Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Waiting to Lose in Afghanistan
National Review ^ | Leif Babin

Posted on 04/09/2012 4:51:05 AM PDT by nuconvert

After a decade of fighting in Afghanistan, at tremendous cost in American blood and treasure, many Americans are now asking: Why are we there? What do we have to show for our efforts? The answers are troubling: A government, under President Hamid Karzai, that is corrupt, largely incompetent, and of questionable loyalty; inept Afghan security forces that regularly turn their weapons on their American and NATO advisers; and a resurgent Taliban poised to regain control of the country after U.S. forces withdraw. Many look at these facts and conclude that the U.S. can’t win in Afghanistan and should therefore get out. But few have examined the dire consequences of losing.

-excerpt-

Many say that the American people, after ten years, are tired of the war in Afghanistan. But I believe Americans — and certainly the U.S. military — are tired of not winning. The U.S. is in dire need of a serious shift in strategy — from one that props up a corrupt and incompetent Afghan government and simply trains and equips its security forces, to one that smashes our enemies, the Taliban and al-Qaeda. America must allow U.S. combat forces, now largely restricted to defensive actions, to take the offensive, rout the enemy from safe havens in Afghanistan and the Pakistani tribal areas, radically reduce the Taliban’s military capability, and then declare victory (which, be it noted, President Obama failed to do in Iraq) and bring our troops home.

(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: afghanistan
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-52 last
To: Road Glide
I agree we will never fight a war correctly from now on. I just think we should fight them, and accept the civilian deaths that go along with war as victims of our enemy who made war necessary instead of trying to fight them in ways history has shown doesn't work. We have had military leaders from long ago warn us that trying to make war less cruel than it is will only end in a debacle which we have proven, but we only work out new ways of reforming it that cause more harm to our effort in each war, but it has had no affect on those who propagate these ridiculous strategies getting us involved in wars. We should fight our wars to win at all cost or not get involved in them to begin with.

How many people would have changed their minds about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan if they had known how bad they were going to be fought? Our military has the best troops in the world, and we dominate when it comes to weapon technology. Those wars should have been quick and devastating victories for the U.S. which they easily could have been. Our last decisive victory just happened to be against the best militaries in the world, and we were not guaranteed to win that war and didn't even have a very good military when it started. We had a will to win as a people though, and a military that learned how to fight fast while on the job after a lot of sacrifice.

Now we have no unity or resolve when it comes to wars that we couldn't lose if we had the same resolve we had in WW2. You could take the axis powers of WW2 and switch them to Iraq and Afghanistan(along with most of our other enemies), and put the same war effort into it, and it would be a footnote in history because we would have won without the worry and sacrifice that had such a profound affect on so many Americans as WW2.

If you could only see the results of our actions without any military statistics you would think our military was was tiny, outdated, and untrained because they aren't allowed to win when they could have destroyed the entire countries of Afghanistan and Iraq while taking Iraq's damn oil instead of acting like resources that we need to survive as a nation aren't worth fighting over. I think most people think fighting over oil in Iraq would have been a lot better reason for the sacrifice in lives and money than fighting to prop up an anti-American government in Afghanistan that has a constitution that permits them to murder those who convert from Islam.

I doubt Iraq would have even been necessary if we had done what we should have in Afghanistan. Nations were very wary of us after 9/11, but we went on to relieve them of many of those fears, and make them confident enough to move back into their anti-American activities when we showed we would not use the full might of our military in a total war. We embolden them when we instead got back to the ridiculous nation building idea that isn't the job of our military in what made it obvious to the enemy we more than likely wouldn't open up another front which embolden them. They know we have the might to completely destroy them, but they also know we have no will to win for some reason.

President Bush should have used nuclear bombs or whatever it took to win regardless of opinion while keeping the media away from the troops instead of putting them with them when many of them are the enemy these days. We should have just woke up to news of the nation being vaporized, and every damn civilian death would have been the responsibility of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. A good leader would have seen that we needed to destroy Afghanistan quickly by any means necessary because we have the media working against us, and the people wavering soon after there is any bad news or death in a war. I would have been able to make that decision in better conscience than I could make our guys fight and die the way they are now. I find it cruel that we get our guys killed and maimed by such an inferior enemy all because we won't unleash them. They prop up governments that hate them and patrol for years until hit with IED or shot by someone in the “friendly” government that wouldn't exist without their protection.

51 posted on 04/10/2012 1:57:27 AM PDT by ThermoNuclearWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Gaffer

I agree we should have made an example of them by completely destroying the nation with total war. It should have been brutal and quick with the use of nuclear weapons in my opinion as well. We should have woke up to a video of mushroom clouds coming out of Afghanistan right after the Taliban refused our demands to turn over Al-Queda leaders. We would have probably prevented the Iraq war and all the problems we are having now with Iran if we had made an example out of Afghanistan with, or without, nuclear weapons by conducting a total war that was brutal, fast, and uncompromising. The response should have been so brutal and swift it would make the 9/11 attacks look like the most foolish strategy to make war with us by making them pay with so much more. We could have also shown that we will react to a direct attack on our nation in a much more brutal and aggressive way than we conduct other wars. Bush should have done this as our leader instead of telling everyone we aren’t getting into another Vietnam only to get into the same type of ridiculously long war that ignorant policy is completely to blame. We couldn’t even win WW2 with our modern military using the stupid ways we try to fight wars now because the Nazi and Jap civilians would come before our own troops.


52 posted on 04/10/2012 2:17:52 AM PDT by ThermoNuclearWarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-52 last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson