The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Down Range Cafe => Topic started by: fightingquaker13 on September 19, 2009, 06:03:53 PM
-
I am pro-military, but a bit conflicted over what the Hell to do about Afghanistan. The one thing I am sure of is that you learn from history or suffer. I also think its a mistake to think that Americans are smarter or tougher than Russians. Anyway, its an interesting 10 minute documentary about stinger missiles in '86 and '87 in the Hindu Kush (which literally means death of the Hindus). Draw your own conclusions.
FQ13
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxR95AqEvVg&feature=related
-
i have always believed that history repeats itself.
what would be the exact definition of a win in Afghanistan and the middle east in general? we kill all the terrorists? then the families of those terrorist will grow a even bigger hatred of the west and more 9/11's will happen in the future. As long as we are in the middle east people will want us out, and they try and get us out by killing soldiers and then the gov. decides it is a threat to american lives and sends more troops, who get killed by the people that want them out... it will go on for ever.
the best thing we can do now is pull out while we still have some of our reputation intact.
-
I've been going through this same conversation with some so-called "libertarians" whose sole solution is to drop and run as fast as we can, let the world go to hell without us. Pull all of the troops back to the US, nothing in Korea, Germany or anywhere else.
Needless to say, I think they are wrong. Afghanistan offers us nothing except opium and bin Laden. It is a backwards, desolate country composed of tribes whose main crop is either opium or hatred of each other and foreigners. When the Taliban were in charge, and supporting bin Laden, I thought we a legitimate reason to be there. Now, I'm not so sure.
I have seen nothing from bho that indicates he or his minions has even as much of a clue what to do as Bush and Cheney did. At least they heated things up in Iraq and drew the BGs there for a long time. When the BGs realized that Iraq was just another word for death to mooslim terrorists, they skedaddled back to Afghanistan and started stirring things up there again.
Not sure what a win looks like, and DC ain't going to give us anything even remotely honorable. I hate seeing our people get killed knowing full well there is no solution. IMO - stabilize the place as much as you can, and hand the keys over to Karzai, telling him "It's yours. Congratulations!" - and leave.
-
Pathfinder, what you are suggesting is what we did in South Vietnam. WE pulled out in 1973 declaring victory and our
Vietnamese compatriots (?) could handle things. Do you remember the fall of Siagon in 75? It will be the same thing in Afghanistan only quicker.
-
There ARE similarities between Afghanistan and Vietnam, Primarily that we went in with only a vague idea of what we intended to do. The only way to have achieved anything better than a stalemate in Vietnam would have been to leave the remnants of the VC for the SVN Govt. to deal with and invade the the North.
In Afghanistan we originally intended to destroy Al Queda and kick the Taliban out of control of the Co0untry as punishment for harboring Bin Laden. The big problem arises from the fact that unlike England, WE have never engaged in wars for purely punitive reasons and once we committed our selves we had to dress it up by claiming to be "Bringing Democracy", since that is not possible with people who are happy being left alone in the stone age our Military leadership doesn't know what the hell to do so they keep killing Taliban (who are drawing on the largest ethnic group of Afghanistan AND Pakistan ) who will just keep coming as long as there are foreigners in their country. It has been turned into a no win situation by politicians trying to put the smiley face of "Democratization" on the brutal truth that we went in to slap the crap out of people who had pissed us off.
Since America is no longer an "Imperialistic" nation there is no reason for us to occupy foreign territory. We SHOULD bring all Army troops home, (except for those involved in training ) and put them on our borders to do what the were originally formed for, DEFENDING THE US. The job of slapping the sh!t out of countries that annoy us belongs to the Navy and Marine Corps (and now the Air Force) which were formed to be projectable power.
With the death of colonialism the only true objective of warfare is to smash things, kill people, and make the offending nation wish they had NEVER drawn your ire. There ARE special situations such as the war on terror or the search for Saddam Hussien that require an extended presence but those situations can and should be handled more effectively by Spec Ops forces.
-
i think we will be there for a while now, most every other country is pulling out and the US is showing no signs of it. we may just have to be prepared to take it like a man and pull out while we still have our cojones intact
-
i think we will be there for a while now, most every other country is pulling out and the US is showing no signs of it. we may just have to be prepared to take it like a man and pull out while we still have our cojones intact
I think we should have a very public debate that strips away the lie of "bringing democracy" as being missionary B/S and admits that we went in to inflict punishment. maybe throw in a couple raids on Taliban concentrations that inflict large casuaties, and then bring the regular forces home.
The British had the right idea in the Second Afghan War, that was intended to be punishment for the 1st one, they went in beat every organized force they could find, held Kabul for a while then left .
-
Afghanistan is a specops war and should be fought as such. That means NO RULES. The national leadership should define victory, tell the military leaders what that definition is, and get out of their way. BHO & Joe DON'T know as much as Bush & Cheney, and if you thought B&C were idiots, then the military is now, truely f<>ked.
-
Pathfinder, what you are suggesting is what we did in South Vietnam. WE pulled out in 1973 declaring victory and our
Vietnamese compatriots (?) could handle things. Do you remember the fall of Siagon in 75? It will be the same thing in Afghanistan only quicker.
I was in college during Vietnam, in the draft lottery (#261), got married the year we pulled out of Vietnam. Vietnam was winnable. In fact in Tet we all but destroyed the VC and a lot of Giap's army. But the politicians who decided to run the war had other ideas.
Afghanistan is not winnable, it is way too tribal and segmented. So either we stay in a losing fight, leave under the best circumstances we can produce, or find middle ground. It's that middle ground I don't see anyone in DC having enough wattage to light an LED to come up with. Besides, that's not what they're in DC for. If they screw it up, well, it's all good, all part of the plan.
I have no answers for Afghanistan. I was happy when Karzai first got elected, I thought the tribes might actually come together after the nightmare of the Russians followed on their heels by the even more oppressive nightmare of the Taliban. I was wrong, it is already disintegrating.
-
As long as its a "politically correct" NATO rules of engagement, type war, the US military will be bogged down.
"It is fatal to enter any war without the will to win it."
General MacArthur
The "will" is an important word.
The big problem arises from the fact that unlike England, WE have never engaged in wars for purely punitive reasons and once we committed our selves we had to dress it up by claiming to be "Bringing Democracy", since that is not possible with people who are happy being left alone in the stone age our Military leadership doesn't know what the hell to do so they keep killing Taliban (who are drawing on the largest ethnic group of Afghanistan AND Pakistan ) who will just keep coming as long as there are foreigners in their country. It has been turned into a no win situation by politicians trying to put the smiley face of "Democratization" on the brutal truth that we went in to slap the crap out of people who had pissed us off.
Like Pathfinder, the tribal folks know nothing else but war and hardship, whether its the Taliban, or US troops, it makes no difference to them. They have known nothing else.
tombogan nailed it...
-
I'll add that no army in history has been able to conquer that place. Think about that for a moment. From Alexander the Great to our current army, no one has ever been able to subdue them.
Like others have posted, we need to pull our troops out of all of these places and bring them home. We can not afford to be the world's policeman. We have nukes, we have the best military in the world. No one in their right mind will mess with us. But I know that because we have chosen to be dependent upon foregin oil, we will continue to have a prescence in the Middle East.
The answer on what to do is relatively simple. It's the execution of this change in policy that is sticky wicket.
-
I'll add that no army in history has been able to conquer that place. Think about that for a moment. From Alexander the Great to our current army, no one has ever been able to subdue them.
Alexander actually won, went on to India then came back through. But that's the point, he didn't stay, and that is the key. The commies tried to stay, we should not plan to, but may get sucked into it.
We have nukes, we have the best military in the world. No one in their right mind will mess with us.
That mindset didn't work too well on 9/11 - driven by those in Afghanistan.
Here's a quote I blatantly stole from the Magpul site:
We all want to live in a world of peace, happiness and prosperity. The problem is that half of us want to live there, the other half wants to pillage it!
Isolationism has never worked for us. Neither has being the world's cop. And we don't seem to be doing too well with the balancing act in between. Personally, bho and his minions are not up to the task - on purpose. His handlers want him to meddle and fidget and mess around - and fail at it. That way, the so-called US "empire" will fall faster, and we will be alienated - while Soros and the other handlers move their money where the prospects for getting more are better.
-
The Afghans could teach us a lot about how to deal with our own "Central Govt" , Ignore them and they will go away ;D
The answer is actually fairly simple, to brutal and realistic for OUR gutless politicians, but simple.
Bring all non training Army troops home, put them on the border with orders to shoot to kill
Leave the Spec Ops forces to search for and destroy the various terrorist groups.
Continue Navy / Marine Cruises around the world to look after American interests as they were intended and have done since 1798
If a country pisses us off, use missiles, Air force, Navy, and Marine air craft to target their bridges, power supplies, food supplies, leadership, and industrial base. In the modern world this is the equivalent of what Rome did to Carthage. Leave their women weeping and their children starving, only because we no longer sell captured populations into slavery.
Countries like Iran, N Korea and Pakistan should have their nuke facilities hit with Nuke bunker busters, we' designed them in 91 for Iraq and never used them 1/2 KT and they generate VERY minimal radiation or fallout, it's all contained inside the bunker.
-
Countries like Iran, N Korea and Pakistan should have their nuke facilities hit with Nuke bunker busters, we' designed them in 91 for Iraq and never used them 1/2 KT and they generate VERY minimal radiation or fallout, it's all contained inside the bunker.
I think MacArthur, would approve..
Patton on the other hand, would just ashtray the entire area...
-
Mac wanted to nuke the Chinese and lay a strip of Radioactive material along the Korean Chinese border ;D
Truman, another democrat, snatch stalemate from the jaws of victory.