Faux Buffoons trash Canadian soldiers

[Wezil]

It cost a whole lot more than wished, but that war is well on its way to being won,

Right. Won = a garrison of 50K left behind indefinitely (if you are lucky and the "withdrawal" succeeds).

thanks to the general now in charge of the Afghan war. It is not a disaster.

With a little luck you can achieve the same sort of victory in Afghanistan. A permanent garrison of 50k to keep them from each others throats.

Motives? You didn't answer that.

[DanS]

You put up odd strawmen. F.e., why would we want to keep them away from each others' throats?

[Naked Gents Rut]

Right. Won = a garrison of 50K left behind indefinitely

You don't think America won in WWII or Korea?

Right, so the west should have bombed the Taliban all the way to Pakistan, then leave only to let them return? What kind of insane logic is that?

There's nothing insane about it. The stupid thing to do is what we're doing now, ie. staying in country and letting the Taliban attack us from a safe haven in Pakistan that we can't get rid of.

[TCO]

I knew things were wrong in Afghanistan with the food drops in OCT of 01. we need to use our forces to disrupt and punish. Not to conquer, nation-build or transform. It's thier country. Find a few Taliban, hang them and boogy. Screw with them via proxies.

But let's drop this charade that occupying the place stops the next plane hijacking. I could organize that from London. The effing TSA does more to stop 9-111 than the 50,000 troops in afghnastian.

[Naked Gents Rut]

Unfortunately, Gates looks dead-set on orienting the military towards future COIN and nation-building operations like Afghanistan and Iraq. I'd personally rather avoid future Iraqs.

[Wezil]

You put up odd strawmen. F.e., why would we want to keep them away from each others' throats?

Afghanistan is in civil war and we have picked sides.

Speaking of strawmen. Still waiting for the "motives" you spoke of.

[Wezil]

Right. Won = a garrison of 50K left behind indefinitely

You don't think America won in WWII or Korea?

I gather you like to argue NGR so I will indulge you (somewhat).

Korea - No. Stalemate.

WWII - Clearly not. The Russians won that war, not the Americans.

Seriously though. Different situation. Permanent US (and other Western) troops weren't left behind in Europe to keep the vanquished in line. They were there to prevent Soviet expansion westward. I suppose you could argue the Iraq garrison is to keep Iran from moving west however the bigger goal is to keep the Iraqi's from fighting each other.

[TCO]

Weasel: You are aptly named.

[DanS]

Still waiting for the "motives" you spoke of.

How about you use your imagination a little?

Some want a punitive expedition. Some want flypaper in the area. Some want to keep Pakistan and its intelligence service in line. Some want to keep Iran encircled. Some want to keep Kabul (Afghanistan's center of gravity) in our hands. Some want to capture/kill OBL and his cronies. Some want to suppress Al Qaeda. Some want to make Afghanistan a better place. Some want to create a government that can rule the entirety of the country. Some want to outspend the Saudis. Some want to stanch the flow of drugs into their countries. And so on.

[TCO]

wow, that's quite an interesting list of motives. Kudos. Serious.

I'm not sure that I buy Kabul as "center of gravity", expecially given the prevelance of guerilla rural activity know and time immemorial. I think this term is way misused in the military (I've experienced it) and that it tends to give a false picture of how much impact can come from a single area (silver bullet). Which would be nice. But life is not always that nice.

And even though your list is very sophisticated, I still think we should not **** with places like this except by long range and proxies and without getting tangled up for long periods on the ground.

Oh...and it's ****ing landlocked.

[DinoDoc]

Oh...and it's ****ing landlocked.

****ing Navy bastard!

[DanS]

Overall, I'm sympathetic to your very cautious views on Afghanistan. Thankfully, we can rely on several benefits of the outcome in Iraq in order to have modest goals. There were lots of myths demonstrated to be untrue in Iraq. We are not merely a paper tiger. The Arab street will not inconvenience us. We can operate in a muslim country if it pleases us. We can handle our soldiers getting killed. We can stick with a war until conclusion, even if it lasts a decade (or two, as the Iraq war has lasted, in my view). We can fight and win a guerilla war. We can place our guys in power in any manner we wish. And so on.

One of the unfortunate aspects of being a superpower is that we have to prove these things every so often to ourselves and our adversaries. If we hadn't done it Iraq, we probably would have to do it in Afghanistan.

[Wezil]

Weasel: You are aptly named.

-1 for spelling.

[Wezil]

How about you use your imagination a little?

Sorry. I didn't want to be accused of "putting words in your mouth". I took the cautious approach and asked what these motives were.

Some want a punitive expedition. Some want flypaper in the area. Some want to keep Pakistan and its intelligence service in line. Some want to keep Iran encircled. Some want to keep Kabul (Afghanistan's center of gravity) in our hands. Some want to capture/kill OBL and his cronies. Some want to suppress Al Qaeda. Some want to make Afghanistan a better place. Some want to create a government that can rule the entirety of the country. Some want to outspend the Saudis. Some want to stanch the flow of drugs into their countries. And so on.

An impressive list as TCO points out however most don't pass serious scrutiny. Since it wasn't your list anyway (I suspect you don't "buy" all those reasons) there is no real need to respond to them individually.

[Wezil]

Overall, I'm sympathetic to your very cautious views on Afghanistan. Thankfully, we can rely on several benefits of the outcome in Iraq in order to have modest goals. There were lots of myths demonstrated to be untrue in Iraq. We are not merely a paper tiger. The Arab street will not inconvenience us. We can operate in a muslim country if it pleases us. We can handle our soldiers getting killed. We can stick with a war until conclusion, even if it lasts a decade (or two, as the Iraq war has lasted, in my view). We can fight and win a guerilla war. We can place our guys in power in any manner we wish. And so on.

This was what I was after. What are these "goals" (to your mind)? Or is it simply a "prestige and respect" thing?

One of the unfortunate aspects of being a superpower is that we have to prove these things every so often to ourselves and our adversaries. If we hadn't done it Iraq, we probably would have to do it in Afghanistan.

Empires are expensive. You have many bills to pay.