| Submit your comments on this article |
| Afghanistan |
| The Surprising Lessons of Vietnam |
| 2009-11-13 |
| Posted by:tipper |
| #16 #13 The fence is a lovely idea, but I don't see how it could be done out here in the real world. Posted by: trailing wife Radiation, TW. Dig a ditch around Pashtunistan, just a couple of feet deep but about 50 feet wide. Fill it with all our discarded radioactive waste. Kill two birds with one stone, as it were. The stuff won't even have to be identified - it'll glow at night, and things crossing it will die in a day or two. |
| Posted by: Old Patriot 2009-11-13 22:38 |
| #15 Compare wid GUAM PDN OP-ED > TOM HAYDEN [US Congresscritter, CA] - OBAMA SHOULD CHOOSE RETREAT!? |
| Posted by: JosephMendiola 2009-11-13 22:14 |
| #14 a well placed MOAB would sure do a LOT more on the 'hearts and minds' front than any of the other worthless DOS projects we have funded to date ever will. |
| Posted by: abu do you love 2009-11-13 20:44 |
| #13 The fence is a lovely idea, but I don't see how it could be done out here in the real world. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2009-11-13 20:15 |
| #12 A fenced Pashtunistan "Hotel California" sounds great: Islamo immigrants and deportees can check in anytime but they can NEVER leave. |
| Posted by: Lumpy Elmoluck5091 2009-11-13 11:11 |
| #11 The Burg has in the past advocated building a big fence around Pashtunistan. The Pashtuns can do as they please inside but aren't ever allowed outside. Fence, razor wire, gun turrets, moats, crocodiles, sharks with frickin' lasers on their heads, whatever it takes, but the Pashtuns stay in their land, and we get the rest of the earth. Seems like one good solution. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2009-11-13 11:03 |
| #10 The difference is that Vietnam was won militarily (then the plug was pulled on SV), whereas the Afghan War is unwinnable. Otherwise I agree with abu, we should have let the Northern Alliance do their stuff with air, training etc support. Although MOABs are a waste. It would be like Arclighting North Dakota. Kill a lot of corn/wheat (poppies and rocks in Afghanistan's case) and not much else. |
| Posted by: phil_b 2009-11-13 10:13 |
| #9 Slowly people are coming to understand (if not admit) that Bush was right to move the war front from A'stan to Iraq. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2009-11-13 09:45 |
| #8 The partition Iraq people were right on the concept and wrong on the country. Partition Afghanistan into tribal areas. Ring fence each and kill anyone that crosses. Kabul becomes a neutral tribal gathering center with a figurehead King restored to a very weak constitutional monarchy. Status quo of 1957. |
| Posted by: Bolshoun 2009-11-13 09:20 |
| #7 As things stand now, the very best that can be hoped for is that it will turn into a Taliban hostile narco state. Sort of like LA with barbaric gang fighting over turf and the narc trade with refugees fleeing the state [and unfortunately taking their nasty habits and behaviors with them]. A failed state that is grid lock with specials interests [another form of tribes] seeking to get their cut of power and wealth and an myopic 'intellectual/elite' class out of touch with the basics of civilization hunkered down in their little bubble communes from the diversity they championed for everyone else. |
| Posted by: Procopius2k 2009-11-13 07:37 |
| #6 The only way to have ever gotten a win in Afghanistan was to right from the start, rewrite the government, give them a MacArthur (PBUH) constitution, and put all children in western style boarding schools in the big cities. We would still be fighting, but at least Afghanistan would have a future. Someplace to go that isn't the disaster that it is. No guarantees, but at least a possibility. As things stand now, the very best that can be hoped for is that it will turn into a Taliban hostile narco state. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2009-11-13 07:12 |
| #5 sadly they make more of a "splat" than a "boom" Easily corrected---tell'em you're dropping'em on a "settlement". |
| Posted by: g(r)omgoru 2009-11-13 04:41 |
| #4 Gorb, sadly they make more of a "splat" than a "boom". Otherwise, your idea is excellent! |
| Posted by: Scooter McGruder 2009-11-13 02:45 |
| #3 with a liberal(in the non political sense) application of daisy cutters/moabs dropped on demand And just why can't we use liberals as Daisy Cutters? |
| Posted by: gorb 2009-11-13 02:21 |
| #2 i think we probably should have skipped getting in with a ground presence. kept supplying the northern alliance (or whoever) with air power anytime they called for a talli-wacking. left running/building that shit-hole to whoever wanted it. our job was to make sure it didn't get used as a base for ops against us. we can do that from the air with friendlies on the ground providing targeting information. the LAST thing we should have done was put a pashtun in power where he could wring his hands about fluffy ducks and bunnies getting boomed. someone like Dotdum (sp?) calling the shots with a liberal(in the non political sense) application of daisy cutters/moabs dropped on demand would have been my preferred method of handling this op. |
| Posted by: abu do you love 2009-11-13 01:46 |
| #1 NewsWeak. Same story. Afghanstan == Vietnam. We should never have gone in. (I guess the 3,000 innocent civilians deliberately targeted and murdered in cold blood by Al-Q and the Taliban were unavailable for comment....) |
| Posted by: CrazyFool 2009-11-13 00:50 |