Posted on 05/22/2016 8:53:51 PM PDT by thoughtomator
The Pentagon thinks it’s killed a Taliban official (Akhtar Mansour) by drone. But what difference does it make to us to kill this man (meaning a positive difference, a gain, a benefit)? Whether or not some outfit in Pakistan applauds this or hates it, what difference does it make to Americans? Why is the U.S. still trying to kill off Taliban or stop them? Why is the U.S. still in Afghanistan 15 years after it went there to get bin Laden? Why did the U.S. start a war with the Taliban anyway? The humongous cost of this killing is already $700 billion. When other costs are factored in, the cost will be 2 or 3 times that, or about $2 trillion. For what? What did we get out of it? What are we supposed to be getting out of this?
Hillary Clinton strongly supported the U.S. going more deeply into Afghanistan. Obama approved the surge she supported. He’s had 7 years to end the war and he didn’t.
Hillary Clinton is an idiot. An official like her who bases decisions on anecdotes, emotions, images, and biases is an idiot and dangerous to boot. This is Hillary:
“It’s clear that if I had been president, we would have never diverted our attention from Afghanistan. When I went to Afghanistan the first time and was met by a young soldier from New York, in the 10th Mountain Division who told me that I was welcomed to the forgotten front lines in the war against terror, that just struck me so forcefully.” For God’s sake, is this how she’ll make decisions if elected? If she had sound instincts in foreign affairs, this kind of emotional basis for forming policy might be negated, but there is no evidence at all that she does.
(Excerpt) Read more at davidstockmanscontracorner.com ...
For the Opium trade.
Drugs make the corruptocrats rich.
It was stupid to ever invade Afghanistan. It’s impossible to successfully invade that country. From Alexander the Great, to the British Empire, to the Soviet Union, it;s never going to work.
at one point, Iran was surrounded.
It WAS a great strategy, but inefficient once the muslomarxist nObama got in the operators seat.
A General Travel Ban.
Its the easiest, most cost-effective “anti-terror” solution there is.
Simply do not allow any regular travel from the Mid-East, North Africa or South Asia into the USA. Exceptions of course can be granted, but only after serious scrutiny and investigation.
Then we don’t have to pretend to control uncontrollable events in places like Af-Pak.
We had enough time to put a bullet between the ears of every male over the age of 12 in afghanistan.....
But we thought we could civilize a bunch of people who already rejected civilisation instead....
In reality we should have decapitated the government that was funding wahabbist philosophy for the last 50 years instead. That would have meant actually dealing with those responsible for terrorism....
But we apparenty love the inbred retards in Riyadh to much to hold them accountable...
Yes it is a ridiculously simple, cost-effective, and straightforward solution, and it would work.
But the War on Terror has never been about stopping terrorism, the most obvious tell being the obstinate refusal to take the most basic of security measures with respect to our southern border. The WoT is about expanding the power of the rogue national security establishment AKA Deep State in furtherance of the New World Order.
You can blame the traitorous democratic party for extending politics beyond the water’s edge and ruining the geographic advantage we had. Our Iran problem would have been gone by 2008 if they had not hated GWB so much that they’d give aid and comfort to the islamonazis in order to beat him electorally!
It’s a good point I never have considered. Why is it the left feels Obama is a peacenik? He never even tried to get us out of there.
Target practice.
They don’t seem to complain about depleted uranium or lead poisoning...
It’s Obama’s plan see? Pull all the troops out of the pacified country so Iran and Isis can pick it apart for the Trillions in oil, and keep throwing money and lives at the pacified country that is only known to produce opium and men who stare at goats and very limited strategic value.
Perfect for weakening our military and saddling us with debt.
We were in WWII for 44 months. We are on 175 months in Afghanistan. 4 times longer in a few weeks. And no end in sight.
Even worse, the moment we leave, the puppet government we built and support with obscene amounts of money will collapse within days.
This tells me there is no intent to leave.....ever.
lol...u must be a * history major....
what would it take to turn it into glass???
Problem- only one side had rules of engagement
We went to war against the Taliban because they sheltered the men who planned the 911 attack and refused to cooperate in surrendering them for trial and Justice - among other things
Remember “ you’re either for us, or against us”?
Remember Bush standing in the smoking rubble of the WRC and vowing to take the war to the men who launched if?
One thing about both Bush 41 and Bush 43 - when they drew a line in the sand, they followed through unlike the inept obama and his ridiculous “ redline” in Syria that drew a false flag attack and a loss of credibility
How many decades have we had bases in Japan and Germany?
The Saudis want us there...to protect them against revolution and the Russians. Let the Saudis eat caca.
As far as I known we still have troops in Germany and in Japan. Not as many as we had for 40 years after the war but we still have troops there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.