Bush didn't try to do what the Russians did in Afghanistan. What the Russians tryed to do was impossible. What He did and is doing in Afghanistan is a horse of a different color from what he's trying to do in Iraq. You don'get it ! What the Russians tryed and failed to do in ten years was impossible and it's a good thing we are not trying to do the same now in Afghanistan. I ask myself, why didn't Bush learn from the Russians experience in Afghanistan, we are in the same position in Iraq as the Russians were then. If Bush would have done in Iraq what He is now doing in Afghanistan most of the American people would not have a problem with it. In Afghanistan we are going after targets and enemies of America with the cooperation of the government. In Iraq we are trying to change and create the government. Afghanistan has a local security force and a vibrant government in place. Iraq has neither. Bush is trying to do in Iraq something He said He would not do. Nation Build !!!!! Is it not funny how nation building came up when He was running for president, way before 911 was even a thought ? NOTE : your sound bites are nice but your understanding of the subject sounds like you went to the GW school for ---------- !
Libs at work in Syria/Iran
- Thread starter DOGS THAT BARK
- Start date
Bush didn't try to do what the Russians did in Afghanistan. What the Russians tryed to do was impossible. What He did and is doing in Afghanistan is a horse of a different color from what he's trying to do in Iraq. You don'get it ! What the Russians tryed and failed to do in ten years was impossible and it's a good thing we are not trying to do the same now in Afghanistan. I ask myself, why didn't Bush learn from the Russians experience in Afghanistan, we are in the same position in Iraq as the Russians were then. If Bush would have done in Iraq what He is now doing in Afghanistan most of the American people would not have a problem with it. In Afghanistan we are going after targets and enemies of America with the cooperation of the government. In Iraq we are trying to change and create the government. Afghanistan has a local security force and a vibrant government in place. Iraq has neither. Bush is trying to do in Iraq something He said He would not do. Nation Build !!!!! Is it not funny how nation building came up when He was running for president, way before 911 was even a thought ? NOTE : your sound bites are nice but your understanding of the subject sounds like you went to the GW school for ---------- !
Classic DTB post - lies about history and lies about what prominent Dems have said.
On every level, this post is :bsflag
Huh? Terrorists blew up 241 Marines and cut and ran and you blow it off. But Somalia? That's a WHOLE different story, based on the party of the 2 presidents involved, I guess. You talk about that ad infinitum. I'm not sure how somebody could have different views of each event, unless it's simply politics.
As for your second part, of course i'd criticize W if we didn't respond at all after 9/11(which, btw, wasn't a military operation either-same as Beirut, as you say). That would be in Afghanistan or Saudi Arabia where I would expect that we'd respond. But you must have been unconscious for the last 5 years if you haven't read my hundreds of posts, both before and after our occupation of Iraq, that were strongly opposed to going there.
So no, I certainly would not have criticized W for not going there. That's totally and completely ridiculous.
Did someone say were not making a Russia mistake in Afghanistan. Stay 10 years. We will be there six soon. And we will make our mistake in Iraq if we take sides.
Huh? Terrorists blew up 241 Marines and cut and ran and you blow it off. But Somalia? That's a WHOLE different story, based on the party of the 2 presidents involved, I guess. You talk about that ad infinitum.
For the last time Matt how can you retreat from military maneuvers (the 241 marines) when there are none :shrug:
Bottom line--it is/was impossible for us to be defeated militarily in Viet Nam-Somolia-or Iraq.
The only hope of enemy is/was our weakest link--stay in fight long enough and the press/liberals will do the job for us.
--any arguements--I didn't think so.
For the last time Matt how can you retreat from military maneuvers (the 241 marines) when there are none :shrug:
Bottom line--it is/was impossible for us to be defeated militarily in Viet Nam-Somolia-or Iraq.
The only hope of enemy is/was our weakest link--stay in fight long enough and the press/liberals will do the job for us.
--any arguements--I didn't think so.
Your statement that it was impossible for us to be defeated militarily in these places is arrogant, simplistic,dangerous and the reason we are being defeated and were defeated. I think our political leaders in all three cases thought and think like you do. Not only our political leaders but the suits in the military that sit on their fat asses in air conditioned pristine offices and their only discomfort is the starch in their shorts. These generals forget about the men they claim to lead and go along with military operations that should not take place. We leveled the playing field in Iraq for this enemy. We can not win this thing, It is impossible. Guys like you can fantasize about why we are losing and why we lost in the past . You Claim to be pro military but you back military plans that do nothing but get brave men killed. I'm more pro military than the likes of you will ever be ! If you want to succeed in Iraq, against an enemy that has no AF. Use our Af to contain the region like we did before this crazy occupation. Send in special ops for hits on special targets. You can't have a mass force on the ground against hit run terrorist tactics. You can't fight terror with conventional tactics. We have to fight terror with terror. You talk about the hope of an enemy that you don't understand. The hope of this enemy is that GW continues to give them AMERICA TARGETS ON THE GROUND IN IRAQ ! BIN LADEN IS LAUGHING @ US ! HE GOT WHAT HE WANTED. NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS FROM HERE, HE GOT WHAT HE WANTED. AMERICAN SQUANDERED WEALTH AND BLOOD, ON A PLAYGROUND WERE HE CAN BREED AND TRAIN HIS SOLDIERS. I agree with you : their are people that oppose this war that don't have Americas best interest in mind. There are those that appose this war , some of them have served and are serving now because they care about America and the men and women that are serving now. You and others have to get over this mentality of cutting and running. If a mistake is made, it has to be corrected before progress and winning can become an option. The Bush option is losing, I want to win. We should win, we have the best military in the world on paper. The best team doesn't always win does it ? We see that all the time in sport, we see that every day in life. WHY WE ARE LOSING : not because of the fighting force...... Lack of leadership on many fronts..... arrogant and simplistic few of the enemy..... THOSE 241 MARINES ARE NOT COMING BACK, GOD BLESS THEM ALL. A TWENTY SOMETHING MARINE LOSING HIS ARM OR LEG TODAY OR ANOTHER MOTHER GETTING A CALL TELLING HER THE LAST TIME SHE KISSED HER SON WAS THE LAST TIME, WILL NOT BRING BACK THOSE BRAVE SOLES LOST IN VIETNAM! WE HAVE TO LOOK AT HISTORY SO THAT WE DON'T REPEAT THE SAME MISTAKES . WE CAN'T ALLOW HISTORY TO BE THE CRUTCH THAT PREVENTS US FROM WINNING NOW OR IN THE FUTURE !
Bryanz one thing for sure. If our medical treatments and procedures had not improved as much as they have last 25 years. And some of the best Doc's being in the field. Our death toll in Iraq might be closer to 8000. We must remember the over 26000 injured many had life threatening wounds.
Are you sure you are not Slick Willy ? I love your semantics. What is your definition of is ? It wasn't a retreat because there was no military operations ? So why would AMERICAN LEADERSHIP PUT 241 MARINES in Beirut in the middle of the Lebanese Civil War so that they could be targets for jihad ? Once they were killed , we and the other members of that peace keeping force left. Call it what you will if that makes you feel better. Don't you think we owe those Marines something and not make the same mistake with their brothers that are serving now ? We have 150,000 serving in the middle of the Iraq Civil War ! You predict the outcome ! I know in war people get killed, I can accept that if they die for something. We haven't fought a major conflict with troops on the ground that was successful since WWII ! You can't separate a military win from a political win, they have to be one in the same. Without a political solution in site there can be no military success.
Last edited:
To have a military win in Iraq they have to wave the white flag. You can't get a terrorist to do that. Their goal is to kill forever. Our President has given the terrorist that would never had a chance in hell to kill Americans Whatever they call X Mas every day of the wk. They were killing before those 241 MARINES IN BEIRUT AND THEY WILL BE UNTIL THE END OF TIME. We need some kind of containment policy, that includes competent intelligence, special ops & terrorist like strikes of our own. I would love for you to read these post with an open mind.
