shatler has a hard time reading english i think
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Karzai to name areas for pullout of Nato troops
@Kmar: okay, if there were no specific implications at some fundamental afaghans differences, then i do not understand the point of the OP and the reason for the qustion you asked at its end (yes it may very well be due to my poor enlish). afghans will not be able to continue on the path you were trying to set them on - unless of course you are willing to hold their hand untill they grow up. all you managed to do is scare off some taliban, but that's about it.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
I was summarizing the futility of the effort of nation building, with rhetoric. The problems in Afghanistan are far greater than anything a military operation can solve. I am aware of our military's effort to build their society (schools etc), but in my opinion those are half measures at best.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
Doesn't mattter how effective their army is, or isn't, no army can destroy an insurgency of this kind.
Especially when its based in Pakistan, and they're being needled by drone strikes.
Especially when its based in Pakistan, and they're being needled by drone strikes.
Fuck Israel
well, it worked for you before - particularly with japan and korea. granted, those two already had a cultural basis to build new modernized nations upon, but still you should have had a closer look at what you did there before starting afghan adventure, imo (that providing you actually went there to do nation-building of course, which is debatable).Kmar wrote:
I was summarizing the futility of the effort of nation building, with rhetoric.
agreed. they woudn't be able to kick out taliban on their own, though. the question is - was it worth the effort? i'm not sure. it might very well bring more harm then good in the long run - their opium business alone is a huge problem already, and don't tell me it has nothing to do with US.The problems in Afghanistan are far greater than anything a military operation can solve. I am aware of our military's effort to build their society (schools etc), but in my opinion those are half measures at best.
if you open your mind too much your brain will fall out.
It shouldn't have taken 9 years...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
We probably should have just left after finishing our bombing runs. The same is true for Iraq.Jay wrote:
It shouldn't have taken 9 years...
It can easily take another 9 before anything resembling a real democratic country emerges ... like mentioned, nation building takes time ... building an Afghan army capable of handling Taliban should have been done by now imo ...Jay wrote:
It shouldn't have taken 9 years...
Wait behind the line ..............................................................
Nah I don't think there's much hope for Afghanistan, in the state it is now it'll fall back to pre-invasion levels within 10 years of us pulling out. The ANA is incompetent and the talibs&co will come back from the paki mountains to take over again.
From what I have seen in numerous docus/read in articles it's that the ANA is largely made up out of village rejects, wonder how they're going to get anything done.
From what I have seen in numerous docus/read in articles it's that the ANA is largely made up out of village rejects, wonder how they're going to get anything done.
inane little opines
We should've continued on the original course with SF troops embedded in Afghan units for training and air support purposes. Today they would have a top notch military.Varegg wrote:
It can easily take another 9 before anything resembling a real democratic country emerges ... like mentioned, nation building takes time ... building an Afghan army capable of handling Taliban should have been done by now imo ...Jay wrote:
It shouldn't have taken 9 years...
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
hmmmmJay wrote:
We should've continued on the original course with SF troops embedded in Afghan units for training and air support purposes. Today they would have a top notch military.Varegg wrote:
It can easily take another 9 before anything resembling a real democratic country emerges ... like mentioned, nation building takes time ... building an Afghan army capable of handling Taliban should have been done by now imo ...Jay wrote:
It shouldn't have taken 9 years...
When did we start changing from that to nation building? I honestly have no idea.
As soon as conventional military forces in the Pentagon bludgeoned Rumsfeld into changing his plan and allowing them to earn combat patches. Every officer dreams of a combat command. Because this is so, they will hammer a square peg into a round hole and make it fit just to squeeze themselves in. "Oh, this mission is going to take place on top of a mountain? Well, you surely need armor support, let's grab a Chinnook and have it airlift up my Stryker unit." No logical sense. "This mission only requires one platoon of infantry? Well, I can't command a platoon. How about we send in an entire battalion that way I can earn my eagle?"Trotskygrad wrote:
hmmmmJay wrote:
We should've continued on the original course with SF troops embedded in Afghan units for training and air support purposes. Today they would have a top notch military.Varegg wrote:
It can easily take another 9 before anything resembling a real democratic country emerges ... like mentioned, nation building takes time ... building an Afghan army capable of handling Taliban should have been done by now imo ...
When did we start changing from that to nation building? I honestly have no idea.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
I read that too, think it was in a book called Sabre Squadron. With that JK Idema walt as an advisor, lol.Jay wrote:
As soon as conventional military forces in the Pentagon bludgeoned Rumsfeld into changing his plan and allowing them to earn combat patches. Every officer dreams of a combat command. Because this is so, they will hammer a square peg into a round hole and make it fit just to squeeze themselves in. "Oh, this mission is going to take place on top of a mountain? Well, you surely need armor support, let's grab a Chinnook and have it airlift up my Stryker unit." No logical sense. "This mission only requires one platoon of infantry? Well, I can't command a platoon. How about we send in an entire battalion that way I can earn my eagle?"Trotskygrad wrote:
hmmmmJay wrote:
We should've continued on the original course with SF troops embedded in Afghan units for training and air support purposes. Today they would have a top notch military.
When did we start changing from that to nation building? I honestly have no idea.
While I agree the approach taken was probably incorrect, I think you're miscalculating the amount of time it takes to turn the Afghans from what they were into "a top notch military." It would likely happen faster at the platoon/company level with SF troops leading the way--it's what they're trained to do. But the military consists of far more than infantry battalions. They need acquisitions, logistics, air forces, and the like. Those have proved some of the most challenging to train due to the technical skills required and thus the foundational education required. Plus, they need the equipment to operate commensurate to being "a top notch military." That doesn't show up and they don't get trained on it overnight.Jay wrote:
We should've continued on the original course with SF troops embedded in Afghan units for training and air support purposes. Today they would have a top notch military.Varegg wrote:
It can easily take another 9 before anything resembling a real democratic country emerges ... like mentioned, nation building takes time ... building an Afghan army capable of handling Taliban should have been done by now imo ...Jay wrote:
It shouldn't have taken 9 years...
Takes a very long time to get there.
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
With better planning there would have been no need to attempt that.FEOS wrote:
I think you're miscalculating the amount of time it takes to turn the Afghans from what they were into "a top notch military."
How did training the South Vietnamese work out in the end?
Fuck Israel
It didn't work out 'cause they were fucked without US help.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
They were fucked with US help too.War Man wrote:
It didn't work out 'cause they were fucked without US help.
Fuck Israel
Nope, although the media reported otherwise, USA pretty much were kicking some ass over there. We only really lost 'cause of fucking hippies and other Americans who didn't support the war. Even the North Vietnamese and Vietcong(at least their officers) admit that they would of lost had it not been for America's weakness.Dilbert_X wrote:
They were fucked with US help too.War Man wrote:
It didn't work out 'cause they were fucked without US help.
The irony of guns, is that they can save lives.
I'm told - I can't remember by whom, a fairly experienced academic or the like is all I can remember - that pulling a lot of specialized equipment out of Afghanistan and into Iraq, equipment necessary to do any useful work outside of Kabul, was a costly error.Jay wrote:
As soon as conventional military forces in the Pentagon bludgeoned Rumsfeld into changing his plan and allowing them to earn combat patches. Every officer dreams of a combat command. Because this is so, they will hammer a square peg into a round hole and make it fit just to squeeze themselves in. "Oh, this mission is going to take place on top of a mountain? Well, you surely need armor support, let's grab a Chinnook and have it airlift up my Stryker unit." No logical sense. "This mission only requires one platoon of infantry? Well, I can't command a platoon. How about we send in an entire battalion that way I can earn my eagle?"Trotskygrad wrote:
hmmmmJay wrote:
We should've continued on the original course with SF troops embedded in Afghan units for training and air support purposes. Today they would have a top notch military.
When did we start changing from that to nation building? I honestly have no idea.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
The US underestimated the VC.. without a doubt. The antiwar sentiment was not limited to "hippies". Simply put, America withdrew because the majority of the public did not feel that fighting communist aggression in Asia was worth the blood. Nixon was elected on the promise to end the war.War Man wrote:
Nope, although the media reported otherwise, USA pretty much were kicking some ass over there. We only really lost 'cause of fucking hippies and other Americans who didn't support the war. Even the North Vietnamese and Vietcong(at least their officers) admit that they would of lost had it not been for America's weakness.Dilbert_X wrote:
They were fucked with US help too.War Man wrote:
It didn't work out 'cause they were fucked without US help.
Also, we didn't really 'lose'.. nor did we win. Both sides made concessions.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
LOL OK.War Man wrote:
Nope, although the media reported otherwise, USA pretty much were kicking some ass over there. We only really lost 'cause of fucking hippies and other Americans who didn't support the war.
You're right, the North would have lost if they hadn't won.Even the North Vietnamese and Vietcong(at least their officers) admit that they would of lost had it not been for America's weakness.
Fuck Israel
He must have meant the south.. which would be funny coming from them. The US won every major battle. It was the south that was unable to hold the land we won that screwed the effort up. That futility is what really led to the fall of Saigon.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
How so? Were they going to miracle themselves one?Dilbert_X wrote:
With better planning there would have been no need to attempt that.FEOS wrote:
I think you're miscalculating the amount of time it takes to turn the Afghans from what they were into "a top notch military."
You're comparing two completely different situations and expecting the same outcome.Dilbert_X wrote:
How did training the South Vietnamese work out in the end?
“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular
It would have been smarter to avoid needing them to form themselves into a cutting edge military in the first place.FEOS wrote:
How so? Were they going to miracle themselves one?Dilbert_X wrote:
With better planning there would have been no need to attempt that.FEOS wrote:
I think you're miscalculating the amount of time it takes to turn the Afghans from what they were into "a top notch military."
For example buying the entire opium crop for the next 50 years. Would have been so cheap and simple.
No, its the same situation, you're expecting a different outcome this time round - isn't that the definition of insanity?Dilbert_X wrote:
You're comparing two completely different situations and expecting the same outcome.
Fuck Israel
Buying the entire opium crop? Are you insane? What the hell would we do with it, make a shitload of poppy seed bagels?Dilbert_X wrote:
It would have been smarter to avoid needing them to form themselves into a cutting edge military in the first place.FEOS wrote:
How so? Were they going to miracle themselves one?Dilbert_X wrote:
With better planning there would have been no need to attempt that.
For example buying the entire opium crop for the next 50 years. Would have been so cheap and simple.No, its the same situation, you're expecting a different outcome this time round - isn't that the definition of insanity?Dilbert_X wrote:
You're comparing two completely different situations and expecting the same outcome.
They would use the money to plant more opium, they're nothing but warlords/drug lords.
Second statement, I can agree with. Russia invaded Afghanistan and look how that ended. It was no different for us.
If the women don't find ya handsome. They should at least find ya handy.
- Index »
- Community »
- Debate and Serious Talk »
- Karzai to name areas for pullout of Nato troops