Article

2010-12-09 Afghanistan

Think tank says go Commando after 2014 in Afghanistan

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 Jeremiah Flainter9609 2010-12-09 03:12|| || Front Page|| [3 views ] Top

#1 Tens of thousands of U.S. Special Operations and conventional forces, drone strikes and intelligence operatives. At least $25 billion per year, spent indefinitely. Plus the loss of a squad a month. Seems a good estimate. I doubt the electorate will endure it.

Posted by Anguper Hupomosing9418 2010-12-09 08:06|| 2010-12-09 08:06|| Front Page Top

#2 It's been sixty-five years and some retired generals weren't even born when WW II ended, much less started. Ditto most of the population.
Nevertheless, the end state of WW II seems to be the model for "winning" a war. Smash the offenders flat, kill millions of their citizens, as well as their soldiers, occupy them, sit on them, remake their societies.
Last time that happened was probably when the Romans finally took Carthage.
After Napoleon was defeated, the Allies put a Bourbon back on the French throne and allowed the French to go their own way. After WW I, there were some short-term, limited occupations for reparations purposes of Germany.
After the US Civil War, Lincoln's advice to "let'em up easy" was more or less followed.
The idea that Afghanistan, given Pakistan's situation, the amorphous nature of Islamism, the funding from the Gulf States, is going to give us a peaceful and congenial end state is nonsense.
Thus, the question of what else is to be done must arise, and the answers are not going to be a peaceful and congenial end state as we got used to by thinking of WW II.
But the answers have to be...something.

Posted by Richard Aubrey 2010-12-09 08:47|| 2010-12-09 08:47|| Front Page Top

#3 At some point, there should be consideration by someone, not us, of smuggling in, and detonating, an extremely dirty nuclear device directly beneath the center of Mecca.

One that will annihilate all traces of the 1km diameter center of the city, its buildings and the Kaaba, and leave a large radioactive exclusion zone around it by adding a selection of very long half life isotopes. Ideally, the rest of the residents will have to leave the city.

1km of utter destruction would probably require 3-5mt.

Posted by Anonymoose 2010-12-09 10:24|| 2010-12-09 10:24|| Front Page Top

#4 Nuke the site from orbit. It's the only way to be sure.

Posted by Excalibur 2010-12-09 13:55|| 2010-12-09 13:55|| Front Page Top

#5 I see your nuke and raise an asteroid.

Posted by Water Modem 2010-12-09 19:09|| 2010-12-09 19:09|| Front Page Top

#6 I see your nuke and raise an asteroid.

Nukes come from people. Asteroids are sent by God. Who is shuttling the supplies up to the Space Station nowadays?

Posted by trailing wife 2010-12-09 21:04|| 2010-12-09 21:04|| Front Page Top

#7 Is this the kind of commando they are talhing about?

Posted by Guillibaldo Unusing2147 2010-12-09 23:22|| 2010-12-09 23:22|| Front Page Top

23:50 Procopius2k
23:40 Procopius2k
23:39 CincinnatusChili
23:22 Guillibaldo Unusing2147
23:20 HEU
23:20 trailing wife
23:17 trailing wife
23:13 Pappy
23:11 trailing wife
22:30 Rambler in Virginia
22:27 Rambler in Virginia
22:24 Skidmark
22:18 rjschwarz
22:03 Thing From Snowy Mountain
22:03 Frank G
22:02 Frank G
21:57 Frank G
21:52 Pappy
21:49 DarthVader
21:47 trailing wife
21:45 trailing wife
21:35 Pappy
21:29 Barbara Skolaut
21:28 trailing wife