was totally frustrated by the inadequate utilization of SF while he was there. Unfortunately, I do not see this changing with Rumsfeld in charge unless he changes his viewpoint.
Clancey's book has an excellent chapter on the "Lebanon Tragedy". Well worth reading if that is an area of your interest. It clearly describes the various groups in the conflict, and the mistakes Israel made leading up to the present mess.
Unfortunately, both Iraq and Afghanistan are influenced too much by the Big Army viewpoint, which is favored by Rumsfeld. "
Uh, you have this backward. Rumsfeld has pushed 'transformation' on the Big Army types since 2001, and they pushed back ... partly in the MSM, which is a hidden agenda reason for a lot of the negative press Rumsfeld gets.
Remember, Rumsfeld approved the Franks Afghan operation, which was mostly an SF operation with no boots on ground practically. And it worked. We toppled the taliban in 7 weeks.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.