Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Wed 06/16/2010 View Tue 06/15/2010 View Mon 06/14/2010 View Sun 06/13/2010 View Sat 06/12/2010 View Fri 06/11/2010 View Thu 06/10/2010
1
2010-06-16 Afghanistan
Afghan War Becoming a Bloody Farce
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by GolfBravoUSMC 2010-06-16 12:00|| || Front Page|| [11134 views ]  Top

#1 It always was---no way any bunch of Muslims is becoming civilized.
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2010-06-16 12:33||   2010-06-16 12:33|| Front Page Top

#2 Key quote
Only self-deception can justify the continued sacrifice of our finest young men and women in uniform. Given the two presidents in command and their irreversible dispositions toward this war and each other, failure is virtually inevitable. For a lesson in how wartime allied presidents ought to struggle to work together for victory, consider the Franklin D. Roosevelt/Winston Churchill partnership.

What is not inevitable is the number of American (and allied) troops who must die before failure becomes undeniable.

Whether or not Muslims can become civilized is the question still unanswered to the satisfaction of most Americans. Those who suggest they cannot must be prepared to suggest policies.
Posted by Nimble Spemble 2010-06-16 12:48||   2010-06-16 12:48|| Front Page Top

#3 Here's one--split it up into smaller nations based on ethnicity. They might wind up fighting each other, but who cares. Our interest arises only when they export their problems.
Posted by Iblis 2010-06-16 12:52||   2010-06-16 12:52|| Front Page Top

#4 This is a moronic article. Blankley is a sharp guy, but this article is just idiotic. There's enough support in the Democratic party to keep a presence in Afghanistan until we kill off the Taliban 100 years later. We should not back off from this commitment, lest some other terrorist group or nation conclude that he can kill tens of thousands of Americans, and Uncle Sam will desist from trying to wipe him out after a couple of thousand KIA. This is a war we cannot possibly lose unless we choose to lose it by withdrawing. And the casualties have been and continue to be far lower (and the stakes far higher - given that failure to establish deterrence means an attack on the continental USA) than in Vietnam or Korea.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2010-06-16 13:08|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com  2010-06-16 13:08|| Front Page Top

#5 the afgahan war was never about making them civilized, it was about not letting it be used as a base of operations for terror groups g(r)om
Posted by chris 2010-06-16 13:26||   2010-06-16 13:26|| Front Page Top

#6 iblis

I've been promoting this idea for several years.

Unsuccessfully.
Posted by lord garth 2010-06-16 13:37||   2010-06-16 13:37|| Front Page Top

#7 @#4ZF

writing checks with your keyboard your fanny can't cash. If you want to talk about staying for a century, feel free to go enlist and put YOUR ( probably out of shape) ass on the line.
Posted by Frangipani 2010-06-16 14:17||   2010-06-16 14:17|| Front Page Top

#8 "There's enough support in the Democratic party to keep a presence in Afghanistan until we kill off the Taliban 100 years later."

You mean the way they supported the South Vietnamese, ZF?
Posted by Barbara Skolaut  2010-06-16 14:19||   2010-06-16 14:19|| Front Page Top

#9 Chris-
Don't you think we can keep Al Qaeda from being an effective presence in Afghanistan with the guys at Creech AFB?

Also, if we are worried about attacks on our shores, we should do something about the borders.
Posted by Penguin 2010-06-16 14:25||   2010-06-16 14:25|| Front Page Top

#10 I think this just goes to show that the policy of "catch and release" doesn't work. The last outsider to control this area effectively was Genghis Khan. It is said that during his day, a woman could travel alone from Persia to China with a purse full of gold and not experience a bit of trouble.

What would Genghis do?

We could even start with some less drastic measures such as possibly not only killing the individuals who kill others, but maybe plowing their family plot with salt.

In other words ... if you act up, not only are YOU going to pay for it, but so is your family and ultimately your tribe.
Posted by crosspatch 2010-06-16 15:03||   2010-06-16 15:03|| Front Page Top

#11 In other words ... if you act up, not only are YOU going to pay for it, but so is your family and ultimately your tribe. Posted by cr
osspatch

Behold the Taliban and AQ TTP.
Posted by Besoeker 2010-06-16 15:12||   2010-06-16 15:12|| Front Page Top

#12 
#5 The USA MO of Bush years is not consistent with your theory.
Posted by g(r)omgoru 2010-06-16 16:14||   2010-06-16 16:14|| Front Page Top

#13 seems too me that they seem too have gotten stronger since they saw who was coming into office as the next president. Also the troops there now are kept under tighter ROE than they where before.
Posted by chris 2010-06-16 18:16||   2010-06-16 18:16|| Front Page Top

#14 until we kill off the Taliban 100 years later. ... This is a war we cannot possibly lose unless we choose to lose it by withdrawing.

Therein lies the problem. Not losing, means the Taliban/Pushtuns win, because there is no way in hell the West will maintain its committment for 100 years. Although I doubt the Pushtun/Taliban can be beaten in a 100 years, but thats irrelevant.

Otherwise, this drags on, because the 'bad' war in Iraq has been won and the country progresses as a democracy, and the Left hates the idea of the 'good' United Nations approved war in Afghanistan ending in failure and abject failure at that.

Men die to satisfy the Left's tranzi delusions.
Posted by phil_b 2010-06-16 20:04||   2010-06-16 20:04|| Front Page Top

#15 writing checks with your keyboard your fanny can't cash. If you want to talk about staying for a century, feel free to go enlist and put YOUR ( probably out of shape) ass on the line.

I've been writing checks to the federal government for a couple of decades. In longhand. These are checks the Feds have never had any problems cashing. Any soldier* who doesn't want to be part of this can leave once his term of enlistment is up. In fact, the only part of the Federal government I want to fund is national defense.

* And if you really love the Taliban that much, you really ought to join them instead of defending them from the safety of your home. Their high casualty rates mean that they need a lot of fresh meat. Are you man enough?
Posted by Zhang Fei 2010-06-16 23:13|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com  2010-06-16 23:13|| Front Page Top

#16 BS: You mean the way they supported the South Vietnamese, ZF?

What you're missing is that the NVA/Viet Cong never threatened to kill off the Democratic voter base. That was Al Qaeda's mistake (something that Michael Moore alluded to in one of his off-hand commentaries - al Qaeda attacked its natural supporters). 9/11 is like an open wound in the quad-state area of CT, NJ, NY and PA. They still like their welfare programs and silly ideas like gay marriage. I suspect Bloomberg would even champion the building of a gigantic mosque in place of the Twin Towers. But the al Qaeda and the Taliban will always be anathema. And their congressional delegations will vote accordingly.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2010-06-16 23:20|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com  2010-06-16 23:20|| Front Page Top

#17 I think this just goes to show that the policy of "catch and release" doesn't work. The last outsider to control this area effectively was Genghis Khan. It is said that during his day, a woman could travel alone from Persia to China with a purse full of gold and not experience a bit of trouble.

What would Genghis do?

Genghis used to exterminate entire tribes and cities. He used to herd prisoners of war in front of his advancing halberdiers so that they could absorb the first flights of arrows from his adversaries. He would have slaughtered the Pashtuns to the last man, woman and child, as well as any tribe or nation that sheltered them. We can't do that. Those are the methods of a different era, and we closed the door on that a long time ago.
Posted by Zhang Fei 2010-06-16 23:31|| http://timurileng.blogspot.com  2010-06-16 23:31|| Front Page Top

#18 Checks to the Feds as justification for a protracted war. Where do I begin? As for joining the Taliban. How about we airdrop you into enemy territory for the entire fiscal year your generous check is written for, since you equate military service as merely a monetary purchase. I'm sure you can tear your check up and whine to the embassy when you become captured to null and void your comitment. Our comitment for 100 years is fine as long as someone else is the one at risk. Your money and your life, all things being equal. People like you are why the draft needs to be reinstated---that way everyone contributes. BTW. Soldiers pay taxes too.

Posted by Frangipani 2010-06-16 23:42||   2010-06-16 23:42|| Front Page Top

00:01 Dash Riprock
00:00 JosephMendiola
23:57 Sgt. D.T.
23:56 JosephMendiola
23:53 Sgt. D.T.
23:50 Dash Riprock
23:48 Dash Riprock
23:42 Frangipani
23:31 Zhang Fei
23:20 Zhang Fei
23:19 Dash Riprock
23:13 Zhang Fei
23:09 Dash Riprock
23:04 Dash Riprock
23:00 Asymmetrical
22:35 Asymmetrical
22:30 JosephMendiola
22:09 DMFD
22:06 junkirony
22:06 DMFD
21:56 M. Murcek
21:51 M. Murcek
21:50 Cornsilk Blondie
21:47 M. Murcek









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com