Unwinnable War?

[Danno 1,228]

While Obama stood firmly against military actions in Iraq, when it came to Afghanistan, he WAS 100% in favor of our military action there, even claiming Bush "took his Eye off the ball" in Afghanistan// not giving it the attention and materials needed to win.

So this is Baracks-War, .....this is also one area I hope he succeeds in.

-------------------------

Unwinnable War?

by Patrick J. Buchanan

08/14/2009

"Taliban Are Winning: U.S. Commander in Afghanistan Warns of Rising Casualties." Thus ran the startling headline on the front-page of The Wall Street Journal. The lead paragraph ran thus:

"The Taliban have gained the upper hand in Afghanistan, the top American commander there said, forcing the U.S. to change its strategy in the eight-year-old conflict by increasing the number of troops in heavily populated areas like the volatile southern city of Kandahar, the insurgency's spiritual home."

Source for the story: Gen. Stanley McChrystal himself.

The general's spokesman in Kabul was swift to separate him from that headline and lead. They "go too far," he said: The general does not believe the Taliban are winning or "gaining the upper hand."

Click Here!

Nevertheless, in the eighth year of America's war, the newly arrived field commander concedes that U.S. casualties, now at record levels, will continue to be high or go higher, and that our primary mission is no longer to run down and kill Taliban but to defend the Afghan population.

What went wrong?

Though U.S. force levels are higher than ever, the U.S. military situation is worse than ever. Though President Karzai is expected to win re-election, he is regarded as the ineffectual head of a corrupt regime. Though we have trained an Afghan army and police force of 220,000, twice that number are now needed. The Taliban are operating not only in the east, but in the north and west, and are taking control of the capital of the south, Kandahar.

NATO's response to Obama's request for more troops has been pathetic.

Europeans want to draw down the troops already sent. And Western opinion has soured on the war.

A poll commissioned by The Independent found 52 percent of Britons wanting to pull out and 58 percent believing the war is "unwinnable."

U.S. polls, too, have turned upside down.

A CBS-New York Times survey in late July found 33 percent saying the war was going well and 57 percent saying it was going badly or very badly. In a CNN poll in early August, Americans, by 54 percent to 41 percent, said they oppose the Afghan war that almost all Americans favored after 9-11 and Obama said in 2008 was the right war for America to fight.

The president is now approaching a decision that may prove as fateful for him and his country as was the one made by Lyndon Johnson to send the Marines ashore at Da Nang in December 1965.

Obama confronts a two-part question:

If, after eight years of fighting, the Taliban is stronger, more capable and closer to victory than it has ever been, what will it cost in additional U.S. troops, casualties, years and billions to turn this around? And what is so vital to us in that wilderness land worth another eight years of fighting, bleeding and dying, other than averting the humiliation of another American defeat?

From Secretary Gates to Gen. Petraeus, U.S. military and political leaders have been unanimous that the Afghan war does not lend itself to a military victory. Unfortunately, the Taliban does seem to believe in a military victory and triumphal return to power, and imposing upon the United States the same kind of defeat their fathers imposed upon the Soviet Union.

Whatever we may say of them, Taliban fighters have shown a greater willingness to die for a country free of us Americans than our Afghan allies have shown to die for the future we Americans envision for them.

In days, McChrystal is to provide the president with an assessment of what will be required for America to prevail.

Almost surely, the general's answer will be that success will require thousands more U.S. troops, billions more dollars, many more years of casualties. And if Obama yet believes this is a war of necessity we cannot lose, and he must soldier on, his decision will sunder his party and country, and put at risk his presidency.

If he refuses to deepen the U.S. commitment, it is hard to see how the United States can avoid what is at best a bloody stalemate.

But if he chooses to cut America's losses and get out, Obama risks a strategic debacle that will have our enemies rejoicing and open him up to the charge that he, the first African-American president, lost the war that America began as retribution for 9-11 and fought to prevent a second 9-11.

Had we gone into Afghanistan in 2001, knocked over the Taliban, driven out al-Qaida and departed, we would not be facing what we do today.

But we were seduced by the prospect of converting a backward tribal nation of 25 million, which has resisted every empire to set foot on its inhospitable soil, into a shining new democracy that would be a model for the Islamic world.

Now, whatever Obama decides, we shall pay a hellish price for the hubris of the nation-builders.

[nowhereman 1]

The Afghans are tough as hell & very hard to defeat... just ask the Russians. Obama & our troops have their work cut out for them. Who knows I may end up over there before the war is over. Lots of my friends have served 1, 2 or even 3 tours in Afghanistan (thankfully my number has only come up once, for Iraq).

[DIARD 1]

"While Obama stood firmly against military actions in Iraq, when it came to Afghanistan, he WAS 100% in favor of our military action there, even claiming Bush "took his Eye off the ball" in Afghanistan// not giving it the attention and materials needed to win."

Bush is what went wrong there. We diverted attention and resources to a war in Iraq. We should have not gone in there at all but if they were going to, they should have waited until we had the first one under control.

I do agree, I hope he does suceed. My nephew is graduating from Army basic next week. Don't want anything to happen to him.

[NickD 203]

I certainly disagree with Obama on this issue, Afghanistan drove the USSR into bankruptcy even though Reagan wanted to take the credit for it. Charlie Wilson's War certainly revealed a lot about Afghanistan, not so much the movie, but the History channels fact base presentation of it. When the USSR left, so did we. But what the hell, it's their country, they should do what they want to do.

Still go along with the most common sense theory, that our presence there does more to create these terrorists groups than anything else. Any kind of a war in Afghanistan would be a very low tech slaughter type of a war. Just say, let's get our a$$es out of there and protect our own borders. Bush's statement about bringing the terrorist war to the middle east was stupid, just making everything a lot worse.

[Danno 1,228]

"While Obama stood firmly against military actions in Iraq, when it came to Afghanistan, he WAS 100% in favor of our military action there, even claiming Bush "took his Eye off the ball" in Afghanistan// not giving it the attention and materials needed to win."

Bush is what went wrong there. We diverted attention and resources to a war in Iraq. We should have not gone in there at all but if they were going to, they should have waited until we had the first one under control.

I do agree, I hope he does suceed. My nephew is graduating from Army basic next week. Don't want anything to happen to him.

Actually our problem has more to do with this idea we can convert all people into Democracies. Some people are unwilling or unable to grasp or keep it.

The other repetitive blunder we keep making is: We fail to Destroy our enemy and every thing around him (As was done in the Civil war to the south and Germany/Japan).

[luckytxn 2,265]

Bring all troops from everywhere in the world back home now.

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

Bring all troops from everywhere in the world back home now.

not going to happen, although we've reduced our troop presence in europe already.

[alienlovechild 75]

not going to happen, although we've reduced our troop presence in europe already.

That's a largely untold story in the news. The kaserne where I was stationed in Germany had been used by the U.S. since 1945 but was turned over to Germany in 2006. Didn't know that until I looked it up.

[Ban Hammer 14,619]

not going to happen, although we've reduced our troop presence in europe already.

That's a largely untold story in the news. The kaserne where I was stationed in Germany had been used by the U.S. since 1945 but was turned over to Germany in 2006. Didn't know that until I looked it up.

that's the case with a lot of them. like when we left frankfurt - turned over all the buildings to the germans, and last time i saw where i lived at (5 years later) it was still empty and had been vandalized.

[nowhereman 1]

not going to happen, although we've reduced our troop presence in europe already.

That's a largely untold story in the news. The kaserne where I was stationed in Germany had been used by the U.S. since 1945 but was turned over to Germany in 2006. Didn't know that until I looked it up.

When I went to Bosnia in '99 a lot of people didn't even know we still had troops there. The American public has a very short attention span.

[CnT4ever 1]

I certainly disagree with Obama on this issue, Afghanistan drove the USSR into bankruptcy even though Reagan wanted to take the credit for it. Charlie Wilson's War certainly revealed a lot about Afghanistan, not so much the movie, but the History channels fact base presentation of it. When the USSR left, so did we. But what the hell, it's their country, they should do what they want to do.

Still go along with the most common sense theory, that our presence there does more to create these terrorists groups than anything else. Any kind of a war in Afghanistan would be a very low tech slaughter type of a war. Just say, let's get our a$$es out of there and protect our own borders. Bush's statement about bringing the terrorist war to the middle east was stupid, just making everything a lot worse.

Not to mention that USSR also broke down into many independant countries afterwards. The same will happen to the US if we continue this or any other war. We will go bankrupt (already there) and states will start to break away from the union (like Texas is trying) and those who are left...eventually we'll all be lining up in mile long lines for bread and toilet paper.

I doubt that he'll stop in Afghanistan though. While I think he's still better than Bush, I don't think he's that much better anymore.

[luckytxn 2,265]

And when I was stationed in Korea we had a lot of military bases there and Japan and still do. We did leave the Philipines. We do still have troops all over the world in many places.

[Danno 1,228]

I certainly disagree with Obama on this issue, Afghanistan drove the USSR into bankruptcy even though Reagan wanted to take the credit for it. Charlie Wilson's War certainly revealed a lot about Afghanistan, not so much the movie, but the History channels fact base presentation of it. When the USSR left, so did we. But what the hell, it's their country, they should do what they want to do.

Still go along with the most common sense theory, that our presence there does more to create these terrorists groups than anything else. Any kind of a war in Afghanistan would be a very low tech slaughter type of a war. Just say, let's get our a$$es out of there and protect our own borders. Bush's statement about bringing the terrorist war to the middle east was stupid, just making everything a lot worse.

Not to mention that USSR also broke down into many independant countries afterwards. The same will happen to the US if we continue this or any other war. We will go bankrupt (already there) and states will start to break away from the union (like Texas is trying) and those who are left...eventually we'll all be lining up in mile long lines for bread and toilet paper.

I doubt that he'll stop in Afghanistan though. While I think he's still better than Bush, I don't think he's that much better anymore.

NOt sure where the link is between "secession and recent military actions".

seems to me it is all about a "federal Govt." doing to much and pushing the states to do things without the Constitutional Authority.

[Pinocchio Liberal 268]

not going to happen, although we've reduced our troop presence in europe already.

That's a largely untold story in the news. The kaserne where I was stationed in Germany had been used by the U.S. since 1945 but was turned over to Germany in 2006. Didn't know that until I looked it up.

When I went to Bosnia in '99 a lot of people didn't even know we still had troops there. The American public has a very short attention span.

More like the press has the short attention span. They kept us informed hourly about how we were losing Iraq. Reminded of us about how McCain was gonna keep us there for a hundred years. Funny no mention from the very same press that Mr.Clintons war in Bosnia is still alive and well after how many years?

[tmma 467]

It's harder to win a war of ideologies.

Alot of our 'enemies' are NOT afraid of dying- and are lead to believe that war against us the only honorable way to die. Fighting an enemy like that is almost impossible. They do not follow international laws, conventions or basic human rights.

Conversely-our Military is trained to preserve & protect assets and follow international laws, rights and conventions. This is what makes it so difficult 'winning' against the Taliban, in Iraq and places like that.

About Bosnia-I was there during Operation Joint Guard.

They were all blowing eachother up and peppering the place with landmines, whilst releasing poison gas into the air. We became a common target because NONE of the people fighting wanted UN/USA there to peacekeep (even though there was no peace to keep) What a nightmare.. They wanted to duke it out the old fashioned way. If it wasn't for the fact that trouble in the Balkans could easily spread and unstabilize the rest of Europe-I would just as easily stayed at home and let them get on with it. Clinton said it was going to be a maximum of 2 years in Bosnia-and our people are still there!

edit-spelling-need more coffeee

Edited August 17, 2009 by tmma