Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2549251)

I disagree with that point. The original invasion was correct. Everything after that decision was made however was I agree, a massive CF.

- Peter.

Originally Posted by Chas H (Post 2549305)

Bush wasted almost a month by demanding the Taliban hand over OBL. The Taliban, predictably, larffed in his face. By the time Bush realized he either had to invade or admit he was humiliated by the Taliban there was only one choice for the cowboy.

Originally Posted by Craig (Post 2549261)

I just don't see how it could have turned out any differently, what was the end game?

Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2549326)

Right there is the problem with the American thought process. Worrying about he "end game" before thinking intelligently about the origin and first steps.

Remember, it hasnt "turned out" yet at all. It's ongoing and will probably be ongoing for decades to come. We might cut and run now, or soon, but we will be back, wether you like it or not.

Getting rid of the blight on humanity that was AQ and their medieval sponsoring thugs was the right thing do to. But it needed to be done right. Which meant the US had to blitzkrieg the place with no concern for US casualties with the intention of swamping the AQ hideouts and shocking and awing these goons sufficiently that there was enough of a "wedge" in the place that "maybe" something positive could have been accomplished.

It's a big "maybe" I agree. However failure was garanteed by the pussyfied way Bush danced with the UN (Blairs doing) and worried so much about the US public not wanting to hear about losing troops in a far away dusty place that they tried to do it by proxy using local gangs to attempt to do our dirty work for us. Never having enough troops in country so that they taliban could see we were too weak to be feared thus effectively fought until such time as our resolve broke. An now finally telling them to just hang on a few more months and we'll hand victory to them on a silver platter.

So we will then be in a position of having one of the ugliest gang of criminals back running the country and if Pakistan becomes inhospitable (for whatever reason) to AQ, ready to provide them with another safe haven.

But that's ok apparently just as long as yanks can pretend we dont have to fight anymore.

Until next time that is...

- Peter.

Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2549326)

Right there is the problem with the American thought process. Worrying about he "end game" before thinking intelligently about the origin and first steps.

Remember, it hasnt "turned out" yet at all. It's ongoing and will probably be ongoing for decades to come. We might cut and run now, or soon, but we will be back, wether you like it or not.

Getting rid of the blight on humanity that was AQ and their medieval sponsoring thugs was the right thing do to. But it needed to be done right. Which meant the US had to blitzkrieg the place with no concern for US casualties with the intention of swamping the AQ hideouts and shocking and awing these goons sufficiently that there was enough of a "wedge" in the place that "maybe" something positive could have been accomplished.

It's a big "maybe" I agree. However failure was garanteed by the pussyfied way Bush danced with the UN (Blairs doing) and worried so much about the US public not wanting to hear about losing troops in a far away dusty place that they tried to do it by proxy using local gangs to attempt to do our dirty work for us. Never having enough troops in country so that they taliban could see we were too weak to be feared thus effectively fought until such time as our resolve broke. An now finally telling them to just hang on a few more months and we'll hand victory to them on a silver platter.

So we will then be in a position of having one of the ugliest gang of criminals back running the country and if Pakistan becomes inhospitable (for whatever reason) to AQ, ready to provide them with another safe haven.

But that's ok apparently just as long as yanks can pretend we dont have to fight anymore.

Until next time that is...

- Peter.

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel (Post 2549459)

With your "no concern for US losses" remark, I expect your next comment to be that you just signed on to the infantry.... or do you posses concern for yourself, but not for others?

Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2549326)

...However failure was garanteed by the pussyfied way Bush danced with the UN (Blairs doing) and worried so much about the US public not wanting to hear about losing troops in a far away dusty place that they tried to do it by proxy using local gangs to attempt to do our dirty work for us...

Originally Posted by Honus (Post 2549552)

Really? I'm no expert, but I thought that the bigger problem was that Bush ignored Afghanistan from about 3/03 on.

Originally Posted by strelnik (Post 2549465)

Sadly, this whole situation makes me realize that there's no country on earth that is mature enough to run its own affairs, let alone anyone else's.

I agree that our original premise for AFG was correct, but the execution was flawed. So was Iraq, also by a larger measure. Plus we allowed opportunists in there.

And yes, AQ is a blight. Granted the West has done some terrible things, but they rarely institutionalize them these days.

Curiously enough, the only countries that still have slavery are Ethiopia and Sudan, both run by radical Muslims. No offense, chilcutt, I put the radicals in the same wacko bag as the abortion shooters.

The larger political end game that was created during and after WW2 was at least a start, but there do not seem to be any political leaders who have more vision or savvy than a high-school football coach.

The UN is a bankrupt, bloated bureaucracy, and key national powers keep making silly political mistakes which just further complicate things.

And people who have the brain of a small rodent or Gila monster, but who also possess used AK-47s, updates 2 or n3 from the 70s (still going strong like an MB diesel) keep on spreading their vitriol and their carnage.

Truly, we get what we deserve, because we have sanctioned it or pretended not to see it.

Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2549503)

I've answered that silly jibe before. Not wasting my time with it again.

- Peter.

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel (Post 2550226)

Yes, the armchair quarterback..... Good thing you will never posses a position in which you have say in policy. You and your wife have kids yet? Your opinion about "no concern for US losses" may very well change when/if you do. It is all just like a video game to the uninvolved war mongers, but every kid that dies is somebody's son or daughter, and they deserve to have leadership that IS concerned with losses. Stick to Medal Of Honor, where the losses are truly imaginary.

Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2550243)

Listen dude. I've been a conscript myself. You get it? Not a volunteer. No ****ing choice. So unless you were a draftee yourself I really don't give a damm what you think.

If a countries foreign policy is held hostage to the inability of it's citizenry to absorb the casualties necessary to to win whatever wars it gets involved in it might as well give up.

- Peter.

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel (Post 2550249)

Maybe you could replace "give up" with not get involved? That would make perfect sense. Getting involved with other peoples conflicts is the problem, not how we deal with the mess after we stick our nose in it.

Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2550261)

Really? So we could have ignored 911 huh?



Actually, therewith I agree.



It comes down to a matter of strategy. Basically what I'm saying is, if you're going to do it at all, then make damm sure you do it right in the first place. That's the only way to ensure you are not wasting your troops lives in the long run. So instead of insufficient waves being wasted for years perhaps a tidal wave at the very beginning was what was needed. Unfortunately for purely domestic political considerations that didn't happen. And the whole sorry mess continues.

- Peter.

Originally Posted by pj67coll (Post 2550261)

Really? So we could have ignored 911 huh?



Actually, therewith I agree.



It comes down to a matter of strategy. Basically what I'm saying is, if you're going to do it at all, then make damm sure you do it right in the first place. That's the only way to ensure you are not wasting your troops lives in the long run. So instead of insufficient waves being wasted for years perhaps a tidal wave at the very beginning was what was needed. Unfortunately for purely domestic political considerations that didn't happen. And the whole sorry mess continues.

- Peter.