|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Afghanistan revisited /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1340208391 Message started by mpescatori on 06/20/12 at 09:06:31 |
|
Title: Afghanistan revisited Post by mpescatori on 06/20/12 at 09:06:31 I remember having an interesting discussion with fellow Officers when, in 2002, the US was talking world opinion into invading Afghanistan... "It will not be another Vietnam" thundered a well known world leader. "It won't - I commented to my colleagues - it'll be another Afghanistan", explaining how the Afghan muhajeddin had beaten the living daylights out of the Soviets to the point of forcing the Kremlin to change TTPs (Tactics, Techniques and Procedures) and even redesigning infantry vehicles. Google BMP2 and BMP3 and check out the visible differences. It ain't looking nice for ANY of the participating Nations, and here's the evidence: http://ricks.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2012/02/06/american_general_dies_in_afghanistan_an_american_lt_col_goes_off_the_reservation?wpisrc=obnetwork And these links within the article http://armedforcesjournal.com/2012/02/8904030 http://turcopolier.typepad.com/files/go-deep-_14-oct-09_.pdf This second document really deserves a read... :-X We're all in this, we ought to pull out mighty quickly :-X |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by Serowbot on 06/20/12 at 09:33:22 Much like in Syria and Iran now,... just seeing a problem, doesn't justify a military intervention... There needs to be a useful mission and realistic goals before committing.. Romney worries me... He seems to be too ready to shoot first... |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by Serowbot on 06/20/12 at 10:01:55 We trained the Taliban and BinLaden back in the 80's and called them "Freedom Fighters" for defending Arab lands against Soviet incursion.... Then,.. after we invaded Iraq,.. and they started defending their lands against us,... we redefined them as Terrorists... One mans Freedom Fighter is another mans Terrorist... or, sometimes... it's the same guys,... fighting for the same cause,.. against a new enemy... |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by justin_o_guy2 on 06/20/12 at 11:24:39 Yea, & the Taliban had the poppy harvest at record lows, we went in & now its at record highs. Amazing how crops flourish in a war torn country that is occupied by a country engaged in a Huge Drug War.. |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by WD on 06/20/12 at 22:06:53 You didn't think we paid for all those toys honestly did you? Same crap happened in Vietnam, with the same crop. Kill several birds with one stone: fund your ops, make allies out of the locals (better armed than you), keep the dregs of our society clamoring for more (and stealing/killing honest folk to justify your domestic law breaking (I mean, homeland security policies)). C'mon JOG, wake up and smell the China White. Sheesh. |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by justin_o_guy2 on 06/20/12 at 22:27:43 That pretty well covers it. |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by RatdogWillie on 05/11/13 at 06:56:32 WHAT OUR CHILDREN ARE DYING FOR IN AFGHANISTAN http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/dyinginafghanistan.php |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by srinath on 05/11/13 at 08:48:17 5543544951444952260 wrote:
That's because america is refusing to learn 1 simple fact of life. YOU CAN NOT "LAY OFF" YOUR FRIENDS. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/11/13 at 09:57:06 Maybe if you expounded on that I could drag some kind of meaningful communication out of it.Maybe |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by srinath on 05/11/13 at 13:24:16 627D7B7C61665767576F7D713A080 wrote:
When we went to afghanisthan in the 70's and decided to "support" them ... guess what, we didn't say, you want to fight, we're able to supply you arms and this and that so you can fight ... cos they would have turned around and said ... yea we fight ... or not fight, what's it to you ? We went there and built a relationship with them. We got their best fighters trained, we told them - attack here and here cos these things are going to affect the US, then you can go attack that. AKA we co opted them. We then left as soon as the russians did. Their reaction is the cost of trying to unfriend them. Cool. Srinath. |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by 45acp on 05/12/13 at 20:07:04 i spent 15 months over there. lots of mountains not alot of trees. i remember this one village that only had one tree. it was more like a bush. all the women and kids would carry water to it just to keep it alive. ::) the men were to busy ass rapin little boys to help. |
|
Title: Re: Afghanistan revisited Post by justin_o_guy2 on 05/12/13 at 21:42:26 30312A2D22372B430 wrote:
When we went to afghanisthan in the 70's and decided to "support" them ... guess what, we didn't say, you want to fight, we're able to supply you arms and this and that so you can fight ... cos they would have turned around and said ... yea we fight ... or not fight, what's it to you ? We went there and built a relationship with them. We got their best fighters trained, we told them - attack here and here cos these things are going to affect the US, then you can go attack that. AKA we co opted them. We then left as soon as the russians did. Their reaction is the cost of trying to unfriend them. Cool. Srinath.[/quote] Thanks. I agree with that & its logical. I also suspect there is a bit more to it, but cant prove it & explaining it would take waaay too much typing & even then, like I said, I cant even start to prove it, |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |