An Unpatriotic Question? What is Victory in Afghanistan?

[fullautovalmet76]

What constitutes victory in Afghanistan? It depends on whom you ask.

For the military/industrial complex it is a perpetual low-grade conflict stretching for decades.

For the general folk, it is the complete withdrawal of U.S. forces from there immediately...

We have more to fear from threats here at home than we do from men with turbans living in caves and mud huts.

[Fox_Hound]

This is a matter of perspective. As long as there is evil on Earth, warriors must stand ready to fight and kill. Doesn't mean evil will ever be eradicated. But that doesn't convince me that we shouldn't fight against it. Threats at home need to be #1 priority (U.S. MEXICO BORDER). Those bastards will hurt us again when they get the chance. As long as they plan to kill us, we need to kill them first.

[LittleRed]

If victory were defined by everyone coming home alive, then we could have been victorious in WWII a lot sooner, with a lot less expense and bloodshed. Victory usually involves an unconditional surrender. For that to happen there needs to be someone who can actually order the surrender of a side's fighting forces. There is no single "terror" leader. Not every terrorist reports to Bin Laden. If Bin Laden, gave up and ordered the surrender of every terrorist that won't bring victory. We have got home grown terrorist such as the Ft. Hood shooter and the D.C. sniper, who on their own initiative became "radical".

You can never winner a "War on [insert nebulous term here]".

You can't win a war on poverty, a war on drugs, a war on hunger, a war on crime, or a war on terror. At best you can only be "winning".

Terrorist are closer to organized crime than fighting against a nation. You don't close down the police department because you caught the mob boss. If our goal is to keep America safe, then we must take the fight to them. I certainly agree that conventional forces occupying a country may not be the best way to do that. But, you have to keep the enemy so busy looking over their shoulders that they are not given a decade in relative comfort to plan a strike.    

There are three things that fuel an adversary:

1. Financial backing
2. Philosophical unity
3. Physical force

With most enemies all three come from one distinct source. Nazi Germany financed itself with stolen property, forced labor, and spoils of war. Hitler's philosophy united Germans and gave them a sense of pride and a common enemy. The Third Reich was constantly recruiting and training through the youth program. Because these components were centralized the defeat of all three could be achieved by forcing surrender.

With Islam, those three components are scattered. The financial backing comes from oil-rich countries (Saudi Arabia) and even from donors in America. The philosophy is preached in mosques throughout the world—again including here in America where we protect it. The most violent form—wahhabism—is the dominant form embraced in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia clearly provides all three components to terrorism, but they have been given a free pass. How many hijackers were Saudi? The physical force is popping up from everywhere. Disgruntled thugs in prison are ripe for Islamic conversion and radicalization.  

In closing, if victory is to win the war on terror, I am afraid it cannot be achieved. If victory is winning the war on terror then it is and will always be a temporal and fragile one in need of our armed forces to always be in harms way.

[tombogan03884]

Bill, the only thing lacking in Vietnam or Afghanistan is balls in Washington, there is a simple solution to fighting this type of enemy, you just have to exterminate the entire population .
The idea of using Nukes is proof of a lack of understanding of the realities of the area, they have been constantly at war since 1979, Afghanistan had more land mines per square acre than any other place on earth, what are you going to do, "bomb them into modern times ? They never got out of the stone age.

Fox hound, you also lack understanding, The Taliban may be assholes but they never did any thing to us.
Al Queda hit the WTC, not the Taliban, they just rented UBL some space.
If you are attacked by some one, would you burn down the Hotel that happened to rent them a room ?

Many of you make the same mistake most people have been making since Vietnam.
This ain't WWII. That type of thinking is why we LOST Vietnam.

Little Red is about the closest to a practical answer.

[Timothy]

I'll answer with another question.....Who is the enemy?

Victory in the middle east is unattainable.....

IMO....

Little Red is about the closest to a practical answer.

I said the same thing without all the words and stuff!

 

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

I said the same thing without all the words and stuff!

 

Nothing says PO'd like a 16 inch salvo ?   

[Solus]

Nothing says PO'd like a 16 inch salvo ?   

President Reagan had a similar approach back in 1986 when Kadafi's actions "crossed the line".  The collateral damage is the risk those who support/allow terrorists to function assume.   I always wondered if the adopted daughter was adopted after the attack.  Then I started to wonder if she died after the attack also. 

You may remember, Kadafi was seldom heard from for many years after this event.

Abunimah News - 13 April 2006

20 YEARS AGO:

13) 100 dead as Reagan orders bombing of Tripoli (LA Times)
14) Rescuers lose hope in grisly clean up (Guardian)

Los Angeles Times - 15 April 1986

100 DEAD ESTIMATED IN TRIPOLI; KADAFI'S DAUGHTER KILLED;
SOVIETS CANCEL U.S. TALKS; 2 SONS OF LIBYA CHIEF WOUNDED

TRIPOLI, Libya--As dusk fell over this U.S.-bombed capital today, diplomats
estimated that about 100 people were killed in the pre-dawn attack, and
doctors said the dead included Libyan leader Col. Moammar Kadafi's baby
daughter.

Dr. Mohammad Muafa, director of pediatrics at Tripoli's Fatah University
Hospital, said he was summoned to the Kadafi family compound about an hour
after the 2 a.m. raid and found the family, including Kadafi's wife, "in
very bad terror."

The daughter, 15-month-old Hana, died from a brain hemorrhage about two
hours after he arrived, Muafa said.

Two of Kadafi's sons, aged 3 and 4 1/2, were injured, he said. Kadafi had
eight children, including the recently adopted girl.

No Kadafi Statement

[tombogan03884]

You will note that not only have we had no problems with him since, he is in fact one of our more valuable Arab allies in the "War on terror".

[ratcatcher55]

You will note that not only have we had no problems with him since, he is in fact one of our more valuable Arab allies in the "War on terror".

Me thinks you speak in jest.
http://uncoverthenews.com/2010/07/20/there-is-no-al-qaeda-muammar-gaddafi/comment-page-1/

I think he just keeps a lower profile.

[Pecos Bill]

I was reading through this again and had a thought (no cracks about how often that happens). I understand how most of you feel and might thoughts, at times, have been to just wipe the SOBs from the face of the earth. The thought did occur to me, has any of our military leaders read a book called "The Art of War". If I remember correctly the author of that book discussed how to win a war against an overwhelming force. Seems like that's what's happening in the middle east. I'm no expert but might be a worth while read for some of the chosen few in D. C. What y'all think?

Pecos