Our 51st state?

[Wolferz]

Endless Afghanistan?

WTFO

http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2...efinitely?lite

[CaptainMattJ.]

This is news? Weve known for years that they planned to keep a garrison in afghanistan. What gets me more is that wed still be paying billions of dollars to pay for whats obviously going to be a complete and utter failure.

Honestly the end of this dragged-out conflict is nothing more than an attempt to upkeep the image of the military. Theyd sure love to say that they came out of Afghanistan with something of benefit, that they helped afghanistan be self-sustaining, but in reality, they know it was nothing but a catastrophe. They know that as soon as our retreat is "complete" that afghanistan will tumble back into what it was before we got there. They just needed something to give the people so that they wouldnt have to admit that they sent our sons and daughters, most with multiple deployments, into a hellhole halfway across the world, suffering thousands of deaths and many more thousands of debilitating injuries, wasting trillions of dollars, for basically nothing. We KNOW that no matter how many troops and how much money we throw into that dump, its going to stay exactly the same.

But like vietnam, we cant admit this. Instead, we gradually retreat from a country so as to seem like our presence there is required, and celebrate as we succeed in our "noble mission". When will the department of defense live up to its name and stop interfering with 3rd world cesspools halfway across the world.

[Stealhead]

Do not be so quick to blame the military.It is Washington that gets the military stuck in wars that have unattainable goals.

The only choice the military has and especially the ones doing all of the leg work the O-4s and below (everyone lower in rank than a Major in the military) is obey orders and try their best to achieve something.

It is the politicians that start the wars and when they are over they take all of the credit if things go well.When things go poorly it goes "peace with honor" and then they blame the military and then every jackass goes and blames the troops.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

Do not be so quick to blame the military.It is Washington that gets the military stuck in wars that have unattainable goals.

The only choice the military has and especially the ones doing all of the leg work the O-4s and below (everyone lower in rank than a Major in the military) is obey orders and try their best to achieve something.

It is the politicians that start the wars and when they are over they take all of the credit if things go well.When things go poorly it goes "peace with honor" and then they blame the military and then every jackass goes and blames the troops.

That is a given. Of course its the politicians that start wars and the grunts who fight them. But in this case, the top brass were among the biggest advocates of a painfully slow retreat with permanent garrison.

So when i talk about how the "military" is trying to upkeep its image, im talking mostly about the people who threw us into and kept us in those wars.

[Stealhead]

Originally Posted by CaptainMattJ.

That is a given. Of course its the politicians that start wars and the grunts who fight them. But in this case, the top brass were among the biggest advocates of a painfully slow retreat with permanent garrison.

So when i talk about how the "military" is trying to upkeep its image, im talking mostly about the people who threw us into and kept us in those wars.

Yeah but you still said military when you could have said politicians.You must have misread my post if you think I have much love for the top brass generally speaking at least there are a few that have brains.Still though in the end the United States military has two jobs one is to defend the United States from all enemies the other is to defend/attack what ever the politicians deem is a national interest.The nature of the military chain of command by and large precludes its members from questioning lawful orders it also means that a military coup carried out by members of the US military of their own will or at the behest of another nearly impossible.

[CaptainMattJ.]

Originally Posted by Stealhead

Yeah but you still said military when you could have said politicians.You must have misread my post if you think I have much love for the top brass generally speaking at least there are a few that have brains.Still though in the end the United States military has two jobs one is to defend the United States from all enemies the other is to defend/attack what ever the politicians deem is a national interest.The nature of the military chain of command by and large precludes its members from questioning lawful orders it also means that a military coup carried out by members of the US military of their own will or at the behest of another nearly impossible.

I could've, but the people who sent us in and kept us there were both the executive branch (and their puppets in congress) and the top brass. The president is technically a part of the military, and so is the top brass. Thats who i was talking about, obviously not our service members.

[TarJak]

Originally Posted by nikimcbee

Will they produce cool pop hits like "Gungnam Style?"

Helmand Style doesn't have the same ring to it.