[bigbootyhos]

Originally Posted by DyePaintballer2k11

Commit. Simple. This war has been the forgotten war. We need to nut up. No more tip toeing around. Smash the living **** out of the Taliban, and gain the hearts and minds of the populace. The win scenario is to get the Afghan people a working government, and they eradicate the Taliban after we do what we can.



1. What debt? Do you understand that military spending happens regardless? When we aren't at war, we still shoot bullets and blow **** up. It's called training. Besides, we don't have enough funds put into Afghanistan to begin with. Don't you ever compare money with American lives.

Homeland Defense can't stop everything.

America had a chance to win their hearts and minds one time, but after the Afghans "defeated" the Soviets, America disappeared from their lives.

[Dahmer]

Originally Posted by paintballa49

Have you no idea the cost of war? Why don't you take a gander at this little link and see for yourself:http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL33110.pdf

What I love most about that link is it shows that the ENTIRE cost of all wars over the last 8 years equates to the Obama bailout. Obama spent in one week as much as Bush did in 8 years actually accomplishing things. Crazy.

[bnctaj]

Originally Posted by CrazyLittle

Afghanistan also isn't asking for our help

"Victory is within our grasp, provided that we recommit ourselves based on lessons learned and provided that we fulfill the requirements needed to make success inevitable... Ireject the myth advanced in the media that Afghanistan is a 'graveyard of empires' and that the the US and NATO effort is destined to fail. Afghans have never seen you as occupiers, even though this has been the major focus of the enemy's propaganda campaign. Unlike the Russians, who imposed a government with an alien ideology, you enabled us to write a democratic constitution and choose our own government. Unlike the Russians, who destroyed our country, you came to rebuild." - Afghan Defense Minister Wardak.

The Taliban is not even attempting to dissuade us of the situation in Afghanistan. They're relying on us to do that to ourselves, and it seems that CrazyLittle here is just one of the many who has been dissuaded. Remember, "pacifism... is one of the means of duping the working class" (Vladimir Lenin).

Furthermore, a troop surge in itself will not win the war. Adopting the proper strategy (which requires a troop surge and protection of the population as opposed to "smashing the **** out of the Taliban") will win the war. Win the war meaning, "having the impact of the Taliban and al Qaeda be relegated to a position where they can no longer impose a threat to America or any other player in the goings on of the world, to include nations, states, and countries." Oh, and for the record... we've consistently pulled troops out of Afghanistan. You know, that whole war over there by the Tigris and the Euphrates, yeah, well that pulled almost all of our SF and CIA elements in Afghanistan over to that area in 2002 and we haven't put them back into South Asian hills till this past year.

And, while the Afghan people live their lives in a very tribal pattern (namely in the south and the east), they also have very much a sense of national identity. A national identity which could very well be lost if the government fails or if the Taliban is allowed to regain a strong foothold through Afghanistan.

Homeland defense won't do **** when MAD protocol kicks in because of a nuclear war between Pakistan and India, between Islamist insurgents and anyone not viewing their view of Islam as THE WAY to live life.

[CrazyLittle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by bnctaj

The Taliban is not even attempting to dissuade us of the situation in Afghanistan. They're relying on us to do that to ourselves, and it seems that CrazyLittle here is just one of the many who has been dissuaded. Remember, "pacifism... is one of the means of duping the working class" (Vladimir Lenin).

This has nothing to do with pacifism. This has to do with sitting around with our thumbs up our ***** like Vietnam. If we're not making progress then it's not worth our time to be sitting around out there.

Originally Posted by bnctaj

Furthermore, a troop surge in itself will not win the war. Adopting the proper strategy (which requires a troop surge and protection of the population as opposed to "smashing the **** out of the Taliban") will win the war. Win the war meaning, "having the impact of the Taliban and al Qaeda be relegated to a position where they can no longer impose a threat to America or any other player in the goings on of the world, to include nations, states, and countries."

So, what's the winning strategy?

[paintballa49]

Originally Posted by bnctaj

Oh, and for the record... we've consistently pulled troops out of Afghanistan.

No. We've transferred some to Iraq, but more troops are being committed to Afghanistan and more yet are needed, supposedly.

[Swerve22]

Originally Posted by stressfire II

Ben, don't ****ing start with me. I was pretty emotional when I originally posted that. How "tough" of you to pick on someone who is obviously down and out, just because you want Obama to send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan without even thinking about it.

I'm not picking on you, I quoted that because I felt that in that post you were picking on others. If you're feeling emotionally heavy I emphasize with you, one of my best friends is over there right now. Thing is, insulting people because they are voicing their opinion on the matter isn't going to get anywhere, and attempting to claim moral superiority because a family member is going definitely isn't. I hope your sister serves her country proud and comes back safe and sound with honor.

Nobody is wanting Obama to "send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan without even thinking about it.". The only thing Obama needs to be thinking about is whether or not Afghanistan is a war that needs to be won, and then listening to how the Generals say to win it if it is (I'd assume he'd say it is since that's what he's been saying since 2002). Military generals don't just say "hey, let's try sending a couple thou more bodies", they actually base their recommendations on sound knowledge.

[$h@key J0nEZ]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

Military generals don't just say "hey, let's try sending a couple thou more bodies", they actually base their recommendations on sound knowledge.

Like the advise General Colin Powell gave Bush on Iraq's WMDs?

[scumquat1]

Originally Posted by CrazyLittle

Nope. Scum still hasn't even defined what "winning" would be, so there's nothing to respond to.

Thanks for chiming in. You still talking about Iraq? Maybe you should give us your opinion on the situation in South Ossetia. Some people make fools of themselves and then they're just not bright enough to know when to quit.

Originally Posted by NotMaxpowOrDarshSauc

Prepare for Ayn Rand strawman... its coming after that last CL post.

What do you think would be a legitimate way to use our force there?

I'm no military expert, but it appears to be another counter-insurgency situation where we'll need to do what is necessary to take and hold ground and to make the population feel safe from the influences of the Taliban. Of course, this will be expensive and take a lot of men.

I don't see the alternative of withdrawal being acceptable. It would have been 6 or 7 years ago, but not now.

[bnctaj]

Originally Posted by $h@key J0nEZ

Like the advise General Colin Powell gave Bush on Iraq's WMDs?

This is erroneous. It was Paul Wolfowitz and a handful of men who advised President Bush on WMD's. A pre-existing notion of a policy by Bush favored this intelligence, and then intel followed policy. It's against just about every notion of intelligence gathering that exists. Colin Powell hated going to war over WMD's (and hated war in general). That's why he abdicated SECDEF.

Originally Posted by paintballa49

No. We've transferred some to Iraq, but more troops are being committed to Afghanistan and more yet are needed, supposedly.

Are you incapable of reading?

Originally Posted by bnctaj

we haven't put them back into South Asian hills till this past year.

Obviously, this is going to include regular military units, as current SF doctrine is that SF cannot operate without the presence of the regular military.

Originally Posted by CrazyLittle

So, what's the winning strategy?

I just said it. Protect the population instead of using a sledgehammer to hit a fly (as the French like to say). With the limited forces that will be allowed in place, there's not going to be enough to cover the entirety of Afghanistan. However, certain areas (urban areas, areas of particular problems, etc) will be given more troops to help out the Afghanis with the problems they are having. From these urban areas the ANSF will be able to recruit more and more and train more and more men (~500,000 more) that will be able to better lock down the countryside.

But what would I know.

[paintballa49]

Originally Posted by bnctaj

I just said it. Protect the population instead of using a sledgehammer to hit a fly (as the French like to say). With the limited forces that will be allowed in place, there's not going to be enough to cover the entirety of Afghanistan. However, certain areas (urban areas, areas of particular problems, etc) will be given more troops to help out the Afghanis with the problems they are having. From these urban areas the ANSF will be able to recruit more and more and train more and more men (~500,000 more) that will be able to better lock down the countryside.

But what would I know.

Do you not understand that the Taliban are WITHIN the population?? They're not uniformed soldiers. They look and act just like everyone else, until they decide to attack.

[CrazyLittle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by paintballa49

Do you not understand that the Taliban are WITHIN the population?? They're not uniformed soldiers. They look and act just like everyone else, until they decide to attack.

Also the warhawks here don't seem to grasp the concept that our presence in the middle east is the best recruiting tool they've ever had.

[bnctaj]

Originally Posted by paintballa49

Do you not understand that the Taliban are WITHIN the population?? They're not uniformed soldiers. They look and act just like everyone else, until they decide to attack.

I do in fact understand that they are within the population. However, the local populace can tell who they are and the local populace despises the Taliban. They want their daughters to go to school, they want to be able to influence their own government, they want to be able to do so many things that systematic Islamic extremism (per the Taliban) didn't allow them to do. The only reason that the Afghanis are in any sense worried about turning in Taliban is that they're unsure how long we intend to stay there... which is easy to see why given the American public's recent downturn of support (post surge).
http://www.cfr.org/publication/20220...en_biddle.html

Originally Posted by CrazyLittle

Also the warhawks here don't seem to grasp the concept that our presence in the middle east is the best recruiting tool they've ever had.

Afghanistan is not the Middle East, first of all. Second of all, the people there support us overwhelmingly compared to the Taliban. The people who hide the Taliban do so because of their way - the Pashtun way, wherein it is one's duty to protect the weak against the strong. And the Pashtuns are beginning to shun the Taliban for their cruelty, because they realise we're going to stay for a while, etc. etc., which is why we've made significant advances in Pashtun regions in the past few months.

But I guess I'm a warhawk.

[CrazyLittle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by bnctaj

Afghanistan is not the Middle East, first of all.

Could have fooled me

[bnctaj]

Pakistan is also not the middle east.

Nice try. It's South Asia. But if you want to go ahead and prove yourself a dolt, be my guest.
And because you seem to be so keen on images, here is South Asia.

Now, Southwest Asia... the "Middle East".

[CrazyLittle (Banned)]

Originally Posted by bnctaj

Pakistan is also not the middle east.

Nice try. It's South Asia. But if you want to go ahead and prove yourself a dolt, be my guest.

If that's the tack you're taking, then Iran is also not in the middle east. But that doesn't change the salient facts of my point: Our presence IN THAT REGION, has been the best recruiting tool the Taliban and Al Qaeda could have ever wanted.

[bnctaj]

Our mere presence is doing nothing. The strategy of hitting insurgents "wherever they may be with all force musterable," is. Discretion must be used and protecting the populace must take place. Tell me, how many Hamas attacks against the US occured as a result of the Persian Gulf War? Or in Iraq?

[Comrade Obama (Banned)]

Obama sucks. I hope his plane crashes. ****er.

[Wango_Tango]

but I thought he was a communist? Why would a comrade want a fellow comrade dead?

[stressfire II (Banned)]

Originally Posted by Swerve22

I'm not picking on you, I quoted that because I felt that in that post you were picking on others. If you're feeling emotionally heavy I emphasize with you, one of my best friends is over there right now. Thing is, insulting people because they are voicing their opinion on the matter isn't going to get anywhere, and attempting to claim moral superiority because a family member is going definitely isn't. I hope your sister serves her country proud and comes back safe and sound with honor.

Nobody is wanting Obama to "send 40,000 more troops to Afghanistan without even thinking about it.". The only thing Obama needs to be thinking about is whether or not Afghanistan is a war that needs to be won, and then listening to how the Generals say to win it if it is (I'd assume he'd say it is since that's what he's been saying since 2002). Military generals don't just say "hey, let's try sending a couple thou more bodies", they actually base their recommendations on sound knowledge.

Hey brother I love opinions. But, when someone is saying "Obama sucks AND OUR TROOPS ARE DYING BECAUSE OF IT" - I take issue with that.

When people use dead and dying troops to further their agenda, I get pissed. That goes for both sides of the isle. I mean ****, what if I started a thread like this:

"President Bush twiddles his thumbs for 8 years, while our troops suffer and die."

Pretty offensive huh? I bet you'd be all over that statement. Of course it's not true. And yes I'm sure you had to endure such treatment for many years from libtards.

The fact of the matter is Obama has already sent a surge of troops to the southern border of Afghanistan when he took office. Right off the bat, just like he promised. Now the Generals are asking for more, and I bet he gives it to them. I'd hardly call that "fiddling" as the OP suggests.

Anyways, I appreciate your kind sentiments towards my sister.

Originally Posted by scumquat1

Even though US soldiers in Afghanistan are being killed in increasing numbers, President Obama won't agree to General Stanley McChrystal's request for a troop surge until he studies the situation some more. I wonder if he'll be studying while he and Michelle are in Copenhagen trying to bring the Olympics to Chicago?

Our President sure does have his priorities jacked up.

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/...ics/index.html

[paintballa49]

Originally Posted by bnctaj

I do in fact understand that they are within the population. However, the local populace can tell who they are and the local populace despises the Taliban. They want their daughters to go to school, they want to be able to influence their own government, they want to be able to do so many things that systematic Islamic extremism (per the Taliban) didn't allow them to do. The only reason that the Afghanis are in any sense worried about turning in Taliban is that they're unsure how long we intend to stay there... which is easy to see why given the American public's recent downturn of support (post surge).
http://www.cfr.org/publication/20220...en_biddle.html

It's not as easy as going door to door and politely asking where the terrorists are.

[bnctaj]

No, it isn't. But doing good faith efforts - going into the markets and asking, setting up hospitals, helping maintain mosques, giving a helping hand to the local populace in general, proving to the people that we're there to stay and that we're serious about helping them against this oppressive problem of the Taliban, is going to bolster confidence in the Americans and the Afghan National Army. This confidence, in turn, is going to result in more and more hand overs and more and more information being dropped to Americans. But wait, that's only what's happened in every counterinsurgency operation that's put protecting the populace before killing the enemy since World War II.