Condi is WRONG...

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by itsbob

We can succeed in Afghanistan, we just have to decide that we want to.

No, we can not succeed. They will NOT stop fighting unless we kill them all. And to what point?

What do we get out of this that is in our national interest?

What have we got out of this?

A destabilized Pakistan.
The modernization of the local grunt into an effective fighter. Against us.
Record Heroin crops.
A more corrupt than usual Afghan 'government'.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

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.

You have a habit of turning a “how should we do it question” into a “how we should’ve done it” or “I know what strategy wont work” answer. I think we acknowledged a long time ago that we did it wrong. I’m not interested in what wont work. I’m interested in knowing what you think will work, if anything. Are you willing to admit that pulling out will only revert us back to a pre-911 threat of al Qaeda making us vulnerable to another attack on our soil? Al Qaeda and the Taliban are very patient people and will lay low while wreaking havoc because they know Americans have no patients and will eventually lose their resolve. And they are right.

So, I’m asking you again, without a bunch of “we should have” or “this tactic wont work” equivocations, how do you propose to deal with the al Qaeda problem?

[chernmax (Premo)]

Let the training begin!!!

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

You have a habit of turning a “how should we do it question” into a “how we should’ve done it” or “I know what strategy wont work” answer. I think we acknowledged a long time ago that we did it wrong. I’m not interested in what wont work. I’m interested in knowing what you think will work, if anything. Are you willing to admit that pulling out will only revert us back to a pre-911 threat of al Qaeda making us vulnerable to another attack on our soil? Al Qaeda and the Taliban are very patient people and will lay low while wreaking havoc because they know Americans have no patients and will eventually lose their resolve. And they are right.

So, I’m asking you again, without a bunch of “we should have” or “this tactic wont work” equivocations, how do you propose to deal with the al Qaeda problem?

I thought I was clear. Crystal clear. I said 'get out' you said 'what should we do' I reviewed what went wrong as a, to me, obvious prerequisite to understand what's going on and why, what we SHOULD have done and then concluded, I guess, not clearly enough; get out.

Get out now. Home by Christmas.

I will not 'admit' that we will then be back in a pre 9/11 mode because of two things; One, Afghanistan was simply coincidental to 9/11. It would be really kewl to get some of you people to admit the relevant planning and training for 9/11 happened in US flight schools and Hamburg apartments. Yes, I am willing to concede that there may have been some box cutter drills done in Afghanistan which, yes, were necessary. And I freely admit that fire hoop jumping and silhouette shooting was done there as well and they do seem good at it, both skills. As I saw no box cutter video, I can only guess that on the morning of September 11, 2001, they were good enough.

Two; If the Taliban is truly our enemy, and sure as hell are now, they are FAR more battle tested and technologically competent now than they were on September 10, 2001. Not to mention motivated to get at us.

There isn't one damn thing over there in our national interest that is worth the next guy to lose both his legs for or another hummer blown sky high or some Marines to get caught in an ambush for. Not one.

GET OUT.

Now.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by chernmax

Let the training begin!!!

The Home Guards.

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

how do you propose to deal with the al Qaeda problem?

My bad.

Al queda. Specifically al queda.

Continue to use specop teams around the world to go in, kill them, and leave.

I would put pressure on the Saudi's to clean up their mess. These are their people. That is the constant and consistently ignored part of the equation; the Saudi's.

I would also get us the hell out of Iraq. And Saudi.

I would "Manhattan" project us into domestic carbon fuel supply.

I would ban imported energy over a 10 year period, as a critical US national interest. End of Al queda problems.

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

I thought I was clear. Crystal clear. I said 'get out' you said 'what should we do' I reviewed what went wrong as a, to me, obvious prerequisite to understand what's going on and why, what we SHOULD have done and then concluded, I guess, not clearly enough; get out.

Get out now. Home by Christmas.

I will not 'admit' that we will then be back in a pre 9/11 mode because of two things; One, Afghanistan was simply coincidental to 9/11. It would be really kewl to get some of you people to admit the relevant planning and training for 9/11 happened in US flight schools and Hamburg apartments. Yes, I am willing to concede that there may have been some box cutter drills done in Afghanistan which, yes, were necessary. And I freely admit that fire hoop jumping and silhouette shooting was done there as well and they do seem good at it, both skills. As I saw no box cutter video, I can only guess that on the morning of September 11, 2001, they were good enough.

Two; If the Taliban is truly our enemy, and sure as hell are now, they are FAR more battle tested and technologically competent now than they were on September 10, 2001. Not to mention motivated to get at us.

There isn't one damn thing over there in our national interest that is worth the next guy to lose both his legs for or another hummer blown sky high or some Marines to get caught in an ambush for. Not one.

GET OUT.

Now.

Are you purposely being dismissive about the question? So, “get out” without any concern for how this emboldens al Qaeda and what we may face later down the road? No strategy for al Qaeda? So, the war is over in your mind? We leave and they will leave us alone?

Coincidental or not, it is what it is. Afghanistan will become a haven for al Qaeda again. They will use that haven to plan their next hit on us. The initial training and finding occurred in Afghanistan. The 19 that were here doing all this flight training and prepping for the attack was being spearheaded out of Afghanistan.

If we do leave as you wish, and we are hit again, who are you going to blame? The one thing that is in our national interest in Afghanistan is al Qaeda. They want to hit us again. They can only do this if they have a place where they can train and refurbish their funding without anyone paying any attention.

So I will try again, but word it differently… We leave Afghanistan, what is your strategy for keeping tabs on them to ensure we are not hit by them again. While you ponder that answer, ponder the fact that arrests have been made on al Qaeda operatives and plotted bombings in NY. What’s your plan taking out of the lions den?

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Are you purposely being dismissive about the question? So, “get out” without any concern for how this emboldens al Qaeda and what we may face later down the road? No strategy for al Qaeda?

My bad. Please see post #46

[PsyOps]

Originally Posted by Larry Gude

My bad.

Al queda. Specifically al queda.

Continue to use specop teams around the world to go in, kill them, and leave. McChrystal, being the expert in the field, has not made this recommendation. Is he wrong?

I would put pressure on the Saudi's to clean up their mess. These are their people. That is the constant and consistently ignored part of the equation; the Saudi's. Pressure? How? Diplomatic? Military? Bomb a couple of major oil sites?

I would also get us the hell out of Iraq. And Saudi. I agree with getting out of Iraq. But you just said put pressure on SA.

I would "Manhattan" project us into domestic carbon fuel supply. Agreed. But is far more than about oil only. There is still an element that is planning to attack us again, regardless of oil

I would ban imported energy over a 10 year period, as a critical US national interest. End of Al queda problems. Too many other countries rely on their oil for that really work. Then there is the opium trade. al Qaeda probably pulls in more cash from that than oil.

Where do you buy lefthanded guitar strings?

[Larry Gude (Premo)]

Originally Posted by PsyOps

Where do you buy lefthanded guitar strings?

The guitar comes with a set. Why would you buy more?






Continue to use specop teams around the world to go in, kill them, and leave. McChrystal, being the expert in the field, has not made this recommendation. Is he wrong? He jsut said give me way more men or we WILL lose

I would put pressure on the Saudi's to clean up their mess. These are their people. That is the constant and consistently ignored part of the equation; the Saudi's. Pressure? How? Diplomatic? Military? Bomb a couple of major oil sites? One of the worst things the US has done the last 20 years is forget we're the customer for all this oil.

I would also get us the hell out of Iraq. And Saudi. I agree with getting out of Iraq. But you just said put pressure on SA. Does pressure mean military to you, in all things?

I would "Manhattan" project us into domestic carbon fuel supply. Agreed. But is far more than about oil only. There is still an element that is planning to attack us again, regardless of oil Go ahead and pretend oil is not THE core issue

I would ban imported energy over a 10 year period, as a critical US national interest. End of Al queda problems. Too many other countries rely on their oil for that really work. Then there is the opium trade. al Qaeda probably pulls in more cash from that than oil. Why would you even mention this after the embarassing, shameful way our military has been order to not interdict or destroy but to leave alone the illegal drug trade coming out of A'stan?