So our soldiers spill their blood and this is the thanks we get..

[JackOSU]

I'm personally pretty torn on the wars in the box where we have had and continue to have a bunch of kick ass guys/gals over there busting there ass and then we have this type of shit going on.

On one hand I just wish they'd let us do our job and figh a war to win it without taking prisoners. Fighting a war and being PC about it is what gets us killed and it seems to be our MO unfortunately after WWII.

On the other hand I almost wish we'd just get out for these folks cannot be reasoned with and most, not all, are worthless anyways. They have been backward ass thinkers since the beginning. Let them live in their shit hole sandbox and bring our boys home. My problem with that is almost giving into what they want and having to feel somewhat that those whom have faught and died over there did it possilby in vein if we pick up and leave. That has really hit home after a guy I went to high school with was killed right before mother's day.

What say you?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/may/16/afghan-prosecutor-arrest-warrant-us-officer

[Safetyhit]

Sounds like you are allowing the emotion of losing a classmate to blur your assessment of the war. By being "over there" we are not only creating casualties within their ranks, but also dissuading the enemy on a major level from further attacks here.

I know some will say it's the opposite, but that would be incorrect. The radicals have always hated us. Now the precedent has been set, mess with this country too severely and we will occupy you until you get your act together.

[JackOSU]

Sounds like you are allowing the emotion of losing a classmate to blur your assessment of the war. By being "over there" we are not only creating casualties within their ranks, but also dissuading the enemy on a major level from further attacks here.

I know some will say it's the opposite, but that would be incorrect. The radicals have always hated us. Now the precedent has been set, mess with this country too severely and we will occupy you until you get your act together.

I wouldn't say it's bluring my view of it. Since 2002 I've had family and friends there and have known 3 who have made the ultimate sacrifice. From what they have described to me they felt they were fighting for a very just cause, but they did have the opinion that things could have been done much differently and lots of lives could have been saved etc. In the end most chalked it up to what they had to deal with and a good soldier will adapt and overcome. I just hate to see us fight a war where we have politicians dictating our moves and how we fight it. I hope that makes sense. Alot of folks have been killed based on horrible ROE's etc. Would you agree on that?

I definatley a agree it's the proper response by doing what we've done for the most part, but I again hate to see lives lost when we could have fought in a way that leads into a better situation.

With the article I attached it's pretty bad that the people we came to help turn on us in that particular stunt. That to me shows the politics involved and I truly hate that aspect of it and in my opinion has no part in war.

For me going to war means fighting as dirty as possible and completely destorying the morale of the enemy for even wanting to fight back at all. Make it quick and VERY deadly. That to me shows we're willing to fight with an iron fist and take no prisoners. The way we've handled many situations over there gives me the mixed feelings of there having to have been a lot better way to victory if you will.

[kmrtnsn]

Fight to win without taking prisoners? What the hell is that supposed to mean? Do you mean take the leashes off and just kill everyone? Is that the America that you are from? Is that the American that our best are fighting and dying for? It isn't the one I fought for. Do you have any idea what we are even fighting "over there"? We are not fighting an army, we are not fighting an insurgency or even a people, we are fighting an abstract notion; we are fighting an idea. We are fighting a religion. The hard truth of the matter is that you can't defeat those things with guns. I think you should sit down and do some real, serious thinking on the matter because after a post like that I don't think you have a clue.

[Belmont31R]

Nation building doesn't work when you are dealing with people who are quite literally in the stone age.



In the end the tribal laws are still going to be the supreme law of the land, and the half assed central government is going to be ineffective, corrupt, and will eventually be removed by force.



IMO we turned to nation building after WMD's in Iraq turned out to be a bust, and capturing Bin Laden didn't turn out so well. Had to have something to dangle in front of people as having a sense of a mission. Those people are savages, and will always be. They don't care about some unified country. They are about what is right in front of them, and nothing more.

[JackOSU]

Fight to win without taking prisoners? What the hell is that supposed to mean? Do you mean take the leashes off and just kill everyone? Is that the America that you are from? Is that the American that our best are fighting and dying for? It isn't the one I fought for. Do you have any idea what we are even fighting "over there"? We are not fighting an army, we are not fighting an insurgency or even a people, we are fighting an abstract notion; we are fighting an idea. We are fighting a religion. The hard truth of the matter is that you can't defeat those things with guns. I think you should sit down and do some real, serious thinking on the matter because after a post like that I don't think you have a clue.

I guess my post was not clear.

I never said to kill everyone. I have a pretty good idea who/what we're fighting over there yes. Fighting that "idea" or crazy twist of a religion is what I view it as is a hell of a thing to have to fight if not allowed to take the gloves off is my main point.

[kmrtnsn]

"Take the gloves off" and do what exactly? Drop a few more bombs? Level a few more villages? Lay some mines? Add another 100,000 troops? A half-million? That worked well for the British and the Soviets, didn't it? I suspect that martyring Mullah Omar and Osama won't have the pacifying effect that taking out the German high command would have had during WWII if we could have pulled it off. We have a problem over there that there is no military solution for.

[dcollect]

That is because Smedley Butler told the truth, and some are aware of this.

[CAVDOC]

after serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan it really lights me up to here the old cliche that " being heavy handed did not work for the russians" so that means we go the polar opposite and have super limited roe that hurts us in the long run? we are not the russians!!! and no I do not think anyone suggests to level the hole region with nukes. But we must create an environment where trying to hurt the US or it's allies/people is just much more trouble than it is worth. How you do that you ask? give them no safe haven- tell the world if you harbor the forces of evil we will ignore all borders and treaties in place come in and take them down- then do it. while in afghanistan troops in my unit were fired upon near the paki border- as soon as they hear the planes or helicopters they drop weapons and run across the border- oops not allowed to hit them now-roe/relations with the pakis etc. everyone in the region hates us anyway so why worry about offending them any more!?

[Fyrhazzrd]

after serving in both Iraq and Afghanistan it really lights me up to here the old cliche that " being heavy handed did not work for the russians" so that means we go the polar opposite and have super limited roe that hurts us in the long run? we are not the russians!!! and no I do not think anyone suggests to level the hole region with nukes. But we must create an environment where trying to hurt the US or it's allies/people is just much more trouble than it is worth. How you do that you ask? give them no safe haven- tell the world if you harbor the forces of evil we will ignore all borders and treaties in place come in and take them down- then do it. while in afghanistan troops in my unit were fired upon near the paki border- as soon as they hear the planes or helicopters they drop weapons and run across the border- oops not allowed to hit them now-roe/relations with the pakis etc. everyone in the region hates us anyway so why worry about offending them any more!?

The problem with that is, is that they downsized the military so much that we just don't have enough personnel to fight a war in eight or nine countries. I agree we don't have enough troops in country to get the job done, but we don't have enough troops period.

[rifleman2000]

I feel the OP's frustration, but feel the effort is worth it.

First, at the tactical level, the appropriate weapons and overwhelming response should always be available to the troops. The enemy must know that he will pay for his actions. Otherwise the enemy will be able to strike with impunity...

Which leads to point two. The military effort is only a part, although a large part, of a counter-insurgency. Bottom line of a counter-insurgency is establish a legit government that can take care of itself and its people; and the people accept it.

But tying our troop's hands in areas that the enemy owns and operates in is not smart. The Taliban's best tool for de-legitimizing the government is demonstrating a lack of security by acts of violence against the people, the government, and our troops.

[rifleman2000]

I think people buy into the media's portrayal of the war, the media that broadcasts casualty figures cheerfully provided by the Taliban.

Compare at total war (WWII) and the war in Afghanistan. The amount of restraint we have shown from 2002 to today is incredible compared to other wars and other nations.

[CAVDOC]

in both Iraq and Afghanistan I saw an immense amount of restraint and discipline from my troops in the face of extreme pressure and frustration-I am very proud of the men(and women) with whom I served. For a 19 or 20 year old to display such restraint gives me hope for the future-as opposed to so many so called adults these days

[GermanSynergy]

in both Iraq and Afghanistan I saw an immense amount of restraint and discipline from my troops in the face of extreme pressure and frustration-I am very proud of the men(and women) with whom I served. For a 19 or 20 year old to display such restraint gives me hope for the future-as opposed to so many so called adults these days

The men and women serving in our Armed Forces are the finest Americans we have. They carry put their duties with a great deal of bravery, honor, professionalism and integrity.

Talking to the average person back home is somewhat disappointing, however.

[500grains]

I don't understand our strategy in Afghanistan. From Patton's words I always thought the way to win a war was to kill as many of the enemy as possible. :confused:

[Eddiesketti]

Talking to the average person back home is somewhat disappointing, however.

I agree.

[rifleman2000]

I don't understand our strategy in Afghanistan. From Patton's words I always thought the way to win a war was to kill as many of the enemy as possible. :confused:

It is. But you have to find them first, and then gain a tactical advantage and get them into a decisive engagement. The enemy is not the Wehrmacht. The Taliban live among the locals and blend in.

[Alex V]

Fight to win without taking prisoners? What the hell is that supposed to mean? Do you mean take the leashes off and just kill everyone? Is that the America that you are from? Is that the American that our best are fighting and dying for? It isn't the one I fought for. Do you have any idea what we are even fighting "over there"? We are not fighting an army, we are not fighting an insurgency or even a people, we are fighting an abstract notion; we are fighting an idea. We are fighting a religion. The hard truth of the matter is that you can't defeat those things with guns. I think you should sit down and do some real, serious thinking on the matter because after a post like that I don't think you have a clue.

I can not agree with you more but would like to add that you can not defeat those things without guns either...

For a millennia the only thing "those people" understand is violence. That is why when they have an apposing political, socioeconomic of religious view then can only argue with with violence, strap a bomb to their asses and go out and kill innocents.

The Soviets ran a pretty PC-Less war in A-Stan for years and what was the result? Sure, perhaps without American assistance it may have turned out differently, but the people "over there" do not yield to the same presssures we do. They ARE backwards, therefore distroying existing infrastructure will not effect them, and building a new one will not win over hearts and minds. They don't need it. They need a goat, a cave, some sand and the Koran and they are happy as pigs in sh*t.

I can't say I am against these wars, but I honestly do not see an ending to it. Especialy if it continues to be run the way it is now.

You saw we can not stoop to their level of cruelty and so on, but that is the only thing they will understand. We kill 10 "insurgents" and the same day 50 are born. It will never end. They will always hate regardless of what we will do.

I hope you are right, I hope that us being "over there" is keeping us safe back home. Otherwise those brave men and women are risking their asses for nothing. And those that have died have died for nothing.

If it was up to me, I would wipe everyone of those who wish harm to us off the face of this earth in one display of atomic fission... but its not up to me... lol probobly a good thing. Untill then all I can do is support those who are more brave than I and protect me.

We will never get a Thank You from anyone for anything that we do. So its no surprise that things like the article the OP linked happen.

[Alex V]

I don't understand our strategy in Afghanistan. From Patton's words I always thought the way to win a war was to kill as many of the enemy as possible. :confused:

and Sun Tzu said "Kill One, Terrify a Thousand"

But we are either not allowed to kill one, of the ones we kill do not seem to scare anyone...

[rifleman2000]

They need a goat, a cave, some sand and the Koran and they are happy as pigs in sh*t.


This is not true. What most people in the world want is a way to support their families, the people of Afghanistan are no different. They are no less practical or no more fanatical about religion than your average blue collar American. Your trouble makers that exploit them are warlords and the rich fanatics (Saudis), etc; a small minority. Just like how American politicians exploit the poor and uneducated.

[Alex V]

This is not true. What most people in the world want is a way to support their families, the people of Afghanistan are no different. They are no less practical or no more fanatical about religion than your average blue collar American. Your trouble makers that exploit them are warlords and the rich fanatics (Saudis), etc; a small minority. Just like how American politicians exploit the poor and uneducated.

I can not honestly argue with you since I do not have first hand experience, but its not what I heard from other's who have.

Either way, I do not believe that they see what we are doing there as helping them support their families. I can imagine that a lot of them have become so fearful of the warlords and so on over the years that they would much rather be under their rule than freed by us.

Almost like Stockholm Syndrome on a national scale.

[120mm]

internet forums are a shitty place to discuss this topic.

They create more disagreement than what is usually there.

I validate each and every thing Rifleman2000 said on this thread, though I was pissing in his Cheerios in another.

Security first

Then Hold what you got

Then build.

And inkblot out from there.

And, you know something? You can call Afghanistan backwards and a people who understand killing, but prior to the Brits and Soviets, they had a kind of peace. Well, when they weren't kicking India's ass just to prove they could.

"Win" in Afghanistan would be a more or less secular Islamic state, like a "Turkey-Lite", that had mostly independent regions that weren't fighting over control of Kabul. Militarily, that is.

Sometimes we forget that we really didn't try that hard in AFG between 2003 and 2008; We've only really started to put effort into this starting last year. Again, not denigrating any person's or unit's contribution there, but AFG just hasn't been the focus, until now.

BTW, I have nothing against Afghan tribalism, per se. And I think we really need to look at who we are calling Taliban and make sure we mean to label them as that. I think we've pushed some folks into that camp that really aren't comfortable being there.

[rifleman2000]

Security first

Then Hold what you got

Then build.

And inkblot out from there.

And, you know something? You can call Afghanistan backwards and a people who understand killing, but prior to the Brits and Soviets, they had a kind of peace. Well, when they weren't kicking India's ass just to prove they could.

"Win" in Afghanistan would be a more or less secular Islamic state, like a "Turkey-Lite", that had mostly independent regions that weren't fighting over control of Kabul. Militarily, that is.

Sometimes we forget that we really didn't try that hard in AFG between 2003 and 2008; We've only really started to put effort into this starting last year. Again, not denigrating any person's or unit's contribution there, but AFG just hasn't been the focus, until now.

BTW, I have nothing against Afghan tribalism, per se. And I think we really need to look at who we are calling Taliban and make sure we mean to label them as that. I think we've pushed some folks into that camp that really aren't comfortable being there.

I certainly agree with this assessment.

As a side note, most of my Afghan police unit knew more about WWE wrestling than I will ever know. John Cena is by far their favorite.

[Spurholder]

That is because Smedley Butler told the truth, and some are aware of this.

And "the war formerly known as GWOT" isn't the Banana Wars.

That comparison falls short in Iraq (who got the oil field development contracts, and who didn't?) as well as Afghanistan (what resources are you referring to here, anyway?).