More Troops to Afghan

Nomad said:
I have no problem with our presence in Afghanistan or even an increase in troop strength there.

My issue with annette is how he ran his mouth about people like Clinton and McCain being war mongers and using that as his rationale for supporting Trump but now, is drooling and fawning over him despite going back on his campaign promises.
Click to expand...
You have to adapt to changing circumstances, surely that lesson has been learnt already from the monstrous gaff Obama made with allowing Daesh to gain so much territory in Iraq and Syria.
 
Nomad said:
IOW, he telegraphed a message to the terrorists that all they have to do is lay low and wait us out until we eventually leave.

IOW, the exact same thing he criticized Obama for.

And the Trumptards swallow as usual.
Click to expand...

Did Trump give a date and I missed it?
 
Nomad said:
Seems like you've learned nothing from every other previous failure of military campaigns in that region including Russia's.

Terrorism is born of ideology and you cannot eradicate ideology.
Click to expand...
Trite answer, if you want to see Daesh mark II then just abandon the Afghans to their fate.
 
Corazón said:
You have to adapt to changing circumstances, surely that lesson has been learnt already from the monstrous gaff Obama made with allowing Daesh to gain so much territory in Iraq and Syria.
Click to expand...

The American people were sick of us being mired in a clusterfuck we should have never been involved in to begin with. Right-wing hacks like you always conveniently forget and ignore how Bush lied to get us into Iraq for no legitimate reason to begin with. So Obama was faced with a damned if he did, damned if he didn't situation and opted for putting his trust in the new Iraqi govt to pick up the ball and run with it.

And really, what room has a limey like you, whose rinky-dink little poof of a country has contributed such precious little to the fight, got to interject his opinion anyway?
 
Nomad said:
Again, you missed the point.

My point was about annette's duplicity on the issue.
Click to expand...

No, ISIS 2.0 is precisely the point.

Anyone who advocates a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan needs to be intellectually honest and say they're ok with owning the results of the withdrawal.
 
Nomad said:
The American people were sick of us being mired in a clusterfuck we should have never been involved in to begin with. Right-wing hacks like you always conveniently forget and ignore how Bush lied to get us into Iraq for no legitimate reason to begin with. So Obama was faced with a damned if he did, damned if he didn't situation and opted for putting his trust in the new Iraqi govt to pick up the ball and run with it.

And really, what room has a limey like you, whose rinky-dink little poof of a country has contributed such precious little to the fight, got to interject his opinion anyway?
Click to expand...
I was 100% against the Iraq War sonny!! I should also point out that we lost 454 soldiers in Afghanistan and 179 in Iraq, so kindly go fuck yourself!
 
Last edited:
.
d6e180a2535fad678d76b2f5957598e1.jpg
 
Darth Omar said:
No, ISIS 2.0 is precisely the point.

Anyone who advocates a complete withdrawal from Afghanistan needs to be intellectually honest and say they're ok with owning the results of the withdrawal.
Click to expand...

This is exactly the same crap spouted back in 2009, no doubt Nomad was one of the chief spouters then as well.
 
Last edited:
Darth Omar said:
Nobody wants to stay there.

But you simply can't deny that total withdrawal will lead to the identical result as when Obama adandoned Iraq and when we mindlessly destabilized Libya.

Maybe you or someone else can explain how the same result in Afghanistan would serve US interests.

Also, Trump made it pretty clear this wasn't opended ended. If he doesn't get the results he wants, he'll say Fvct it, and pull the plug on it somewhere don't the road.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is open-ended because there is no timeline and no discernible means of achieving victory (or even a viable definition of victory). Trump is kicking the can and the hard decision down the road for the next president.
 
Corazón said:
This is exactly the same crap spouted back in 2009, no doubt was one of the chief spouters then as well.
Click to expand...

Well, ignorance of results may have been somewhat excusable in 2009. Just like regime change in Iraq was somewhat excusable in 2003.

But by now we know what will happen if we abandon Afghanistan. We know what will happen if we regime change in Syria by proxy. In that sense, Trump made two good foreign policy moves this summer in that part of the world.

Trump is neither an abandoner nor a regime changer and more people should applaud him for it.

He is going to do several different things with regards to Afghanistan that his two predecessors didn't, and his overall strategy is more comprehensive than ever before. We'll see how it goes.
 
The second America withdraws, without some form of nation-building, it becomes a terrorist haven. So either you stay there indefinitely or nation-build. There is no third option that doesn't result in the collapse of Afghanistan.
 
Darth Omar said:
Well, ignorance of results may have been somewhat excusable in 2009. Just like regime change in Iraq was somewhat excusable in 2003.

But by now we know what will happen if we abandon Afghanistan. We know what will happen if we regime change in Syria by proxy. In that sense, Trump made two good foreign policy moves this summer in that part of the world.

Trump is neither an abandoner nor a regime changer and more people should applaud him for it.

He is going to do several different things with regards to Afghanistan than his two predecessors didn't and his overall strategy is more comprehensive than ever before. We'll see how it goes.
Click to expand...
See, an amazing Trumptardian ability.
 
Amadeus said:
Yes, it is open-ended because there is no timeline and no discernible means of achieving victory (or even a viable definition of victory). Trump is kicking the can and the hard decision down the road for the next president.
Click to expand...

Victory is a reasonably stable government---and Trump seemed to indicate that a coalition government including the Taliban isn't off the table. In other words, he/we don't care if Afghanistan wouldn't be mistaken for Belgium, so long as it's not a nation-sized training ground for Islamists.

Obama had 8 years to withdraw from Afghanistan and didn't. Why do you want to level that criticism at Trump?
 
Nomad said:
I have no problem with our presence in Afghanistan or even an increase in troop strength there.

My issue with annette is how he ran his mouth about people like Clinton and McCain being war mongers and using that as his rationale for supporting Trump but now, is drooling and fawning over him despite going back on his campaign promises.
Click to expand...

again..for those in the cheap seats that can't hear...

Going merrily into a war ( foreign civil war) with the intent of nation building ( counterinsurgency)
one side or the other with some intent to change it's course/influence the outcome [like Libya]
is a zillion ways different then being handed a war (Afghan) you have no choice to deal with.

You have no choice to play the war out in some fashion if you are handed a hot war.
That is diametrically opposed to starting a fresh war!!!

Am I speaking english? I can't make it much clearer ...
 
Darth Omar said:
Victory is a reasonably stable government---and Trump seemed to indicate that a coalition government including the Taliban isn't off the table. In other words, he/we don't care if Afghanistan wouldn't be mistaken for Belgium, so long as it's not a nation-sized training ground for Islamists.

Obama had 8 years to withdraw from Afghanistan and didn't. Why do you want to level that criticism at Trump?
Click to expand...

Well, for one, Trump spent the past 8 years telling Obama to withdraw from Afghanistan. And to turn things around on you, Trump's strategy is literally more of the same. Why criticize Obama and not Trump?

And when you say 'Victory is a reasonably stable government', you are endorsing nation building. America is committing blood and treasure to stabilize another nation. Sorry if you don't see it.
 
Amadeus said:
Yes, it is open-ended because there is no timeline and no discernible means of achieving victory (or even a viable definition of victory). Trump is kicking the can and the hard decision down the road for the next president.
Click to expand...
He always states things in a way he can't be held responsible for, later.

Mr. Trump promised to launch an intensive diplomatic and economic initiative, but he does so from a position of acute weakness at the State Department, which has yet to place an ambassador in Kabul, Afghanistan’s capital, and scrapped the office of the special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/21/world/asia/afghanistan-troops-trump.html



 
Amadeus said:
The second America withdraws, without some form of nation-building, it becomes a terrorist haven. So either you stay there indefinitely or nation-build. There is no third option that doesn't result in the collapse of Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Put diplomatic pressure on Pakistan to reign-in the Taliban from one side---and kick their asses with looser rules of engagement and generals calling shots on the ground, from the other.

Get them to the table. Bush never did it, I don't know that Obama even had a strategy and Russia didn't do it.

Seems like a good enough third option to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top