![]() |
New Afghanistan policy
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009...fghanistan-war
Well, what did you think of the speech? If we're going to set a timeline, I say get rid of all these silly RoE and let the troops do their job. IMO. But now that I think about the RoE thingy, that didn't work out so well for the soviets.:dead: Nobody plays meaner than the Russians. I say we just build a big wall around the place and say nobody leaves. I think that would be cheaper. They get there islamic utopia and we keep them contained, away from everybody else. If they climb over the wall, kill them on the spot.:yeah: Kinda like hotel kali-fornia. |
There was a speech? I slept thru it. :D
Just kiddin' So far, the policy outlines look very much like what the Republican plan was. Where there is a flaw is in the unfortunate fact that Afghanistan does not have a popular consciousness as a nation state. I expect us to have trouble there. Afghanistan is less a nation than it is a reservation for assorted hill tribes. Neighborhood security is not bestowed by any national institution, but only among familial and clan ties -- it's your valley against all the rest of the world, especially the immediate neighborhood, and it ain't pretty. Consequently Afghanistan is a very low-security, balkanized place, and we must be working on that close-in level, not on the level of a Kabul government that too many tribesmen give less than a damn about and trust very little. |
BTW is Obama shipping his bad habits to Afghanistan?
http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/...anista-002.jpg |
Why pulling oiutn then when you could pull out now. The effect is the same. The two years inbetween will not make chnages to Afghanistan.
It's all face-saving only, I think. And troops will pay with their blood for that. I hope they die happy. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Get out now.
And close the door behind you. NO MORE INVASIONS BY ARMIES OF "REFUGEES"! Maybe you can do something constructive like re-integrating them back into THEIR OWN SOCIETIES, and out of ours. |
All HOPE is lost for any CHANGE.
Fail. :yeah: just remember - YOU voted for him :har::har::har::har: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
This will be Vietnam 2: Electronic Boogaloo. I don't understand why this isn't blazingly obvious to Obama.
|
Quote:
|
The bit I don't understand is the announcement of an additional 30,000 troops allied to a timescale for withdrawal.
What's the point? |
Not often a newspaper comment puts something so damn well:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/...664753,00.html Quote:
|
Quote:
|
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
Supposedly so they can go on the offensive for the last 18 months, and also train the afghan military and police to defend themselves. (hmmmm) Same was done in Vietnam by Nixon in 1973, he anounced that the South Vietnamese army was strong enough to defend Saigon, and with drew the US military - but the south govenment collpased in 75. (two years was pretty good going though) But in the case of Vietnam the majority of the population where behind Ho Chi Mihns communist govenment anyway, so there was never any hope for the South & the U.S. That is ultimatly why the U.S failed in Vietnam. (And I am not going to argue about this fact either, that is what i have read, so if you dont belive it - I dont care) I dont know how it will work in Afgahnistan. I guess it partly depends on how far the the Taliban have been pushed back, and partly how well the 'hearts & minds' thing has paid off on this occasion..... Time will tell anyway. i just hope the loss of human life is minimal. |
I dident really make this connection untill now.
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:03 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 1995- 2025 Subsim®
"Subsim" is a registered trademark, all rights reserved.