Condi is WRONG...

[Bann (Premo)]

Originally Posted by Pete

pssssssst I think the answer is "Since we haven't had one I would think the correct answer is "all of them"."

I need to turn the TV down. Qaddafi was just talking about Lee Harvey Oswald & the assasination a few minutes ago.

[EmptyTimCup]

Originally Posted by vraiblonde

If we do not fight against Al Qaeda and other terrorist organizations on their own turf, where they are, where would be a better place to fight them?

they will be easier to pick out ......... in downtown Lexington Park ...

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Alexa

I don't think people have lost resolve. I just don't think people think we are getting anywhere in what we are doing. Al Qaeda isn't a country that can be pin pointed and attacked. They are all over the place.

I am by no means a military strategist...but I do wonder if A'stan is where we want to be anymore. While this is where they were after 9/11 and was their base of operation, does it hold true anymore? The operatives did flee. Where are they now?

Iraq was said to be where Al Qaeda sent their minions for military training. Is A'stan the same? Are we just putting up the costs of an elaborate training ground? Is Osama in Somalia? Saudi Arabia? Who are the other leaders? Where are they? Should we be doing a covert operation rather than a full out war on a country in which these individuals are in? What about the other countries they are in? Do we bomb them too? Are we just spinning our wheels?

There are a lot of questions that aren't so clear cut for many people anymore and fatigue has set in too. Seven years plus of war and no end in sight or even a glimmer of hope.

If for one minute the people thought that staying A'stan for another year or two would definitely wipe Al Qaeda......they would be all for staying. We are spinning our wheels...no?

al Qaeda has a root, a center, a nerve center. Afghanistan WAS this place. The training grounds and safe-haven for al Qaeda. It has since moved to Pakistan. I know what I would do. But with all this talk about pulling out of Afghanistan after Obama campaign on bolstering our military presence there and getting Bin Laden and WINNING THIS WAR, it’s a little confusing about the direction now. I thought it was clear.

The strategy should not be policing Afghanistan; it should be obliterating al Qaeda and the Taliban. Do that and Afghanistan will solve itself. And the message should be more about doing this as a central part of securing the US not Afghanistan. IMO everyone is talking about the wrong thing. They are talking about what to do about Afghanistan when we should be talking about what happens in the US if we pull out and allow al Qaeda to rebuild in that region. That would be far more steps backwards than we’ve taken forward.

[acommondisaster]

Was the question rhetorical - I agree the answer is "all of them".

If we leave Afghanistan without getting rid of Al Qaeda, the country will fall to them. If Afghanistan falls to Al Qaeda, Pakistan is probably next - that country's political climate is pretty rickety, and there are AQ supporters there. And Pakistan has nukes. OBL would be thrilled.

[ImnoMensa]

I dont mind sending more troops to Afghanistan with the stipulation that we are fighting a war. A WAR. that means if civilians get in the way, it's tough titty. We cannot win a limited war by guarding the poppy fields and walking along with road crews.
If a person is suspected of being the enemy Kill him, God will sort them out. It's War or bring them home. We dont need more prisoners at Gitmo so Obama can turn them loose later. If they are caught on the battleground shoot until they are there no longer and bulldoze them into a mass grave with a couple of pigs to help them decay.

Harsh methods , Yes, we arent there for recreation, we are there to win.

[chernmax (Premo)]

Obama is confused, I guess he thought if he just changed the name to "Overseas Contingency Operations" it could never escalate to a point requiring a troop surge!

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by SamSpade

To my knowledge, no Afghanis have attacked this country - period. It is al-Qaeda, and Afghanistan was the perfect home for them, being a nation in near anarchy, ruled by a despotic religious group in alignment with their beliefs, access to loads of drug money, and entrenched in a region historically difficult to fight in.

Leave Afghanistan, and it is leaving the keys in the ignition.

Great. Leave the keys it. It's A'stan; it won't start. If it does, it ain't running for long. Nothing works in A'stan.

The training for 9/11 happened, if facts matter at all, right here in the US. There ain't no flight schools in A'stan. As for the intense ninja box cutter skills, I'm thinking they could learn them pretty much anywhere.
On top of that, most of the 9/11 gomers where right here, in the US, for over two years leading up.

What is it any of you think we're gaining in A'stan besides destabilizing Pakistan? Condi is all for the original fantasy; turning A'stan into a stable, nice place. It is NOT happening.


It is in our national interest to get out. Now.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by ImnoMensa

I dont mind sending more troops to Afghanistan with the stipulation that we are fighting a war. A WAR. that means if civilians get in the way, it's tough titty. We cannot win a limited war by guarding the poppy fields and walking along with road crews.
If a person is suspected of being the enemy Kill him, God will sort them out. It's War or bring them home. We dont need more prisoners at Gitmo so Obama can turn them loose later. If they are caught on the battleground shoot until they are there no longer and bulldoze them into a mass grave with a couple of pigs to help them decay.

Harsh methods , Yes, we arent there for recreation, we are there to win.

If we did not do that under Bush, do you think Obama will fight? I don't think so.

Bring our people home.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

If we did not do that under Bush, do you think Obama will fight? I don't think so.

Bring our people home.

Okay, I have to get a better understanding of you here.

Leave Afghanistan and we leave them in disarray and the Taliban will certainly retake the country. Okay, I am willing to do this simply because Afghanistan has become corrupt and uncoorperative. I don't want our great warriors wasted on a country that isn't willing to fight for itself.

Leave and al Qaeda rebuilds again. We revert back to pre-911 days. How do you propose to solve the al Qaeda problem?

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Okay, I have to get a better understanding of you here.

Leave Afghanistan and we leave them in disarray and the Taliban will certainly retake the country. Okay, I am willing to do this simply because Afghanistan has become corrupt and uncoorperative. I don't want our great warriors wasted on a country that isn't willing to fight for itself.

Leave and al Qaeda rebuilds again. We revert back to pre-911 days. How do you propose to solve the al Qaeda problem?

How we SHOULD have dealt with A'stan was simply go in on an as needed basis, whack a camp and/or some fine folks and leave. Specops teams. A small team had Osama cornered and submitted a plan to come in behind his KNOWN position, cut him off and kill him. Everything was in place but, it was decided it would be preferable if the locals did the deed so, politics came in and the game was over. It all fell apart and our efforts descended into endless managing of bad and worse choices.

Now, inserting small units would be crazy because a team is now going to try to sneak in and hit some camp or some guys who are surrounded by BATTLE tested troops who are intimately familiar with US close quarters battle tactics, weapons and support. Conversely, they also have their own advanced knowledge of small unit tactics against us, what works for them, electronics, etc.

We've made mobs of clueless tough guys into quasi armies of much better soldiers who will have that much easier time taking over A'stan WHEN we get out. They are also now more capable of taking on the Pak army.