This pic convinced Trump to keep US troops in Afghanistan

NY Post ^

[dsc]

“Damned if you do, damned if you don’t.”

That’s why we need to quit caring what the forces of evil say. We know it’s going to be lies in the service of evil, so who cares what it is this time?

[KyCats]

Okay. The chicks are cute. But are they really worth the 7 or 800 billion they’re going to cost?!

[DesertRhino]

Oh yeah, I read that book. It was about how a bunch of Waffen SS guy in the Foreign Legion wiped out the communist forces in Laos and Vietnam in the 1950s./s

Basically, you just proved my point. there is no ROE or brutality level that will fix Afghanistan. There will be no surrender on a battleship deck.

[littleharbour]

The modern urban Afghanistan is never coming back. Even those who supposedly support US intervention in that country are in total support of Sharia and the subjugation of women. They just didn’t go the extra step of stoning women in the local soccer stadium. The Middle East and most of Africa are on a rapid descent into darkness. They were far better off under colonial rule.

[DesertRhino]

“Trump was very very clear in his speech last night that we are NOT nation building.”

Yeahhh... we aren’t nation building. We are fighting there until the Afghan government can fully take care of everything by itself.

Who could ever call THAT “nation building”?/

[DesertRhino]

It isn’t an Obama talking point moron. Its pretty obvious we are creating more terrorism. The guys we are shooting at were 5 years old or not even born when we first went there.

We are creating more every day. It isn’t the roach motel model Bush claimed Iraq was, attracting terrorists there to kill them.
Its a hornets nest, you keep whacking it claiming you are suppressing the hornets.

Staying there is causing more of this crap. That and a new intervention in the Islamic world every couple of years.

[piasa]

Afghanistan has some seriously large mineral/rare earth deposits.
Mining potential is extremely good.

[TigersEye]

“Killing terrorists creates terrorism.”

My apologies. That is more the logic of a John effin Kerry slogan isn’t it?

[G Larry]

We weren’t in Afghanistan before 9/11, so our presence is NOT the “cause”.
You are WRONG!

The number of troops is NOT the issue, it is the strategy, tactics, and objectives.
You are WRONG!

You have not offered a “sane course of action”.

“staying” is not a strategy or a tactic.
Changing both and the ROE, makes a difference.
Making the locals accountable for change makes a difference.

If your charge regarding money, neocons, and general were true, Trump would not have changed his mind.

Killing terrorists works.
Having the will to engage and win matters.

[Old Teufel Hunden]

"Basically, you just proved my point. there is no ROE or brutality level that will fix Afghanistan. There will be no surrender on a battleship deck."

I was just messing around with the whole waffen ss in French foreign legion thing. I agree, there will be no surrender on a battleship deck, but that's not what the definition of winning in Afghanistan is anyways. Afghanistan's a landlocked country so we can't pull a ship in their anyways!

Right now, they say that the Taliban control half the country or maybe more. That's the measurables we need to look at. How much of the country do they control a year from now? The end game should be that Al Qada and ISIS are wiped out and the Taliban control little to no land areas in Afghanistan and the central government is strong enough to stand on it's own two feet. Even after that, I think we still position a small amount of troops in the large bases such as Bagram for support. I think even with the situation in Iraq being almost completed, we need to keep a small amount of forces there. The alternative is unacceptable.

[JimRed]

Those are NOT miniskirts. Compared to minis, they’re modest!