Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Afghanistan


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Afghanistan Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 12:29:33 AM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline 		Here you go, Panda.  History paints a very bleak picture of this part of the world.
 

"Afghanistan: Can Obama succeed in the 'land of the unruly?'"

UPDATED: 01:39 PM EST 02.03.09
By John Blake CNN

"The ancient Persians called it "the land of the unruly." Historians call it "the graveyard of empires." President Obama calls Afghanistan something else: The "central front" in the battle against terrorism.

Afghanistan has defied armies led by military leaders including Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan. Now Obama's new administration will attempt to accomplish what few leaders have been able to do: stabilize Afghanistan.

Obama says he wants to start by adding U.S. troops to Afghanistan. Although some believe that a "surge" helped in Iraq, there is no military solution for stabilizing Afghanistan, several military and political experts say.

"Controlling the Afghan people is a losing proposition," says Stephen Tanner, author of "Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the Fall of the Taliban." "No one has ever been able to control the country."

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is struggling to control the country now, Tanner says. The landlocked nation, which is roughly the size of Texas, has no strong national police, he says; its citizens are averse to taxes and a strong central government.

Afghans seem to unite only when a foreign army occupies their country, Tanner says.

"The people are so disunited within that they can't resist an invader at the border," Tanner says. "But once you're in, you're surrounded by them."

The resurgence of the Taliban will complicate Obama's plans as well, Tanner says."

http://cnn.mlogic.mobi/cnn/archive/archive/detail/240601/full

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to ThatDamnedPanda)
Profile   Post #: 41
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 1:05:44 AM   
MasterShake69


Posts: 752
Joined: 11/30/2005
Status: offline 		yes but more so with liberals.  Very few are truly anti war.  They typically are politically motivated anti war.
I'm still waiting for john Edwards explanation on his change of position regarding the Iraq war.  I cant believe not one reporter asked a question about that prior to the 2004 election.
How you can go from being to the right of George w bush to changing to being against the war.  Saying Bush sr didn't go far enough in the 90's as the reason why you support George W going into Iraq.  Edwards Iraq war support was never about WMD.   Bill CLinton proved before being called a racist that Obamas always being anti Iraq war was a farce.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Vendaval

Humans have a way of repeating history, no matter their political or religious belief systems of lack thereof.

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69

History repeats itself with liberals




     I don't find that to be a partisan sort of behavior.


(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 42
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 1:15:16 AM   
StrangerThan


Posts: 1515
Joined: 4/25/2008
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Vendaval

Here you go, Panda.  History paints a very bleak picture of this part of the world.
 

"Afghanistan: Can Obama succeed in the 'land of the unruly?'"

UPDATED: 01:39 PM EST 02.03.09
By John Blake CNN

"The ancient Persians called it "the land of the unruly." Historians call it "the graveyard of empires." President Obama calls Afghanistan something else: The "central front" in the battle against terrorism.

Afghanistan has defied armies led by military leaders including Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan. Now Obama's new administration will attempt to accomplish what few leaders have been able to do: stabilize Afghanistan.

Obama says he wants to start by adding U.S. troops to Afghanistan. Although some believe that a "surge" helped in Iraq, there is no military solution for stabilizing Afghanistan, several military and political experts say.

"Controlling the Afghan people is a losing proposition," says Stephen Tanner, author of "Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the Fall of the Taliban." "No one has ever been able to control the country."

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is struggling to control the country now, Tanner says. The landlocked nation, which is roughly the size of Texas, has no strong national police, he says; its citizens are averse to taxes and a strong central government.

Afghans seem to unite only when a foreign army occupies their country, Tanner says.

"The people are so disunited within that they can't resist an invader at the border," Tanner says. "But once you're in, you're surrounded by them."

The resurgence of the Taliban will complicate Obama's plans as well, Tanner says."

http://cnn.mlogic.mobi/cnn/archive/archive/detail/240601/full


I'll second some of the notions in your quote. A friend who came back from Afghanistan last year came back a completely changed man. The one who left was friendly, open, willing to bed over backwards to help anyone. The one that returned was deeply distrustful of the Middle East, and US politicians. Can't remember his exact title but his job was defusing, removal and destruction of IED's. He talked often about a populace that would virtually disappear when explosives or some sort of ambush had been set, only to reappear in throngs and head about daily business afterwards. He described humanitarian missions that carried the feel of the smiling person in front being a distraction for the knife at your back. He had a unique view in a way. He felt those who supported invasions in the Middle East to be flag waving zealots who had no clue as to the reality on the ground, and those who pined endlessly for the loss of innocent life to be just as ignorant.

In his estimation, we could have flattened the damned place a thousand times over, but because some innocent someone might die, we spent our time as walking targets and trying not to die.

Many in the Middle East hold an antiquated type of thought when it comes to war. Saddam offered some classic quotes along that line when he promised hell for invaders and battles of epic porportions. The hell... is a matter of perspective, but one thing no one seems to understand is that we could flatten the place a thousand times over. We just don't because... we're civilized I guess. Personally, if he were alive, I'd send Pershing to do the job in Afghanistan he did in the Phillipines. Yes, I know, completely different circumstances, but if you remove the vaunted trip to heaven and the waiting virgins, the desire to build bombs triggered by your cell phone or hide in hollowed out places in the back of a car and use a flip down license plate as a sniper's loophole, tends to wane. It also tends to wane if you flatten everything, and everyone.

But of course, we respect cultures, and we'd be called bullies, and somewhere someone would convene a court of war crimes. So I guess it's better to let soldiers be targets and to let grieving families know we'd hate to be thought of as bullies. Later on, Afghanistan can add another empire to its graveyard and ascribe it to the prowess of its fighters.

As I told a person in a debate on air once, the Middle East is not a glassed over parking lot for three reasons. The first is oil. The second is that we'd have to deal with the fallout. The third is a testament to the humanity of the people the zealots among them hate.


(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 43
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 2:43:45 AM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline 		Hello Stranger Than,
 
I have a friend here who enlisted for the Army and deployed to Afghanistan.  He was a very sweet, sincere guy and so innocent in so many ways.  He came back completely changed from the experience, hard, rough, jaded and plagued by nightmares.
 
Your 3 reasons for the Middle East still being intact strike a chord.  I remember watching a documentary about the earliest builders of cities and step-pyramids and all across the desert were ruins of those who had gone before, buried in the sands by time and the winds.
 
Do you recall this poem by Percy Bysshe Shelley?  He wrote this poem nearly 200 years ago, in 1818.


"Ozymandias"
 
 "I met a traveler from an antique land
Who said: Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk, a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed.

And on the pedestal these words appear:
"My name is Ozymandias, king of kings:
Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away."

http://homepages.wmich.edu/~cooneys/poems/ozy.shelley.html


quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan
As I told a person in a debate on air once, the Middle East is not a glassed over parking lot for three reasons. The first is oil. The second is that we'd have to deal with the fallout. The third is a testament to the humanity of the people the zealots among them hate.


_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 44
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 5:26:53 AM   
kittinSol


Posts: 16926
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Vendaval

kittenSol and slaveboy,
 
I did some checking and there is a poem by Kipling that describes the battlefield in Afghanistan once the fighting stopped and the locals came out.  Tom Wolfe is also mentioned in regards to the phrase but I cannot locate the exact origin so far.


Afghanistan, Graveyard of Empires.

Publication: Foreign Affairs
Publication Date: 01-NOV-01
Author: Bearden, Milton

"In the aftermath of the second British misadventure in Afghanistan, Rudyard Kipling penned his immortal lines on the role of the local women in tidying up the battlefields:

"The Young British Soldier", 1892

"When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains
And the women come out to cut up what remains
Jest roll to your rifle an' blow out your brains
An' go to your Gawd like a soldier."

http://www.accessmylibrary.com/coms2/summary_0286-10275078_ITM


quote:

ORIGINAL: slaveboyforyou

quote:

Do you happen to remember who described Afghanistan as 'the graveyard of empires'?


Thank you Kittin, now I'm sitting here racking my brain trying to remember who said that.  The first person that pops in my head is......Rudyard Kipling?



A belated 'thank you', Ven :-) .

_____________________________



(in reply to Vendaval)
Profile   Post #: 45
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 5:27:44 AM   
Vendaval


Posts: 10297
Joined: 1/15/2005
Status: offline 		You are most welcome, dear.

_____________________________

"Beware, the woods at night, beware the lunar light.
So in this gray haze we'll be meating again, and on that
great day, I will tease you all the same."
"WOLF MOON", OCTOBER RUST, TYPE O NEGATIVE


http://KinkMeet.co.uk

(in reply to kittinSol)
Profile   Post #: 46
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 9:24:12 AM   
domiguy


Posts: 12952
Joined: 5/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69

we didn't take the eye off the ball we gave the war to our NATO Allies to handle.  You know the same allies that liberals wanted us to rely on when invading Iraq.  It seems our NATO allies couldn't handle the situation and turned it into a big mess.  What's that giant white and green objects moving??  Its just Canadians with the wrong color camouflage ;)




quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Could never understand the war in Iraq.  Couldn't understand how it seemed that when we had quieted the Taliban in Afghanistan we took our eye off of the ball.

There was never a strong case for war after 9/11.  Obviously if you were going to strike Afghanistan would have been the target.  Just to shut down the terrorist bases.  That might have been the end of it. 

No one wants us to be the world's police force.  I am saddened and hope the best for those that fought and continue to fight in Iraq.  What a waste.

I hate the phrase  "The war on terror."  Fuck, it is a mess. Exactly who are we fighting and what is the enemies agenda? Rather hard to discern.

I just don't want to see Americans throwing away their lives and limbs in a futile effort.



You are delusional. Do you have any idea how many troops our allies contributed to the war effort?  What was the total amount deployed in Afghanistan...!5,000 in total?  They were expected to hold the line?

The administration is responsible for taking their eye off Afghanistan which enabled the Taliban to reclaim what many had died for.

Please do not respond if you have nothing worthwhile to add.

_____________________________



(in reply to MasterShake69)
Profile   Post #: 47
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 11:38:55 AM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheUtopian




quote:


Gordon was working at the request of the Egyptian Khedive, to fight the mahdist ( sp ) rebels, and as far as I know there were no British troops in Khartoum. The relief forces arrived two days after he had been killed. If you must state this stuff at least get your facts right.


I knew I was in danger of striking a nerve of nationalist....

Whether they were with Gordon by proxy or directly under the banner of the crown ; they were there....and they got thoroughly wupped ----Like it or not.

http://american_almanac.tripod.com/mahdia.htm

quote:


Your facts are totally incorrect. Only 4,500 of the estimated 16,500 were soldiers, there were 12,000 civilians made up of women and children camp followers, and civil servants and such. Your rock throwing natives had Jezail muskets, with a range of 500 yards, far longer than the 150 yards of the Brown Bess. Most of the retreating column was picked of by sniper fire as they retreated through the passes.


Give me a break....You speak of some of the indigenous fighters with 500-yard muskets?  The British had artillery and still couldn't win! And whether you wanna skue the numbers and parse out women/children and civil servants---as you are calling them---is really inconsequential---- because it was still an invading force bent on conquest. 




You still dont get it and have your facts wrong. Despite the inaccurate link, Hicks wasnt with British units either, both he and Gordon were with Egyptian regular forces at a time when the Sudan was controlled by Egypt. Egypt had appealed to britian for assistance, so bang goes your " bent on conquest" nonsense.

As for the retreat from Kabul, I am not skewing any figures, as you suggest. A quick check online would confirm this for you. It isnt my fault you are "facts" are incorrect is it ?

Getting back on topic, if Bush and Blair had not been so bent on getting rid of Saddam, we might have made more progress in Afghanistan. When troops were first sent, there was co-operation both from Russia and Iran, whose intelligence services provided the links with the Northern Allience. It seems to me the bigger problem of the Taliban and Al Qaida was left to fester while we hurried into Iraq.

(in reply to TheUtopian)
Profile   Post #: 48
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 12:07:38 PM   
MasterShake69


Posts: 752
Joined: 11/30/2005
Status: offline 		So those forces from our NATO allies the liberals required before supporting Bush In Iraq never existed ;)

how many troops would you say is required in Afghanistan??   The more troops the more it looks like an occupying force.  How many troops were needed to defeat the Taliban?  The ground war was outsourced to the Afghan resistance with US Special Forces assisting.

Also remember what you need to use to get Bin Laden is Special Forces because he’s hiding in the mountains.

Now a point you might not understand is MOST of our NATO allies simply dont fight.  They go through the motions of saying they support us and they send troops but MANY of those troops do NOTHING.  And when they do fight many dont do it as well as the Americans.


http://www2.canada.com/ottawacitizen/news/story.html?id=30f7e1f4-f7be-4688-90f8-beee3ace83c4

There are about 33,000 U.S. soldiers in the campaign in Afghanistan, making up about half of the international forces here.

There are close to 70,000 foreign soldiers in Afghanistan, more than 50,000 of them in a NATO-led force drawn from 40 countries and the remainder in the US-led Operation Enduring Freedom campaign.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=12227

.. American criticism of some European governments erupted last year when Defense Secretary Robert Gates -- a Bush administration appointee who Obama kept on -- warned that NATO risked degenerating into a “two-tiered alliance” of countries that fight and those that don’t.

http://articles.latimes.com/2008/jan/16/world/fg-usafghan16

In an unusual public criticism, Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates said he believes NATO forces currently deployed in southern Afghanistan do not know how to combat a guerrilla insurgency, a deficiency that could be contributing to the rising violence in the fight against the Taliban

http://www.spiegel.de/international/0,1518,449183,00.html
Once again this week, the friction that has been steadily building between Germany and its NATO allies flared up as 340 parliamentarians gathered in Quebec City, Canada for their annual meeting. Things are not going well in Afghanistan and allies fighting in the more dangerous southern part of the country are fed up with countries -- like Germany, France, Italy and Spain -- refusing to send reinforcements from their relatively peaceful sectors in the northern Afghanistan. According to the German Green Party defense expert Winfried Nachtwei, who was at the meeting -- as quoted by the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung Web site -- a British participant said that there are soldiers in Afghanistan who drink beer or tea, and there are soldiers who risk their lives.



quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69

we didn't take the eye off the ball we gave the war to our NATO Allies to handle.  You know the same allies that liberals wanted us to rely on when invading Iraq.  It seems our NATO allies couldn't handle the situation and turned it into a big mess.  What's that giant white and green objects moving??  Its just Canadians with the wrong color camouflage ;)




quote:

ORIGINAL: domiguy

Could never understand the war in Iraq.  Couldn't understand how it seemed that when we had quieted the Taliban in Afghanistan we took our eye off of the ball.

There was never a strong case for war after 9/11.  Obviously if you were going to strike Afghanistan would have been the target.  Just to shut down the terrorist bases.  That might have been the end of it. 

No one wants us to be the world's police force.  I am saddened and hope the best for those that fought and continue to fight in Iraq.  What a waste.

I hate the phrase  "The war on terror."  Fuck, it is a mess. Exactly who are we fighting and what is the enemies agenda? Rather hard to discern.

I just don't want to see Americans throwing away their lives and limbs in a futile effort.



You are delusional. Do you have any idea how many troops our allies contributed to the war effort?  What was the total amount deployed in Afghanistan...!5,000 in total?  They were expected to hold the line?

The administration is responsible for taking their eye off Afghanistan which enabled the Taliban to reclaim what many had died for.

Please do not respond if you have nothing worthwhile to add.

(in reply to domiguy)
Profile   Post #: 49
RE: Afghanistan - 3/6/2009 11:47:13 PM   
TheUtopian


Posts: 259
Status: offline
quote:



You still dont get it and have your facts wrong. Despite the inaccurate link, Hicks wasnt with British units either, both he and Gordon were with Egyptian regular forces at a time when the Sudan was controlled by Egypt. Egypt had appealed to britian for assistance, so bang goes your " bent on conquest" nonsense.


You're taking this stuff personal -- Almost as if you think I'm trying to sucker punch you and the British military on the chin.

That was never my intention. My intention was to point out that Afghanistan is a very inhospitable place....a real meatgrinder of sorts---and much more so than Iraq. And its also a huge waste of money.....especially when both of our countries are already completely bankrupt.

Now....if you really wanna know my opinion as far as the British ability to scrap.....watch this video. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mjep2b224Go






- R


_____________________________

Vae Victus! - Woe to the conquered....

My tears are the cure for cancer - I sweat testosterone, bleed black, and piss excellence.

(in reply to Politesub53)
Profile   Post #: 50
RE: Afghanistan - 3/7/2009 12:51:47 AM   
Hippiekinkster


Posts: 5512
Joined: 11/20/2007
From: Liechtenstein
Status: offline 		I'm curious, there, Shake69. You state on your profile that you are 37. If that is true, and if you are so terribly worried about Afghanistan, why aren't you there? They'll take you into the Army. Ft. Dix might be a little rough at your age, but you'd make it through.  Just don't go in August like I did. So why are you not over there helping defeat the Tewwowists on their own ground?

Why are you so concerned about what Deutschland is or is not doing? They have a Constitution, you know (the Grundgesetz), and they have to follow it, and if it says that they cannot have an offensive force, then that's how it is. Do you want them to do a Bush and just piss on their Constitution? You think that Germany should just rip up their Basic Law and send German kids to die in Afghanistan just because you don't want to go? That seems rather, oh, I don't know, inconsistent is the best word I can think of that is consistent with what I'm thinking.

If you go over there and give your life I'll be eternally grateful, or until I perish, whichever comes first (void in Nirvana). I'm sure I can make a couple subbies from here go and put some dandelions on your grave, however much they might dislike actually getting up and doing something. You WILL be remembered, I promise. I'll make sure your sacrifice is noted in spray-paint on the side of the Bush Library. I've already started a fund. There is $3.47 US, plus a Marta token, plus a Canadian Loonie, plus an old 2-Deutschmark coin from before the Euro, a couple Mexican 100 Peso coins (old Pesos; don't get excited) and some stamps. There's a really cool stamp from Zimbabwe. It's about 2cm high, but nearly 20 cm long, to accomodate all the zeros. The Germans were much smarter. They just overprinted their stamps with, say, "fünfundzwanzig Milliarden Mark" (25 billion marks). I hope our Postal Service is as smart as the German Reichspostamt was.

I just think it would be a terrible waste, because not only do I not know what you would be dying for, but I'd also miss your invigorating prose. Do YOU know what you would be dying for? It truly is a mystery to me. UBL is in Pakistan, right? Wouldn't it make sense to look for him in Pakistan? Or is it another case of the Mullah Nasrudin,

"Mullah!" exclaimed Nasrudin's friend Amir. "Why are you crawling around in the street?"
"I lost a ring, and I need to find it. My wife gave it to me."
"Well, where did you lose it?" Amir asked.
"Two streets over," Nasrudin replied.
"Then why," Amir wanted to know, " are you looking for it here?"
"Because, Amir, my dear friend, the light is much better here."

Really, why does the US keep looking (actually it was Cheney, speaking through his sockpuppet George W) in Afghanistan? WTF are we doing there?

< Message edited by Hippiekinkster -- 3/7/2009 1:03:44 AM >

_____________________________

"We are convinced that freedom w/o Socialism is privilege and injustice, and that Socialism w/o freedom is slavery and brutality." Bakunin

“Nothing we do, however virtuous, can be accomplished alone; therefore we are saved by love.” Reinhold Ne

(in reply to TheUtopian)
Profile   Post #: 51
RE: Afghanistan - 3/7/2009 10:26:30 AM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		      Thanks to all for the great replys and discussion.  There was a last question in the OP that I should provide my answer to, though.

     Goals.  How do we decide what "success" is with regard to our mission in Afghanistan?  What are we spending good lives on? 

     In my opinion, our goal in Afghanistan should not be to bring order, but to restore chaos.  Let them go back to being tribes, but don't let anybody get as powerful as the Taliban became.

    We do what we have to with special forces and air power.  Enough Marines to make sure nobody questions who owns the airport, and embassy row.  This is basically how we started in Afghanistan after 9/11, and I think it was one of the smartest things Bush did as President.  The nation building follow up, not so much.  We should be doing deals, and little alliances (with lots of double-dealing and back-stabbing, in the traditions of the place). 

     Our definition of success in Afghanistan should be the ability to wash our hands of a hopeless mess that isn't a threat to anybody on the other side of those mountains.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 52
RE: Afghanistan - 3/7/2009 8:20:26 PM   
MasterShake69


Posts: 752
Joined: 11/30/2005
Status: offline 		Well I have always had a childhood dream of being an Airforce pilot.  If I could physically do it I would fly today in operation Iranian freedom.  There is nothing more I would love to do then bombing all of Iran's WMD facilities and command and control. ;) McCain must have been such a problem for you guys to attack last year.  You couldn’t label him a chicken hawk because he actually served in Vietnam and supported the surge and the AFgan wars. Now if one doesn’t serve in the military going by a liberal’s logic then they shouldn’t be allowed to deploy American forces overseas or support such actions like Mr Obama and Mr Clinton ;)   Now I understand why you liberals like to perv my profile.  By making this about me you change the topic.

The last solid evidence Mr. Bin laden was anywhere going by DNA was in Afghanistan.  There have only been rumors of Bin Laden being in Pakistan northern tribal areas.  However that didn’t prevent US forces from using Drones to search for the possibility that bin laden was in N Pakistan.  So VP Cheney and Prez Bush were actually sending US forces to look for Bin Laden in N Pakistan typically using Drones.   They tried to do it with as little press as possibile so not to cause internal problems in Pakistan.  Those little facts makes your little story and attack against bush meaningless.   Next time try a little harder and use some facts then what you say might actually make some sense.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

I'm curious, there, Shake69. You state on your profile that you are 37. If that is true, and if you are so terribly worried about Afghanistan, why aren't you there? They'll take you into the Army. Ft. Dix might be a little rough at your age, but you'd make it through.  Just don't go in August like I did. So why are you not over there helping defeat the Tewwowists on their own ground?

Why are you so concerned about what Deutschland is or is not doing? They have a Constitution, you know (the Grundgesetz), and they have to follow it, and if it says that they cannot have an offensive force, then that's how it is. Do you want them to do a Bush and just piss on their Constitution? You think that Germany should just rip up their Basic Law and send German kids to die in Afghanistan just because you don't want to go? That seems rather, oh, I don't know, inconsistent is the best word I can think of that is consistent with what I'm thinking.

If you go over there and give your life I'll be eternally grateful, or until I perish, whichever comes first (void in Nirvana). I'm sure I can make a couple subbies from here go and put some dandelions on your grave, however much they might dislike actually getting up and doing something. You WILL be remembered, I promise. I'll make sure your sacrifice is noted in spray-paint on the side of the Bush Library. I've already started a fund. There is $3.47 US, plus a Marta token, plus a Canadian Loonie, plus an old 2-Deutschmark coin from before the Euro, a couple Mexican 100 Peso coins (old Pesos; don't get excited) and some stamps. There's a really cool stamp from Zimbabwe. It's about 2cm high, but nearly 20 cm long, to accomodate all the zeros. The Germans were much smarter. They just overprinted their stamps with, say, "fünfundzwanzig Milliarden Mark" (25 billion marks). I hope our Postal Service is as smart as the German Reichspostamt was.

I just think it would be a terrible waste, because not only do I not know what you would be dying for, but I'd also miss your invigorating prose. Do YOU know what you would be dying for? It truly is a mystery to me. UBL is in Pakistan, right? Wouldn't it make sense to look for him in Pakistan? Or is it another case of the Mullah Nasrudin,

"Mullah!" exclaimed Nasrudin's friend Amir. "Why are you crawling around in the street?"
"I lost a ring, and I need to find it. My wife gave it to me."
"Well, where did you lose it?" Amir asked.
"Two streets over," Nasrudin replied.
"Then why," Amir wanted to know, " are you looking for it here?"
"Because, Amir, my dear friend, the light is much better here."

Really, why does the US keep looking (actually it was Cheney, speaking through his sockpuppet George W) in Afghanistan? WTF are we doing there?

(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 53
RE: Afghanistan - 3/7/2009 9:06:45 PM   
UPSG


Posts: 331
Joined: 1/22/2009
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: MasterShake69

Well I have always had a childhood dream of being an Airforce pilot.  If I could physically do it I would fly today in operation Iranian freedom.  There is nothing more I would love to do then bombing all of Iran's WMD facilities and command and control. ;) McCain must have been such a problem for you guys to attack last year.  You couldn’t label him a chicken hawk because he actually served in Vietnam and supported the surge and the AFgan wars. Now if one doesn’t serve in the military going by a liberal’s logic then they shouldn’t be allowed to deploy American forces overseas or support such actions like Mr Obama and Mr Clinton ;)   Now I understand why you liberals like to perv my profile.  By making this about me you change the topic.

The last solid evidence Mr. Bin laden was anywhere going by DNA was in Afghanistan.  There have only been rumors of Bin Laden being in Pakistan northern tribal areas.  However that didn’t prevent US forces from using Drones to search for the possibility that bin laden was in N Pakistan.  So VP Cheney and Prez Bush were actually sending US forces to look for Bin Laden in N Pakistan typically using Drones.   They tried to do it with as little press as possibile so not to cause internal problems in Pakistan.  Those little facts makes your little story and attack against bush meaningless.   Next time try a little harder and use some facts then what you say might actually make some sense.


quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster

I'm curious, there, Shake69. You state on your profile that you are 37. If that is true, and if you are so terribly worried about Afghanistan, why aren't you there? They'll take you into the Army. Ft. Dix might be a little rough at your age, but you'd make it through.  Just don't go in August like I did. So why are you not over there helping defeat the Tewwowists on their own ground?

Why are you so concerned about what Deutschland is or is not doing? They have a Constitution, you know (the Grundgesetz), and they have to follow it...



MS,

You and any other man or woman who have never served in the military are in full right, and not at all out of order, to express your viewpoints on war or military campaigns as they involve one's country and national interests.

I think what might bother HippieK, and rightly so, is that there are often people who seem to subconsciously feel that while wars might be necessary, they themselves are too important to fight in them. I don't know you personally nor well enough on this board to even hazard a guess if that is or is not you.

I do find it interesting, and even ironic, that as civilization has supposedly become more civilized, gone are the days when nobility were the knights offering protection to lords and peasantry, and gone are the days kings sat mounted on the battlefields. Today it is usually the poor who fight the wars and consequently provide the protection for the rich. But maybe I digress....

(in reply to MasterShake69)
Profile   Post #: 54
RE: Afghanistan - 3/8/2009 6:55:49 AM   
NorthernGent


Posts: 8730
Joined: 7/10/2006
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

What are your thoughts on the build-up in Afghanistan?  Do you think the war will widen in the tribal areas of Pakistan, and become public?  What should our goals be to define success in the region? 



a) They don't want you there.

b) A value system comes from within, rather than outside coercion.

c) Assuming the idea is to prevent terrorism, then it is seriously misguided. US excursions into muslim lands will only add fuel to the fire, but then US foreign policy strategists are well aware of this and I'd estimate that there is an agenda wrapped up in economic interests.

_____________________________

I have the courage to be a coward - but not beyond my limits.

Sooner or later, the man who wins is the man who thinks he can.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 55
RE: Afghanistan - 3/8/2009 7:20:56 AM   
corysub


Posts: 1492
Joined: 1/1/2004
Status: offline 		Barack wants to"reach out" to MODERATE Taliban...is he serious or seriously world knowledge challanged?  Moderate Taliban is like Nazi's who were not members of the Gestapo!   And who are these "moderates" in this extreme Islamic group.......?  He compares the "Sunni" success by GW and General Petraus to a group that believes woman are second class people..a group that inflicted the most harsh rules against the population, and still is in open warfare with our troops on the ground.  I guess the democrat party definition of a "surge" is to"surge" in retreat!!
It's VietNam all over again. 
I also wonder who in his "advisory group" would be so naieve as to suggest this inexperienced young President present this idiotic "trial balloon" in public. I"m sure Chris Matthews will find a way to blame GW for this too!

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/08/us/politics/08obama.html

< Message edited by corysub -- 3/8/2009 7:23:23 AM >

(in reply to NorthernGent)
Profile   Post #: 56
RE: Afghanistan - 3/8/2009 7:49:13 AM   
FullCircle


Posts: 5713
Joined: 11/24/2005
Status: offline 		In every group there are different personalities that is the nature of groups. I don't think finding moderate Taliban leaders will be easy but you'll find people fighting with the Taliban do so for various reasons such as fear or misunderstanding of other positions, divide and conquer is nothing new. There were people in the Nazi regime who were a help to the allies, some people have no real options at a point in time and so go along with things they don't agree with 100%, they do so because it's the closest position to their own they can find. It's those people you have to find because if you don't try to engage with these people to convince them they could be better off in a different situation then you'll be there forever; killing these Taliban that appear from the shadows by putting down hoes and picking up guns. 

< Message edited by FullCircle -- 3/8/2009 7:50:37 AM >

_____________________________

∞ ﮒuקּƹɼ ƾɛϰưϫԼ Ƨωιϯϲћ.

(in reply to corysub)
Profile   Post #: 57
RE: Afghanistan - 3/8/2009 10:07:08 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline 		Hippiekinkster said:
"UBL is in Pakistan, right? Wouldn't it make sense to look for him in Pakistan?"

Well, yes. That way we could extend the fight to Iran pretty easily, when they came to the defence of Pakistan. Our forces in Afghanistan could go east to baghdad,  then head south thru the peninsula, leaving nothing but rubble and the occasional looted museum all the way to Kuwait.

These wars are not about oil but religion. Islam is all about conversion at swordpoint, has been since Mohammed. They will be denied their world caliphate only by the use of force.

Of course, if you're not for the immiediate and huge expansion of this little pissing contest into a real war, then invading Pakistan is a truly terrible idea.


(in reply to Hippiekinkster)
Profile   Post #: 58
RE: Afghanistan - 3/8/2009 10:09:20 AM   
FullCircle


Posts: 5713
Joined: 11/24/2005
Status: offline 		They don't still use swords do they?

_____________________________

∞ ﮒuקּƹɼ ƾɛϰưϫԼ Ƨωιϯϲћ.

(in reply to truckinslave)
Profile   Post #: 59
RE: Afghanistan - 3/8/2009 10:22:12 AM   
truckinslave


Posts: 3897
Joined: 6/16/2004
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: StrangerThan

quote:

ORIGINAL: Vendaval

Here you go, Panda.  History paints a very bleak picture of this part of the world.
 

"Afghanistan: Can Obama succeed in the 'land of the unruly?'"

UPDATED: 01:39 PM EST 02.03.09
By John Blake CNN

"The ancient Persians called it "the land of the unruly." Historians call it "the graveyard of empires." President Obama calls Afghanistan something else: The "central front" in the battle against terrorism.

Afghanistan has defied armies led by military leaders including Alexander the Great and Genghis Khan. Now Obama's new administration will attempt to accomplish what few leaders have been able to do: stabilize Afghanistan.

Obama says he wants to start by adding U.S. troops to Afghanistan. Although some believe that a "surge" helped in Iraq, there is no military solution for stabilizing Afghanistan, several military and political experts say.

"Controlling the Afghan people is a losing proposition," says Stephen Tanner, author of "Afghanistan: A Military History from Alexander the Great to the Fall of the Taliban." "No one has ever been able to control the country."

Afghan President Hamid Karzai is struggling to control the country now, Tanner says. The landlocked nation, which is roughly the size of Texas, has no strong national police, he says; its citizens are averse to taxes and a strong central government.

Afghans seem to unite only when a foreign army occupies their country, Tanner says.

"The people are so disunited within that they can't resist an invader at the border," Tanner says. "But once you're in, you're surrounded by them."

The resurgence of the Taliban will complicate Obama's plans as well, Tanner says."

http://cnn.mlogic.mobi/cnn/archive/archive/detail/240601/full


I'll second some of the notions in your quote. A friend who came back from Afghanistan last year came back a completely changed man. The one who left was friendly, open, willing to bed over backwards to help anyone. The one that returned was deeply distrustful of the Middle East, and US politicians. Can't remember his exact title but his job was defusing, removal and destruction of IED's. He talked often about a populace that would virtually disappear when explosives or some sort of ambush had been set, only to reappear in throngs and head about daily business afterwards. He described humanitarian missions that carried the feel of the smiling person in front being a distraction for the knife at your back. He had a unique view in a way. He felt those who supported invasions in the Middle East to be flag waving zealots who had no clue as to the reality on the ground, and those who pined endlessly for the loss of innocent life to be just as ignorant.

In his estimation, we could have flattened the damned place a thousand times over, but because some innocent someone might die, we spent our time as walking targets and trying not to die.

Many in the Middle East hold an antiquated type of thought when it comes to war. Saddam offered some classic quotes along that line when he promised hell for invaders and battles of epic porportions. The hell... is a matter of perspective, but one thing no one seems to understand is that we could flatten the place a thousand times over. We just don't because... we're civilized I guess. Personally, if he were alive, I'd send Pershing to do the job in Afghanistan he did in the Phillipines. Yes, I know, completely different circumstances, but if you remove the vaunted trip to heaven and the waiting virgins, the desire to build bombs triggered by your cell phone or hide in hollowed out places in the back of a car and use a flip down license plate as a sniper's loophole, tends to wane. It also tends to wane if you flatten everything, and everyone.

But of course, we respect cultures, and we'd be called bullies, and somewhere someone would convene a court of war crimes. So I guess it's better to let soldiers be targets and to let grieving families know we'd hate to be thought of as bullies. Later on, Afghanistan can add another empire to its graveyard and ascribe it to the prowess of its fighters.

As I told a person in a debate on air once, the Middle East is not a glassed over parking lot for three reasons. The first is oil. The second is that we'd have to deal with the fallout. The third is a testament to the humanity of the people the zealots among them hate.




My son-in-law is an Afghan vet and basically agrees, I think, with your friend. We learned nothing from Nam, imo: here we are, again, fighting limited wars with insane rules governing contact with the enemy, allowing the enemy sanctuary behind political lines, etc etc.

Modern Americans mostly would be shocked to learn that one of Roosevelts key advisors (one of his nephews; name escapes me) openly- in the press, for Gods sake- advocated killing a million Japanese civilians to "break their will" before landing a ground invasion (which advice may well have been acted upon had we not dropped nukes on- lets use the word again- civilians). We firebombed  Tokyo, a city of millions of people living in paper houses. And it wasn't a racial thing (we also firebombed, for example, Dresden)- it was, simply that we were fighting to win.

Limited wars are senseless.

(in reply to StrangerThan)
Profile   Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid >> RE: Afghanistan Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109