30,000 more troops = win war

Discussion in 'Free Speech Alley' started by Rex_B, Dec 3, 2009.

  1. Rex_B

    Rex_B Geaux Time

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2003
    Messages:
    3,926
    Likes Received:
    187
    Does anybody actually think this new surge of troops will win this war?

    Would 100,000 ?

    What exactly is the point of putting more men and women's lives in danger exactly...


    I need my fear mongering friends to actually use some smarts on this one.
     
  2. LaSalleAve

    LaSalleAve when in doubt, mumble

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    44,034
    Likes Received:
    18,018
    personally i don't think anything will ever win any kind of struggle in Afghanistan, or Iraq. You cannot change the culture of the middle east, those people have been feuding for centuries and 30,000 american troops isn't going to change that, its just going to make the body count go up. This pisses me off more than any bailout, or anything this administration has done to date.
     
  3. mobius481

    mobius481 Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 20, 2006
    Messages:
    7,731
    Likes Received:
    1,350
    I honestly don't know. I haven't educated myself about it enough to form a good opinion but my natural instinct is to bring everyone home. It seems like there should be a couple of easily definable goals, and maybe there are, but they aren't evident unless you research the hell out of it.
     
  4. gumborue

    gumborue Painfully Pessimistic

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2003
    Messages:
    10,834
    Likes Received:
    573
    i think we should cut a deal with the taliban. we'll leave if you keep al qaeda out. otherwise we'll start dropping bombs.

    id guess after a few more years there will be weak gov thatll be overtaken by the taliban after a while.

    nation-building isnt quick, cheap or easy.
     
  5. red55

    red55 curmudgeon Staff Member

    Joined:
    Oct 21, 2002
    Messages:
    45,195
    Likes Received:
    8,733
    Guerilla Wars are unwinable by nature. But they can be adequately dealt with by not allowing mission creep. We can eradicate Al Qaida as an effective player, we can keep the Taliban from ruling the country, but we cannot stop every local muhjadeen from fighting foreign occupiers. They will be there as long as we are and will go back to fighting each other when we leave. We can't get caught up in trying to make a country of of Afghanistan, it never really has been one.

    Afghanistan is run by tribal elders and war lords and always has been. What worked in Iraq will work in Afghanistan too. We must engage the local tribal chiefs and convince them through military and economic support, bribes, and other incentives incentives them not to shelter or support the Taliban. The surge of troops allows us to back them up when the Taliban try to intimidate them.

    We can never eliminate guerillas but we can greatly reduce the active and tacit support they get from the population. In this fashion we can reduce future threats to us and let the ordinary Afghans get back to whatever they do.

    Most of our real enemy is in Pakistan now . . . and that is another story.
     
  6. LaSalleAve

    LaSalleAve when in doubt, mumble

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2008
    Messages:
    44,034
    Likes Received:
    18,018
    and a frightening one if you ask me.
     
  7. TigerBacker70

    TigerBacker70 I'm the Cock of the Walk!

    Joined:
    Sep 22, 2009
    Messages:
    1,167
    Likes Received:
    243
    This doesn't sound anything like how Vietnam played out.

    US involved in military action abroad to "help" the local population and give them our version of freedom. And serve US interests at the same time.

    The enemy is far larger and far more dedicated than US troops because it's in their front yard and impinging on their way of life that we have determined is wrong for them. In this case substitute "radically extreme Islam" or "terrorism" for "communism". This is gonna be a a lot tougher and take a lot longer than we thought.

    US public opinion turns againt the war because it seems unwinnable without sending every US troop in uniform into harms way. Maybe not even then.

    US eventually leaves the job unfinished and leaves the nation we went to "protect" much worse off than we found them with the objective we ostensibly went there to accomplish completely abandoned. Many US and foreign lives lost with nothing to show for it.

    Nope. Nothing at all like Vietnam. Not at all.

    We leave a little bit weakened as a world power with our nose bloodied and still haven't learned that we aren't always the biggest and baddest swinging pecker on the block.
     
  8. Bandit88

    Bandit88 Old Enough to Know Better

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    6,068
    Likes Received:
    511
    30,000 (which is 25% less than asked for) will be used to train and provide security. This is an effort to create the conditions to leave. Security and Stability Operations.

    Problem is, there is no political will to win. The drawdown deadline (even though it's completely bogus and will not be adhered to in any meaningful way) creates a ridiculously difficult problem for the commanders on the ground.

    Amateur hour, once again.

    Zero leadership.

    Either commit to staying in Afghanistan for a long time (which is the only way to hope for even modest progress there) or get out ASAP and be honest about it. Anything in the middle just wastes US lives for nothing - the Afghans will wait us out.
     
  9. Bandit88

    Bandit88 Old Enough to Know Better

    Joined:
    Aug 25, 2007
    Messages:
    6,068
    Likes Received:
    511

    Actually, we are clearly the biggest and baddest. No one else even comes close. That's why no one else will take us on conventionally. Because - right now - they know we will kick their azzes.

    But there's no chance of military success without political will. Our arsenals are already waning. Our training is already eroding. In another decade of atrophy and neglect, we're going to see the possibility of a conventional challenge to US military power.

    Anyway - back to the point. The military is the biggest and baddest in the world. Politically - we've become very, very weak. Getting weaker every day.

    It's like the Carter years all over again.

    Maybe the bright spot will be a return to Reaganesque years. We can only hope.
     
  10. cajun_tiger

    cajun_tiger Founding Member

    Joined:
    Jun 10, 2009
    Messages:
    208
    Likes Received:
    11
    so much for not sending anymore troops and sending them home......liar!
     

Share This Page