Posted on 08/13/2009 6:25:01 PM PDT by Nachum
WASHINGTON – The Pentagon presented a grim portrait of the Afghanistan war Thursday, offering no assurances about how long Americans will be fighting there or how many U.S. combat troops it will take to win.
Defeating the Taliban and al-Qaida will take "a few years," Defense Secretary Robert Gates said, with success on a larger scale in the desperately poor country a much longer proposition. He acknowledged that the Taliban has a firm hold on parts of the country President Barack Obama has called vital to U.S. security.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
The list, ping
This is going to take a while. No use getting in a big hurry.
To defeat them militarily you also have to replace them and displace them with something else. That is what takes time. Just defeating them alone isn’t enough because the culture generates more of them every day. Defeat them every day and they are back unless you displace them with something else.
A real Afghan Army has to be built up, and a real Afghan government has to be functional, and a functioning economy has to take hold. This is going to take a generation.
This is the war the Dems say they wanted to fight. I suggest they figure out a way to win it.
Can we now safely call this “Obambi’s war”?
Still won't be enough. Afghanistan has yet to be tamed by anyone. I certainly don't have the answer, but I'm not in favor of having 200,000 troops there.
Does the place have any value outside of growing poppies? How can they pay for any infrastructure?
parsy, who thinks the Paks have to be involved to cut off the escape routes
I'm in favor of 200,000 troops but they have to be Afghans. You'll never beat the Afghans, I think I agree with you. We have to focus on building the Afghan Army and scale back to a Green Beret operation, with some reserve troops maybe for stiffening and logistical support.
We can't win it unless its their war and we're just helping them win it.
I don't think we can abandon the country, thats how we got here in the first place. But I don't want to see 200,000 US troops there indefinitely either. We need to do something similar to what we did in Iraq, build their army and win over the various insurgent factions and turn them on the "foreign fighters", which is to say, Al Qaeda. That, while helping to build up a ruined infrastructure to get the economy going.
I certainly don't have the answer
I'm not sure I do either. I'm just trying to imagine what an answer might look like. Thats my best shot...
I concur, they better not screw it up.
-Sun Tzu, The Art of War
A “few years” my arse, Gates.
We will still be in Afghanistan and fighting international terrorism come 2012 and after.
Trying to bring Afghanistan into the 21st century (or in their case, the 16th) is like teaching a pack of dogs to play poker. Just another hole to dump money into for 10 years.
2. Where are the peace demonstrations?
3. Why isn't code punk calling for impeachment hearings?
Where is Cindy Sheehan???
Code Pink doesn’t care about the war...AND THEY NEVER DID.
They care only about the money it consumes...MONEY THAT COULD BE SPENT ON MARXISM.
Marxism is their God, their Alpha and Omega, the beginning and end of anything behind what comes out of their mouths.
He promised us!
War on slightly irritable poppy farmers - Quagmire!
Captain Tax - Quagmire!
Deporting Grannies & Baby Parts - Quagmire!
A Dodge In Your Garage - Quagmire!
Jobs Creating IOUs Creating Jobs Creating IOUs - Quagmire!
So Al-Qaeda made a good choice for it’s base....right?
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.