OK, so what should our response to 9/11/01 have been? Nuclear strikes? Air campaign a la Kosovo? Economic sanctions? Nothing at all?
I think we should get out, and let them duke it all out themselves, if there’s going to be killings.
They're going to come after us again. It's only a matter of time.
Our soldiers are our great assets. Both as a country and to their families.
They are. Service members are trained to do a particular job, though. You sound like you want to spend a lot of money on a military we never use. That's not going to work. There has to a purpose for the expenditure, otherwise it'll evaporate completely.
And again, I question the grande dames of the Pentagon that are allowing this.
COIN is very complex. Afghanistan is very complex. There really is no in-between: you either pursue annihilation, or you try to rebuild the nation in your image while slapping down bad guys as you find them. The latter is very, very difficult and time-consuming. Involving the NATO construct has made it even worse, but that's just how it is over there, and we can thank Bush for it.
And I do recognize a keyboard commando when I see one.
I'm pretty sure you have no idea what that term means.
“OK, so what should our response to 9/11/01 have been? Nuclear strikes? Air campaign a la Kosovo? Economic sanctions? Nothing at all?”
We should’ve done what we did. Go to Afghanistan after Osama, clean the terrorists out, negotiate a new government. And leave a few troops there to protect until a new government stabilizes. Which is what President Bush did. He took the soldiers out of the mountains and took them to the open deserts to fight them in Iraq since they were decamping through southern Afghanistan, across Iran, and into Iraq. How many did we take out in the open deserts in Iraq?
“They’re going to come after us again. It’s only a matter of time.”
Of course they are. They’re coming after us now. We have a weak-assed president who not only favors them, but has allowed them to re-strength because they know he won’t touch them. Not only in Afghanistan, but now in Iraq as well. How many actual terrorists have been taken out on this administration’s watch? Osama and 6,7, maybe 9? And we’re spending money like crazy? At the very least when President Bush was fighting this war we took 20-30,000 of the bastards out and made them stop and think about attacking us again. In fact, Osama and his collaborators had to go underground and hide out. And it’s still policies Bush put in place that are finding them while Obama spikes the ball fooling people into thinking he’s actually doing something.
“They are. Service members are trained to do a particular job, though. You sound like you want to spend a lot of money on a military we never use. That’s not going to work. There has to a purpose for the expenditure, otherwise it’ll evaporate completely.”
Apparently, you’re not old enough to remember one of our greatest presidents and saw him speak to and act on ‘peace through strength’. Armed us to the teeth and pointed them at the bad guys...said, do you want to talk peace now? And the old Soviets took the wall down, didn’t they? Not a shot fired. He also almost shot a missile up Gaddafi’s behind and settled him down nicely, didn’t he? ‘Peace through strength.’ A strong military and defense is always ‘worth it.’ And it should also be the PRIMARY function of the federal government. Now, even the old Soviets are rattling their cages at this weak-assed Islamofascist president.
“COIN is very complex. Afghanistan is very complex. There really is no in-between: you either pursue annihilation, or you try to rebuild the nation in your image while slapping down bad guys as you find them. The latter is very, very difficult and time-consuming. Involving the NATO construct has made it even worse, but that’s just how it is over there, and we can thank Bush for it.”
You’re trying to make it complex so as to keyboard warrior me. My point still is, we’re not trying to annihilate them and the ROE basically says you can’t do much slapping them down or even around. Especially since they hide out among the ‘oh so innocent’ citizens (sympathizers) and one might get hurted. We’re pussy-footing around over there training the next round of terrorists to our military strength on the taxpayers dime, not the Afghani’s dime. And the new government being established is still Islamofascism, nothings going to change. I have a nephew who did two tours in Afghanistan on training missions. They can’t turn their backs on them. Neither the trainees, or their families. After they’re trained, they can’t send them out on missions without escort. As soon as they do, they disappear into the mountains, weapons included. And on their way out, as it stands now, they off a few of our escorts or trainers as they hie out! You can’t explain how this is a win/win situation. I know you can’t figure out why I question the grand dames at the Pentagon. Yet they seem not to learn anything from the ten-year fiasco that Russia accomplished there. Do you even know who NATO is, and who leads it?
Now I’ve stated my opinion, it’s not going to change. And I’m done with this conversation we’re having. I don’t want and will not answer another of your spiels of keyboard warrioring. I see a bigger picture of this situation through the study of societies for the many many years. That doesn’t mean I’m a genius, it just means I’m looking. I realize I’m not one of the warriors fighting it, but there is a MUCH bigger picture here than just military operations.
God bless our soldiers. They’re certainly ‘worth it’ whether they’re actually fighting or not. They’re still standing between me and the bad guys from sea to shining sea!!! They are ever vigilant.