Who said Afghanistan wouldn't be another Vietnam...

[Ecthy]

I'm not saying that at the end of the war western casualties will be about as high as were the American ones in Vietnam, but just have a look at this. When it all started many of us said it would only be a short war, only be about defeating the Taliban in several days. And the general assumption was that while the Soviets tried to get control over the area, we would only destroy the evil guys.

Thing is, you can't destroy an army like this, especially not in a mountain region like this. And then, we are indeed trying to control the region by not only founding a new government but also supporting it militar-wise, and we're not going to retreat from the region that quickly, since those guys are still pretty much into playing the powerful local warlord. That means we need to be there to stabilize the region, which makes us more vulnerable to resistance by militant guys.

Now that Germany is going to take over the command over the local troops in Kabul, another interesting point has gained importance lately over here - the fact that guerillas will find it easy to attack stationary troops in Kabul from the mountains, since Kabul is basically encircled by hills and mountains. With a few grenade launchers you can inflict a lot of damage on a camp, and there seem to be no decent tactics against that sort of hassle.

[Solly]

Troll.

Why do you persist with your anti-Americanism?

[MrFun]

Re: Who said Afghanistan wouldn't be another Vietnam...

Originally posted by Ecthelion
I'm not saying that at the end of the war western casualties will be about as high as were the American ones in Vietnam, but just have a look at this. When it all started many of us said it would only be a short war, only be about defeating the Taliban in several days. And the general assumption was that while the Soviets tried to get control over the area, we would only destroy the evil guys.

Thing is, you can't destroy an army like this, especially not in a mountain region like this. And then, we are indeed trying to control the region by not only founding a new government but also supporting it militar-wise, and we're not going to retreat from the region that quickly, since those guys are still pretty much into playing the powerful local warlord. That means we need to be there to stabilize the region, which makes us more vulnerable to resistance by militant guys.

Now that Germany is going to take over the command over the local troops in Kabul, another interesting point has gained importance lately over here - the fact that guerillas will find it easy to attack stationary troops in Kabul from the mountains, since Kabul is basically encircled by hills and mountains. With a few grenade launchers you can inflict a lot of damage on a camp, and there seem to be no decent tactics against that sort of hassle.

First off, we have the technology to drop bombs that can burrow into the caves and tunnels to blow the terrorists to smitherins.

Secondly, we know the challenges of the mountainous terrain and have already experienced difficulties with the terrain. BUT, we have deployed specific missions and operations with a unit of only a dozen or so men with such obstacles in mind.

Thirdly, the international forces are coordinating their missions with the native alliances, such as the Northern Alliance.

And last, but certainly not least, most wars take years TO WIN. If we lost patience after the fighting in World War II lasted for six months and decided to call it quits, Nazi Germany would have won. So do not start crying just because this war has lasted for four months.

I cannot think of any other comments.

[Ecthy]

I'm not crying, I'm just saying those wh osaid the war would last 2 weeks were wrong.

Could Mr Spink explain me how this is anti-American in any way?

[KrazyHorse]

Why do you persist with your anti-Americanism?

Did anybody else find this funny considering its source?

[Bereta_Eder]

yes.

[Solly]

I am pro-American.

[Ecthy]

I, and many other, just can't find that funny anymore.

Therefore, the ignore list feature has gained popularity on this board lately, even among many European users.

[Ecthy]

If you post another reply without answering my question, you'll never reach me again with any of your trolls

[Giancarlo]

Was the D-Day unnecessary too? How about overthrowing Manuel Noriega? Did Kuwait need to be liberate? War is war. And people like you ecthelion won´t win this argument.

Thing is, you can't destroy an army like this, especially not in a mountain region like this.

Yes you can. With 15,000 pound bombs you can.

since those guys are still pretty much into playing the powerful local warlord.

There is a difference between the Interim government and the warlords. The interim government is receiving a substantial amount of money to function, the warlords are getting very little. So the warlords will join the interim government or become quiet.

[Az]

Did anybody else find this funny considering its source?

yes , very much so...

I also liked this part very much:

Troll.

[Ecthy]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
Was the D-Day unnecessary too? How about overthrowing Manuel Noriega? Did Kuwait need to be liberate? War is war. And people like you ecthelion won´t win this argument.

I don't know what you're talking abou,t you seem to be missing the point

There is a difference between the Interim government and the warlords. The interim government is receiving a substantial amount of money to function, the warlords are getting very little. So the warlords will join the interim government or become quiet.

The warlords I'm talking about are a part of the interim government

[The Mad Monk]

Since German troops will be putting themselves into harm's way, I view Ecthelion's post as nothing more or less than a legitimate airing of his POV.

That said, when did anyone say this was going to be a short war? The sudden collapse of Taliban forces in a few days came as a complete surprise to everyone involved--certainly the American High Command, which spent that time desperately trying to rein the Northern Alliance in. The prison revolt then showed that there was still plenty of fight in these guys.

As it is, we have congressmen wondering aloud if we are actually going to win this.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by The Mad Monk
As it is, we have congressmen wondering aloud if we are actually going to win this.

That wasn't the impression I got of Senator Daschle's comments.

[The Mad Monk]

Dunno--seemed to me he was saying that if we didn't get bin Laden, it would all be for nothing. What was your interpretation?