|
| quote: | Originally posted by Q5echo
first off, i don't buy into the current, imo, sensationalism about Afghanistan. i don't think it's as dire as advertized IOW, just an evolution of the conflict.
none of that gets to cause of the issue in Afghanistan and how it's gotten where it is. NATO is the problem in Afghanistan. the NATO countries' rules of engagement is the cause of the problem coalition forces are being taken advantage of. the Taliban would be nothing if they were on any other terrain in the world, but theyre not. we operate where they've been for almost two decades of free reign. thats where we, not just NATO, are sorely disadvantaged.
people (journalists) are making huge mistakes equating Afghanistan with Iraq and what we should do in Afghanistan what was done in Iraq. the two are, again, completely different animals and NATO countries have been dropping the ball for years now.
but thats not to say the decision to let NATO bear responsibilities in Afghanistan was an unwise one. it was necessary and they're still necessary they just need to be let go. |
My concern isn't with tactics. I don't believe we should have ever occupied the country. Not saying we shouldn't have attacked targets after September or dropped in some forces to capture OBL, but nation building is one hell of a job which Afghanistan sure as fuck doesn't deserve from us. I must be missing something. Our blood and treasure isn't worth fucking Afghanistan, and yet, we're there. I have my suspicions...mainly access to Caspian sea energy reserves and thus bypassing Russia, Iran, and China. No country goes to war for some ideal (i.e. democracy), and to say so is really dumbing down whoever has to hear such a niave comment. Every country which has ever gone to war has done so in its own interests, America included.
___________________
|