Afghanistan war un-winnable?

Oleg Bach · March 6, 2009

Ask the russians.

A hundered thousand Russian mothers go to sleep at night and pray a curse on the powers that be - that took and destroyed their sons. They will never forgive the state for this great injustice. More bull crap and phoney feelings of relevence today as they parade the human sacrafice down that HIGHWAY OF HEROS - Such a stupified population that actually think that being road killed like a racoon by some road side bomb is heroic - It is not heroic to be executed without a fight. Who ever is getting their jollies out of sending off young men in the flower of their youth to be slaughtered like sheep on the alter is a socio-path. YOU know and I know that once this is all over it will all be for not! YET the powerful and wicked men in our high places continue to lick up the blood of youth like dogs that they kill indirectly - It is much like Iraqi the lie - or the man standing in the dark of night in a rain storm and tells the passing traveler - "The bridge is NOT washed out, it is safe to cross" - Killing the poor traveler who tumbles into the dark swirling waters never to witness against the liar...Lies kill....and we stand by and approve.

M.Dancer · March 6, 2009

Ask the russians.

..and they will tell you they were stymied by american arms.

eyeball · March 7, 2009

..and they will tell you they were stymied by american arms.

I wonder what the stymied Americans will tell us? Doh....it was them libruls and socialusts.

M.Dancer · March 7, 2009

I wonder what the stymied Americans will tell us? Doh....it was them libruls and socialusts.

You will have to wait till they are stymied.

Feel free to hold your breath..

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

What I find very irritating is the notion of importance that death has for the folks that stand on top of bridges over the 401 - dressed in corny uniforms and suffering from Legion hangovers...holding a high salute as if they were the bothers in arms - yet the old dweebs were reservists at Moss Park and never say battle - except now at the legion hall. World war 2 was a real war - we did not take every last dead soldier and fly them home one by one and limo them to the autospy room in down town Toronto - Because I had parents who witnessed the real deal - these ceremonies are absurd and childish. So what happens when a death occurs - does the Toronto corner after notification send a message "Don't you dare cut the corpse - keep it chilled and let me have the first curious stab at the mutilated young boy" It's stupid and shows how spoiled we are in our comfort - not to mention, How these parades down hero's lane are pure and shameless propoganda to stir up the emotions of the common idiots - in order to gain public support form the unthinking public - what a sham and shame.

tango · March 7, 2009

OTTAWA — As he warned the West against giving up on his country "halfway," Afghanistan's envoy to Canada said Friday he disagreed with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's suggestion the Taliban insurgency cannot be defeated.

http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/firmly+b...2230/story.html

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

OTTAWA — As he warned the West against giving up on his country "halfway," Afghanistan's envoy to Canada said Friday he disagreed with Prime Minister Stephen Harper's suggestion the Taliban insurgency cannot be defeated.
http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/firmly+b...2230/story.html

This is much like the things that took place in Iraq - an artifically installed government and law makers who are helpless unless they have enforcers (american troops) to make the laws real and their government fuctional and real. Same affair in Afghanistan. Indiginous people put into postions of power that they would never in a million years achieved with out - out side forces such as America and Canada in tow, as enforcers. Let to natural and tribal law, the Afghani envoy are but paper tigers...and eventually this weakling fledgling government will collapse - but as long as we and others are there we can control their domestic situation via force - we will never win the hearts and minds of the average Afghani - they are a seperate culture - you would have to stay there for 3 generations till the culture dies out - are we going to do that?

AND it's not an "insurgency" - all of these cluster of nations are one loosely knit tribe - whether they be from with or out side the Afghani geographical boarders .. Do you think that someone coming in to Afghanistan to fight against what they percieve as occupiers imagine themselves as "insurgents" or "terrorists" - To them it is one large house and all they are doing is moving form the living room to the kitchen to protect their house - so you would have to destroy the whole middle east to gain control over Afghanstan and nuking is not an option - se we are fools. Fools who can not grasp the reality that we have stepped not into that rocky mound called Afghanistan but have declared war on most of the middle east - what the heck were we thinking? What do we do wait till our body bag count is up to fifty thousand? Inlisting in the miliary is not a popular thing in Canada.

Once we have run out of the rural Ontario and prarie white Christian boys - it will be over - no Canadian Muslim is going to enlist - nor an immigrant for China - nor will a Jew - nor will a black - this is a white mans war.

bush_cheney2004 · March 7, 2009

....Once we have run out of the rural Ontario and prarie white Christian boys - it will be over - no Canadian Muslim is going to enlist - nor an immigrant for China - nor will a Jew - nor will a black - this is a white mans war.

Cute....but let the record show that one of the first KIA's in Iraq was a "black"....Marine Cpl. Bernard G. Gooden, who went to school in Toronto.

.

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

Cute....but let the record show that one of the first KIA's in Iraq was a "black"....Marine Cpl. Bernard G. Gooden, who went to school in Toronto.
.

I don't read the materials - I just look at the pictures and our papers were flooded with tributes to foolish and adventurous human sacrafice - and 99.9 are all of the old Canadian white Christian tribe - and YOU as usual look of that 1%ter. The point I have always made is that the Canadain military is tiny and white - and they can not breed another batch quick enough to sustain a prolonged war...or war in general. They are going to run out of bodies and I really don't see the more educated anglos enlisting - and our immigrants - that flood the street - they did NOT come here to leave and die else where - so that's a non-starter - phyically we are doomed.

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

I don't read the materials - I just look at the pictures and our papers were flooded with tributes to foolish and adventurous human sacrafice - and 99.9 are all of the old Canadian white Christian tribe - and YOU as usual look of that 1%ter. The point I have always made is that the Canadain military is tiny and white - and they can not breed another batch quick enough to sustain a prolonged war...or war in general. They are going to run out of bodies and I really don't see the more educated anglos enlisting - and our immigrants - that flood the street - they did NOT come here to leave and die else where - so that's a non-starter - phyically we are doomed.

YAH great - the first to die in Viet Nam were blacks that they pushed forward like cannon fodder - as with Canadians during the two great wars - if under British command they sent the "colonists" first to melt down the barrels of machine guns - after all they are not important - and Obama will have no quams about sending poor blacks to their death once they convince them that enlistment enhances the chance of getting an "education" and seeing the world...who think stinks - Rubes and ruby red blood - killing the naive is against my personal mode of operation - it's like convincing a toddler that he can fly and lead him to a cliff.

bush_cheney2004 · March 7, 2009

YAH great - the first to die in Viet Nam were blacks that they pushed forward like cannon fodder -

Not even close to being true for the early 'Nam years. You know better than that.

Besides, Canada is "black" challenged.

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

Not even close to being true for the early 'Nam years. You know better than that.
Besides, Canada is "black" challenged.

Are you saying that there are and never were racist commander - or it was never quietly spoken about disposing of what is considered humanly disposable? I have a darker and more cynical mind than you --- when I heard a man who I know appoints Canadian judges say of the gun problems in Toronto..."You know it's the BLACKS...who are responsible" - just the tone of the way he said blacks was racist - and he also refered to Muslim "militants" as "toxic waste" - this is what I gathered about our elite who have influence - they are old school and they do not thing of others out side their Scottish clan as valuable -----as for human sacrafice - I believe that this dark elite - like to sacrafice what they consider sacred - white people - young ones. Frankly there is an occulishness about men of great power --- they really don't want black meat on their alters. Am I being to dark? Sorry B C >>>>> This is what I see.

bush_cheney2004 · March 7, 2009

.... I believe that this dark elite - like to sacrafice what they consider sacred - white people - young ones. Frankly there is an occulishness about men of great power --- they really don't want black meat on their alters. Am I being to dark? Sorry B C >>>>> This is what I see.

Ha! I already told you 'Bro, Canada is great for Africans, not uppity "Blacks". That's why I refuse to buy a pack of Kools in Quebec City! :lol:

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

Ha! I already told you 'Bro, Canada is great for Africans, not uppity "Blacks". That's why I refuse to buy a pack of Kools in Quebec City!

There was one kid who is the nephew of a person that ran for the prime ministership of Jamaica - I hung out with this very smart young man - he was down and out and we sat together in this boardroom taking some "course" - He wanted a real education and wanted to go back to university...the supervisors dispised the fact that this radical - wanted to educate himself (his dream was to go home and lead the nation) - yes he was uppity - as was I - but - he was thwarted and they did not want him to climb the ladder - they wanted him to take a meanial job and get lost and die. The "Africans" are a different lot - one guy I knew that ran an small add company was form the Congo - and a woman I adored and worked with for a few years was a very hot model from Zaier (spell) - she was from a family that were diamond dogs - and she held the guy form the Congo in contempt that he was less - and was she superiour - that french accent and those long legs sure made it so in my mind. :lol:

Sir Bandelot · March 7, 2009

So you think leaving the Taleban in control and by extension, leaving Afghanistan as the base of al qaeda operations was an option?

Your quote about what YOU call "winning" does not even include the removal of the Taliban, and I doubt thats the way it will go down. Well, it appears now that the Taliban are going to have some say in the way the country will be run. Thats what Mr. Karzai has been talking about for months, and now we are hearing similar noises coming from western leaders. So for all intents and purposes that will not be a necessary outcome.

In terms of reducing terrorism the strategy was grossly ineffective, perhaps even producing the opposite result as thousands of disenchanted muslim youth now have a focal point for their hatred, someone to blame, and a cause to rally around.

So I say, these bare minimum outcomes could have been accomplished by other less costly means. To me that says, they were never really the objectives, just lip service for the bobble headed public. Now that the war is dragging on, and the economy tanking our leaders don't see the war as so attractive anymore. Their short attention span diverts them elsewhere. To the country we attacked, we appear to be either as cowards or fools since we didn't achieve what we set out to do. This only makes us look stupid and weak, to people such as these.

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

Do you think that leaving the governing body in China in control is an option? I am sure that China causes more harm directly to it's own citizens and to us indirectly though their gangsterish Draconian polices..we should invade China and set them straight - lets go - I'll lead the charge.. :lol: If the west was not so cut throat and abusive to the east over the last few centuries there would be no "terrorist" - Funny you kick a guy when he is down - rip him off for his natural resourses - now you are telling him how he should treat his wife and raise his children -- you bomb the hell out of their meger infrastructure - and he gets pissed off - then suddenly ---he is a terrorist - maybe we should have been nicer to the poor. :lol:

Sir Bandelot · March 7, 2009

In terms of reducing terrorism the strategy was grossly ineffective, perhaps even producing the opposite result as thousands of disenchanted muslim youth now have a focal point for their hatred, someone to blame, and a cause to rally around.

As is now evidenced by the re-introduction of sharia law in parts of Pakistan. We have not done well in spreading good will and democracy by the use of force, so lets get off that one.

scorpio · March 7, 2009

..and they will tell you they were stymied by american arms.

And American arms can't take out the taliban/al queda because.....?

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

And American arms can't take out the taliban/al queda because.....?

Fists can not win the mind or heart - by the time you go around banging every las al queda member and taliban on the head with a fist or a rock or American arms...your arm would wear out and fall off. Put it this way if it were the other way around -do you think that every last Canadian would sucumb to the use of coersive force if invaded? We would resist to the last man and woman and child....and all the weapons in the world would not be enough to quell our thirst for freedom. Arm chair critics love talk about weapons - and our superiour toys of technological warfare..You can not kill a mentality by force no more that get rid of an idea - the only way Canada will have victory - is to kill every last Afghani male over the age of 12..and that is not going to happen - so we all agree that we are there to make sure "we fight the terrorists on their terf so we don't have to fight them on ours" Because Afghanistan was an base for terrorist training a decade ago..

Saudi Arabia and Pakistan and others financed the terrorist camps and with out these interlopers there would be not al queda or taliban ---- but us delluded cowards dare not reprimand the Saudis - because they have oil....awwwwwwwwh I seee....money.....we would not want to part with that - best to divert and kill the henchman while the evil prince is allowed to continue to undermine us though violence and economic manipulation of energy...we are chickens and we are dellusional.

Moonlight Graham · March 7, 2009

Stephen Harper has admitted what anyone with any understanding of the history of Afghanistan should know: Defeating the Afghan insurgency militarily is not possible.

Afghanistan is known as "the place where foreign armies go to die". It has been invaded numerous times since Alexander the Great and virtually all invaders have had their butts handed to them. If the might of the Soviet military couldn't defeat the Afghans in the 1980's, even while having the massive advantage of sharing a border with Afghanistan, what makes anyone think the U.S. and NATO can do much better?

NATO & the West has under-estimated the resiliency of the Afghan fighters, despite a few thousand years of precident. I’m thankful Canada’s military mission ends in 2010, though frankly it should end immediately. Negotiating with the Taliban & helping to provide aid to the country while keeping out of their countries' internal affairs as much as possible is the only way the many problems in Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world, can hope to be solved.

Oleg Bach · March 7, 2009

Stephen Harper has admitted what anyone with any understanding of the history of Afghanistan should know: Defeating the Afghan insurgency militarily is not possible.
Afghanistan is known as "the place where foreign armies go to die". It has been invaded numerous times since Alexander the Great and virtually all invaders have had their butts handed to them. If the might of the Soviet military couldn't defeat the Afghans in the 1980's, even while having the massive advantage of sharing a border with Afghanistan, what makes anyone think the U.S. and NATO can do much better?

NATO & the West has under-estimated the resiliency of the Afghan fighters, despite a few thousand years of precident. I’m thankful Canada’s military mission ends in 2010, though frankly it should end immediately. Negotiating with the Taliban & helping to provide aid to the country while keeping out of their countries' internal affairs as much as possible is the only way the many problems in Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world, can hope to be solved.

So if they are one of the poorest countries in the world - how could they be a threat. Yes there were some "terrorist" training camps...but being so poor someone had to send the money in to make things happen...I doubt very much that these camps exist and doubt anymore that anyone still is stupid enough to send in millions to faclitiate more of the same - so...what the heck is going on? Did it turn from stamping out some out post financed to terrorize by neighbours we dare not approach?

Did our mission change from an agressive one to one of benevolent re-building of a nation that was never built to begin with? And - if we cared so much about these people why were we not there 50 years ago helping out - something is amiss and off kilter in our logic - Does anyone really know why we are really there other than to continue using up military equipent - that has to be replaced constantly...at great cost that someone else profits by - I don't understand - do you?

eyeball · March 7, 2009

Stephen Harper has admitted what anyone with any understanding of the history of Afghanistan should know: Defeating the Afghan insurgency militarily is not possible.

I said the very same thing the day it was announced Canada was going.

Afghanistan is known as "the place where foreign armies go to die". It has been invaded numerous times since Alexander the Great and virtually all invaders have had their butts handed to them. If the might of the Soviet military couldn't defeat the Afghans in the 1980's, even while having the massive advantage of sharing a border with Afghanistan, what makes anyone think the U.S. and NATO can do much better?

Ditto this too, almost word for word...its almost like it was 2001 again.

NATO & the West has under-estimated the resiliency of the Afghan fighters, despite a few thousand years of precident. I’m thankful Canada’s military mission ends in 2010, though frankly it should end immediately. Negotiating with the Taliban & helping to provide aid to the country while keeping out of their countries' internal affairs as much as possible is the only way the many problems in Afghanistan, one of the poorest countries in the world, can hope to be solved.

Maybe, I think Afghanistan is hooped no matter what anyone does but that said not interfering is the only hope it has.

scorpio · March 7, 2009

Perhaps these two quotes sum up Harpers confusion on Afghanistan:

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper reaffirmed his government's commitment to Canadian troops serving in Afghanistan on Monday, telling hundreds of soldiers there that Canada won't "cut and run" as long as he's in charge" March 13, 2006

"We can't defeat the Taliban" March 1, 2009

Canadian Blue · March 7, 2009

Actually it's always been policy that the Canadian Forces will stay in Afghanistan until the ANA and Police are ready to deal with the Taliban themselves. We've been helping with training since 2005.

Theirs a difference between leaving Afghanistan immediately like the NDP wanted to do without a single concern to the consequences and recognizing the reality on the ground.

eyeball · March 7, 2009

Actually it's always been policy that the Canadian Forces will stay in Afghanistan until the ANA and Police are ready to deal with the Taliban themselves. We've been helping with training since 2005.
Theirs a difference between leaving Afghanistan immediately like the NDP wanted to do without a single concern to the consequences and recognizing the reality on the ground.

There was a difference between going and not going too. The reasons for not going have remained the same but the reasons for going and staying look more like a bag of old disposable diapers than anything.

By the way, where's Bin Waldo? Is "who cares" still the stock answer or has that changed again too?

Edited March 7, 2009 by eyeball