What's new

Time to Get Out of Afghanistan

well talk about pulling out of afghanistan,for this just study last 30 year,s not more,in these 30 years afghan nation just fight fight and fight for them nothing else
i think that fighting has becoem their habit and revenge is running is their blood,i think that american,s canot think of pull out because its just starting of real afghan film, soo let american to learn how to fight,they will have to learn thsi from afghan nation
 
.
well talk about pulling out of afghanistan,for this just study last 30 year,s not more,in these 30 years afghan nation just fight fight and fight for them nothing else
i think that fighting has becoem their habit and revenge is running is their blood,i think that american,s canot think of pull out because its just starting of real afghan film, soo let american to learn how to fight,they will have to learn thsi from afghan nation

I think Obama calls this rural Pennsylvanian syndrome: some people have no other hope than sticking to their Bible and guns. :rofl:
 
.
"I'm sorry to disappoint you but Taliban still controls most of Afghanistan..."

B.S.

28% of the land the taliban have NO militarily significant presence. 72% of the land is contested.

Please understand, if you can, that we KICK THEIR AZZES when we show up. They CONTROL nothing that we choose to stand on.

Contested? Certainly, but only by our sporadic presence. Controlled? Get real.:disagree:

I agree.....you should fight until the last gringo solider is dead:rofl:.......fight until the last man like custer.
 
Last edited:
.
"Better US resolve their issues through talks with OBL."

Yup. Concur. Why don't you arrange such and accompany him?

We'll be eager to chat.:agree:



Ball is in your court , why you dont reply to his offers of talks?

Invisible channel can be used ,if there is no other option left.
 
.
Hi,

By invading afghanistan and not taking the war seriously at the time of first attack, the u s has committed millitary suicide----the american foreign policy is filled up with murderous blunders---where ever they have been, the place has been left with the dead bodies of the natives and a job that has always been left incomplete.

The shame and embarrassment of leaving from another country as a big time failure is not going to go away----this is going to be the one thousand year shameful loss that will stay in the history books forever---till eternity.

Can you imagine the level of incompetency in the american regime---they went to columbia and Killed Escobar---controlled the drug supply from columbia---oh guess what---the monster has grown up a thousand times stronger---and that also right at the border cities----on the mexican u s border---they are much more ruthless and organized than the columbians----the supply of drugs has reached new heights.

Iraq a dismal failure---have no clue which way iraq will go once the last u s troops leave---afghanistan---another shocker for the future once the u s leaves.

Religionsit are stupid---either they are from the bible belt down south or from radical fundamentalist muslims or hindus.

These wars that you see in iraq and afghanistan were manufactured in the bible belt churches of the united states---even the active u s army generals were talking about their greatness in chucrh sermons---well there is no greatness left in afghanistan or iraq.

It is about time to get out of afghanistan---let us spare some muslim lives. Taliban had neverhad any plans to attack america---they won't have them in the future. The afghans know first hand that wars are a horrible business----the only fool in this mess, the u s of a still doesnot understand the problem---afghans were never involved in 9/11 they will not be involved again----they will their victory to cherish for generations to come and the maniacs in the u s will try to findother targets to kill more people under some other misunderstanding.
 
.
the u s of a still doesnot understand the problem---afghans were never involved in 9/11 they will not be involved again----they will their victory to cherish for generations to come and the maniacs in the u s will try to findother targets to kill more people under some other misunderstanding.

Buddy, I hate to break this to you. But USofA understands all the problems there. The idea target is Iran, US couldn't get in. Iraq war, well who knows, more of a ego fighting between Bush family and Sadam Hussein, and channel tax dollars through certain tubes. Afghanistan is a compromise. Gates just said today: US won't leave. Sorry.
 
.
US says wants much better ties with Pakistan
Updated at: 0100 PST, Friday, September 04, 2009

WASHINGTON: US Chairman Joint Chief of Staff Admiral Mike Mullen has said US wants much better ties with Pakistan while US is facing difficult times in Afghanistan.

Defense Secretary Robert Gates is taking issue with any notion that the war in Afghanistan "is slipping through the administration's fingers."

Meeting with reporters at the Pentagon Thursday, Gates and Mullen both acknowledged growing impatience with the war. But he said that must be expected, given that the United States has had a presence there for eight years.

Gates said he believes "it's important for us to be able to show over the months to come" that President Barack Obama's new strategy for both Afghanistan and Pakistan is succeeding. Obama had said the goal is to defeat and dismantle the al-Qaida terrorist network and its allies.

He said any request for additional U.S. troops or funds for the war in Afghanistan would only come after officials study a new assessment of the conditions there by Gen. Stanley McChrystal.

Speaking to reporters Thursday, Gates said he doesn't believe "the war is slipping through the administration's fingers," and said that public suspicions about the mission are understandable given eight years of war.

Gates said he believes "it's important for us to be able to show over the months to come" that President Barack Obama's new strategy for both Afghanistan and Pakistan is succeeding. Obama had said the goal is to defeat and dismantle the al-Qaida terrorist network and its allies.
 
.
Hi,

The american generals said the same thing in vietnam and then later on they had to pack their bags and leave. Things are no different here in afghanistan.

There will always be the talk of big things coming and committment to the cause right to the end---and then one day you will see the last of the C 5's taking off.

Today the air strikes killed 90 people---more than half of them civilians---these people were killed at the request of the germans---when the air strike was requested, there were no civilians at that time according to the drone footage---only taliban---it took 40 minutes for the air strike to materialize---by that time the villagers had gathered around to get free gas---gas tankers stuck in mud---free flowing gas---splashing around---on the ground---clothings wet with fuel---a tragedy waiting to happen---the ultimate death trap----there was a whoooosh and a whooomp---most of them didn't even had the time to cry---because all the air would have been sucked out by the explosion----then there would clothes burning---bodies on fire and then the charred remains of the afghans.

The controller / area commander could have used brains---had the jets buzz the air a couple of times so that the civilians could scatter around and then taken out the tankers. Theye were already stuck in mud and going nowhere. But then the killing of afghans civilians comes real cheap. Doesn't leave much on the conscience of the pilots or the the commanders. If some of them feel sinful and ashamed---they can go talk to the priest in the evening or after the sortie and can be absolved of their crimes in the name of the Lord---.

We would like to know what the german papers are saying about this tragedy.
 
.
and if this was done by Pakistani Air Force Pilot they would have called it Pakistan Air Force atrocities...look how western media is mum over this.
 
.
I can't help but express my disappointment at your latest "offering". I expect more rational insight from somebody that purports to represent an august body of intellects.

"By invading afghanistan and not taking the war seriously at the time of first attack..."

How "seriously" should operational victory be? What would you have us do in late 2001 besides oust the prevailing taliban regime and scatter A.Q. to the four winds?

THAT was achieved. What followed is where the real story lies. The reconstitution of the taliban leadership on your tribal lands permitted both temporary respite and long term sanctuary from which to wage war on the fledgling Afghan gov't and it's NATO/U.N sponsors whom then possessed the clear general support of mankind as expressed through the Bonn Accord.

You may make a case that our efforts to build governance within Afghanistan between early 2002-2006 were diffuse, incoherant, and haphazardly implemented through a variety of state/NGOs. If so, fair enough but, given the taliban precedent of governance, there was every reason to believe that some modicum of stability could be initiated.

At least until all the chronic issues of Afghanistan-corruption, drugs, brigandry, warlordism, tribal/ethnic enmity, were exacerbated by an externally-directed and supplied insurgency.

That means Pakistan.

For all of Afghanistan's endemic problems there's no predicting where we might be in the absence of such. This insurgency has no traction without sanctuary within the Islamic Emirate of Waziristan.

It is what it is. Supposedly you're our ally but I can't help but wonder how this can be when a sovereign gov't surrenders vast tracts of it's (obstensibly) sacred lands to a foreign gov't to facilitate the making of war upon representatives of forty other nations much less the afghans whom they are attempting to assist to a life you could hardly promise under taliban rule.

"the american foreign policy is filled up with murderous blunders..."

Where? When? Not that we haven't committed "murderous blunders". OTOH, any nation has made a litany of regretable mistakes if sufficiently notable and bearing any length of history.

Nor is your government immune from such accusations. Of course, fully embracing murderous proxy warfare in pursuit of Pakistan's foreign policy objectives is hardly a "blunder". Endorsing and sponsoring a murderous taliban regime in Afghanistan is clear example of such. A "blunder"?

That, my deep-thinking friend, is murderous intent. I hope you note the salient difference.

"...a job that has always been left incomplete."

"Always"?:lol:

Really? M.K., I encourage you to refrain from absolutes that are this dismissive. A modest review might suggest that the Marshall Plan to re-construct post-W.W.II Europe might have been born of thinking somewhat more enlightened than offered on Sunday morning at the 1st Baptist Church of God in Lynchburg, Tennessee.

Or South Korea and Japan. Taiwan? Israel? Our hand is ALL over those countries and their notable achievements. Those, alone, topically destroy your ill-considered assertion.

No. I'm rather satisfied that you didn't give that particular outburst much forethought. Too bad.

"The shame and embarrassment of leaving from another country as a big time failure is not going to go away..."

"Shame and embarrassment" aren't elements of rational primary considerations supporting foreign policy/nat'l security decision-making. Subordinate or peripheral? Perhaps. In the end, though, foreign policy should (and usually is) be driven by the continuous, on-going calculus of nat'l interests and the associated cost/benefit analyses.

"Shame and embarrassment" is associated with prestige. In my life I've experienced the full gamit of rises and dips of American prestige from our post W.W.II neo-colonialist anti-communist defender of freedom, defeated and dismissed post-Vietnam, exalted as a hyper-power following DESERT STORM and the Soviet Union's demise to where we are today.

Who cares? Time marches along and, hang around long enough, every dog has his day but I'd assert foreign policy objectives of any responsible nation-state are generally grounded on more enduring qualities than "shame and embarassment" as a central feature.

"These wars that you see in iraq and afghanistan were manufactured in the bible belt churches of the united states"

Child-like.:)

"---even the active u s army generals were talking about their greatness in chucrh sermons..."

Care to add up all the active army generals we've got running around? My point is that you've a very modest percentage of generals and this is hardly damning. Are you here to assert that you've no Pakistani army general that hasn't espoused his faith in Allah (PBUH)?:eek: If so, what's so terribly wrong with that?

"It is about time to get out of afghanistan---let us spare some muslim lives."

Cut the sanctimonious religious B.S. The muslim taliban TARGET civilians. The taliban are responsible for the greatest percentage of Afghan civilians as attested by, separately, Human Rights Watch and the U.N. The taliban have been documented to use human shields and, certainly, you're aware of their propensity to attack little girls who'd very much like to attend school.

You should be aware of these simple and easily-obtained FACTS. Be clear, M.K. FACTS. Can you do better to remove the lame "crusader" pitch that seems to be coloring your "insights", sir?:lol:

"...the maniacs in the u s will try to findother targets to kill more people under some other misunderstanding."

And there in the U.S. you live? Have you no simple dignity or are you so crass to chase the almighty dollar and derive all it offers while casting these self-righteous barbs at the hand that FEEDS your azz?:angry:

Were you but a man of conviction rather than one who's so disingenuous to bite the hand which feeds him. I'd call you an enemy of my nation for your views and ask you to leave America just as fast as your heinous perspective might take to gather itself and GO.

I'd be dead were I to reside in Pakistan and suggest the same. You might imagine something equally deserving were Americans as easily defiled.

Thanks.:)
 
.
Well, there is no doubt in my mind and people all over the world are now realizing that Afghanistan will end up like Vietnam although the casualties are too low because Vietcong were actively funded and supported by KGB/Soviet Union/PRC while Taliban operate with outdated weapons and taken out from 30,000 feet by Jet's.You went in Vietnam to save Vietnamese from themselves and it was your DUTY in 2001 to make sure Taliban from Afghanistan don't spill into Pakistan.You knew very well the border was too big and mountainous hence unable to effectively patrol but yet your Army incompetence paid for Pakistan's destabilization..no matter how much you malign Pakistan you won't win in Afghanistan..after all you did bomb Sovereign Territory of Cambodia for supporting Vietcongs but you still had to order thousands of body bag.The bombing of Columbia did not stop US causalities and yes, you cant compare your today's Generals with your old great Generals like George S Patton.Do you honestly believe your current Generals can be compared with those Generals...?All those countries were setup decades ago.Don't give me that vs.Better examples would be Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan.....
 
Last edited:
.
The Taleban will not seek revenge just as the Afgans did not seek revenge from former Soviet forces when they moved back to the failing Soviet Union. withdrawal would mean failiure for the occupiers at the moment but success for Pakistan as it would fill the void and its influence would be restored as there are more Pakhtoons (Pathans) born in Pakistan now living in Afganistan then ever before the Soviet invasion. The withdrawal will not affect Pakistan as the occupation does at present as then Pakistan will stablise the situation as it has many active and dorment 'assets,' in Afganistan. The allies are losing the war for the simple reason that they can not hold onto territory for any lengh of time and when they leave the resistance re - occupies the land. When the with drawal happens the present political set up will not last 5 minutes and will fall to the forces fighting against the occupiers resulting in a period of relative peace and security. But before this relative peace etc., there may be a short period of civil war as some resistance from the present warlords, some of whom are in Government, before stability prevails.
 
Last edited:
.
Why would the Taleban not seek revenge. The reason being the Taleban are essentailly fight an occupier same as when the Afgans fought the Soviets. They only objective is to eject the allies from their motherland and let the Afgans decide their future for themselves. However Al Qaida (if it exists at all) wants to remove all foreign forces from all 'Islamic' states. I dont believe that Al Qaida exists in any form in Afganistan. If it does then it is an American invention via the CIA to keep the pot boiling to keep the foreign troops there. However no matter how long the Allies remain in occupation the Taleban will not give up the fight and more bodies for foreign troops will leave in caskets. The other problem for the allies public opinion is now going against the war. If the allies leave I am sure if the Taleban return to power in some form or other they will re-establish diplomatic relations will their former occupiers as there is no other way. Pakistan would insist on this course of action and advise the post occupation government to follow this path as it would be in Pakistan's interest.
 
.
There were some news a few months back that some in the USA forces were distributing Bibles amongst the Muslims in Afganistan. I believe it was reported by Al Jazeerah
 
.
Hi,

Sadiqams---you are so correct---why do they need to seek revenge----when on one wall----there is a 15 pointer trophy head with a hammer and sickle and on the other wall there will be a 50 pointer trophy head with all kinds of lines and colors---.

The generals of the 2nd WW that are being talked about were MEN ANOGST MEN---who were not scared of a sharp tongue man like Rumsfeld---they were men of action and courage and knew what it took to win the war with how many troops---these generals that we saw in the first few years of the afghan and 2nd iraq war---should have worn BANGLES AND SARIS when they talked to Rumsfeld.

Anyone remember Gen Schwarzkopf---het went into kuwait with over half a million troops----Gen Tommy Franks wanted to outdo him----wanted to show everyone that he was better the Schwarzkopf----took only a 100k to iraq---yeah, he routed the iraqi forces---but he didnot have enough for an occupation army.

And what a screw up was afghanistan---the americans left all the escape routes open for the enemy to run away---what a great planning commission they had---let the prime target escape multiple times.

It is a tragedy for a nation when they have incompetent leaders and generals---leaders like Rumsfeld---and generals like Tommy Franks, Abizaid and Sanchez. Leaders who put the fear of termination in the genarals that he is worried for his retirement entitlement and due to that becomes a kowtowing yes man---and shame on the genarals as well---who bow down to the likes of Rumsfeld---knowing very well that he is in the wrong.
 
.

Latest posts

Country Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom