It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Afghanistan war 'cannot be won'

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 08:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by torresm1



Actually we've done incredible progress in building Afghan to standards and life style they have never seen before.


Yes Afghan living standards have definetly gone high.The drug trade has increased 500% making the afghan farmers much wealthier.




of Islamic bent it takes longer but in the end the last pages of their movement are now being written.


Here we have a British commander who says that its not possible to win this war and you are talking about their 'last few pages'?

Yes i would agree with your point if the US and coalition also attack Pakistan and Russia because they are supporting them with intelligence and weapons but until than its a BIG MESS.



our SF and Air-power and satellites we hunted them down from mountain to mountain.


Yes we have seen how relibale and accurate the air power and satellites are because the civillians casualties seem to double than the insurgents killed.




posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 08:33 AM
link   
reply to post by jerico65
 


You do remember that the US already knew that Afghanistan is not an occupiable region?

[edit on 6-10-2008 by Sublime620]



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 10:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmlima
You do know that outside main cities there's still no semblance of law and order in the country?


Outside the main cities, it's like flying over the dark side of the moon. There isn't anything there.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65

Originally posted by jmlima
You do know that outside main cities there's still no semblance of law and order in the country?


Outside the main cities, it's like flying over the dark side of the moon. There isn't anything there.


Sorry, I forgot... they all travel and move by airplane in there... my mistake.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:09 AM
link   
This admission is damning - it is a complete admission of failure - what was their intention in the first place ? To simply engage in a protracted battle costing thousands of lives which generated great hatred amongst the Islamic world and served as a basis for military training for these Islamic extremists to simply then hand it back to an unstable Afghan government which will be quickly overrun by local war lords ?

If that is the mission then America needs to be taken out the back of the shed and shot. Disgraceful.

Here is the REALITY - the northern areas of Pakistan are known as the bad lands (not so much Afghanistan - which is still bad). These areas have long been considered ungovernable - this has been the case for many decades.

These areas are semi-autonomous - however are still part of Pakistan. The new President of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan - Asif Ali Zardari - has made it absolutely abundantly clear that any unilateral strikes INSIDE Pakistan WILL NOT BE TOLERATED.

Bush ordered strikes inside the area as it was not being policed (was not being policed as although America had supplied Billions to Pakistan for this purpose it is almost impossible - some 100,000 Pakistan army are there however local tribal customs tend to over ride the issues) - there had been several retaliatory attacks by the US prior to this using UAV's - however this order signalled a clear new mandate for the military.

It was considered an act of war by Pakistan who replied that they would return fire if fired upon.

THIS is the reality of the situtaion.

Hence, there is no way the alliance can EVER win as there is a never ending stream of replacements coming from inside Pakistan to defend Afghanistan from the "Infidels". It is therefore and unmitigated admission of failure.

Iraq, Iran, Georgia, Afghanistan - the west has been completely reamed four times in a row. Iraq is now a fully fledged surrogate state of Shiite Iran - there will be NO CONTRACTS to America and the only thing which has been agreed upon is that the insurgency will stop to allow the US to pull out without loosing any more face.

The major contracts have already been awarded to China.
Georgia has had the US/Israeli hardware obliterated, its standing in Nato wiped clean of the map, its president the laughing stock of the Caucasus, and empowered the bear to reclaim through political machinations the Ukraine.

Meanwhile - Iran has completely out manoeuvred the US - utterly. Leaving it free from any action militarily - rather, strengthened with its tacit acquisition of Iraq (two years it will declare a Shiite super state of Mesopotamia ), Russia has completely sided with China whom have both thrown their weight unequivocally behind Iran.

Further all three nations have massively strengthened ties with both Cuba and Venezuela - creating a geo-strategic nightmare for the domestic situation.

China has claimed Africa as its own with numerous treaties being revisited pushing Shell and Exxon out of lucrative deals.

In the meantime the US financial sector is almost totally ruined -

Yep - the Afghan situation is tied to everything - it is one of THE MOST important parts of the world geo -politically / -strategically.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by audas
 



there will be NO CONTRACTS to America


Guess this shows the war in Iraq wasn't about oil after all.

Iran- outmaneuvered who? They pose more of a threat to Europe than the US. What US needs to do is let Iran know that we will defend Israel, not to threaten us, and tell the Europeans that the ball is in their court. It will be up to them how strong Iran gets.

Afghanistan- stabilize the government and head to the exit. Once Obama or McCain start sending more troops they will start to see us as an occupation force. Violence against troops will increase.Time to go back to the co-op days to get the terrorist.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:30 AM
link   
reply to post by audas
 


Nicely Summed up mate!


The Northern regions of Pakistan have very close ties with Pakistani intelligence (ISI) and both have a very deadly combination as we have seen the effects on Soviets during 1980s.Now to win a war in Afghanistan you gota cut the supply of fresh young recruits with plenty of Aks and RPGs from Pakistan?Russia.IF the coalition can't even control Helmand province than how can one expect Pakistan to get rid off these extremists by sending troops in the those regions with more than 50% of them not wanting to fight 'fellow muslim brothers'.We shouldn't forget that the Soviets got defeated because the CIA and ISI used these same northern regions to train,supply and regrouped the insurgents to go back and deal with the Russians.The Russians were getting banged from every direction and it came to a point where russian soldiers shot themselves in transport helicopters before they touched foot on Afghan soil.

The West is expecting too much from Pakistan and supplying them with billions $$$$ of aid is not gona help them in anyway as it all goes in the pockets of corrupt politicians who are more bothered about their mansions,guards and imported bullet proof mercs.But you can't really wage a war with Pakistan because it has over a 100 ready-to-fire nukes which could also end up in wrong hands and China is also not gona sit there with its best mate being bombed to stones ages.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:37 AM
link   
Interesting related news that doesn't necessarily contradict the OP, but may indicate the Taliban is sick of fighting....


LONDON, England (CNN) -- Taliban leaders are holding Saudi-brokered talks with the Afghan government to end the country's bloody conflict -- and are severing their ties with al Qaeda, sources close to the historic discussions have told CNN.
www.cnn.com...


Looks like the Taliban and al Qaeda broke up...



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmlima
Sorry, I forgot... they all travel and move by airplane in there... my mistake.


My friends were moving my vehicle. I was in an aircraft. Doesn't matter, it's still a big empty outside of the cities.

AQ is a nebulous organization, without an identifiable hub, or center of gravity. This could be classed as one of it's strengths. From what I've read, the Taliban and AQ, while co-operating to some degree, were uneasy bedfellows, with some ideological differences.

I can't think of any COIN campaign in recent history that has been a 'military victory'. Even the Malayan Emergency, which is seen by some historians as 'the way' to conduct COIN, was ended through the political process.

By attriting the Taliban and AQ in Afghanistan, the military is shaping the environment for the politicians. A Taliban that is militarily weak can be politically coerced and manipulated better than one that retains the capability to maintain a significant level of insurgency.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by 27jd
 


They can brake up all they want but if they are allowed to form a government again than they will basically screw the world up in the long run.

They are not gona suddenly let their women start wearing mini-skirts and start fornicating.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 11:48 AM
link   
the war over there is turning into a modern day Veitnam.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 12:12 PM
link   
reply to post by spuddyboy
 


not yet, not yet by a mile. What makes you think that? Now if we start seeing more US troops going over there and NATO troops withdrawing I could see it leading to a Vietnam type war. But as of now I don't see Vietnam.



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 12:57 PM
link   
reply to post by azureskys
[more

"An appeaser is the one who feeds the crocodile, hoping it will eat him last." Winston Churchill

"My good friends, for the second time in our history, a British Prime Minsiter has returned from Germany bringing peace and honor. I believe it is "peace in our time." Go home and get a nice quiet sleep." Neville Chamberlain, 27 September, 1938

"How horrible, fantastic, incredible it is that we should be digging trenches and trying on gas masks because of a quarrel in a far-away country between people of whom we know nothing." Neville Chamberlain

"We should seek by all means in our power to avoid war, by analyzing possible causes, by trying to remove them, by discussion in a spirit of collaboration and good will. I cannot believe that such a program would be rejected by the people of this country, even if it does mean the establishment of personal contact with the dictators." Neville Chamberlain

"I believe it is peace for our time . . . peace with honor." Neville Chamberlain

Some peace. Some honor. 52,000,000 died from his inability to tackle the problem head on in 1938-39 while it was still manageable.


"One ought never turn one's back on a threatened danger and try to run away from it. If you do that, you will double the danger. But if you meet it promptly and without flinching, you'll reduce the danger by half." Winston Churchill

"The God of War hates those who hesitate." Euripides

"Always attack. Even in defense, attack. The attacking arm possesses the initiative and thus commands the action. To attack makes men brave; to defend makes them timorous. If I learn that an officer of mine has assumed a defensive posture in the field, that officer will never hold a command under me again." Alexander

"So the important thing in a military operation is victory, not persistence." Sun Tzu

"Those on the defensive are so because they do not have enough to win; those on the offense are so because they have more than enough to win." Wan Xi

"The best form of defense is attack." Karl von Clausewitz

"Remember that victory depends on the legs. The hands are only the instruments of victory." Suvarov

Once you engage in battle, it is inexcusable to display any sloth or hesitation; you must breakfast on your enemy before he dines on you." Kai Ka'us ibn Iskander

"Even if opponents are numerous, they can be made not to fight." Sun Tzu

"That which you fear is truly undefeatable. Not by its nature or overwhelming power, but by your own choosing. What you believe impossible or unbeatable, so it is." Michael Riggs

"Courage is the greatest of all virtues. Because if you haven't any courage, you may not have the opportunity to use any of the others." Samuel Johnson



posted on Oct, 6 2008 @ 01:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by jerico65
...

I can't think of any COIN campaign in recent history that has been a 'military victory'. Even the Malayan Emergency, which is seen by some historians as 'the way' to conduct COIN, was ended through the political process.
...


Actually I could point (and you also could I believe) several that were military successes but ended in defeat due to the political situation they originated. The problem is not only the military side, but mostly the political situation you need to create to win. In Afghanistan , the US alone could win the war, but how would they explain that the country was a complete desert after it? I think what the Brit general is saying is that , given the present situation, including the virtual bankruptcy of most countries, and the political unwillingness to sustain collateral casualties, or even doing a serious cross border operation in Pakistan (a la Turkey in Iraq) , the war is impossible to win. And he is quite right.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by jmlima

Originally posted by jerico65
...

I can't think of any COIN campaign in recent history that has been a 'military victory'. Even the Malayan Emergency, which is seen by some historians as 'the way' to conduct COIN, was ended through the political process.
...


Actually I could point (and you also could I believe) several that were military successes but ended in defeat due to the political situation they originated. The problem is not only the military side, but mostly the political situation you need to create to win. In Afghanistan , the US alone could win the war, but how would they explain that the country was a complete desert after it? I think what the Brit general is saying is that , given the present situation, including the virtual bankruptcy of most countries, and the political unwillingness to sustain collateral casualties, or even doing a serious cross border operation in Pakistan (a la Turkey in Iraq) , the war is impossible to win. And he is quite right.


INteresting - consider wars that have been fought for genuine humanitarian reasons (Iraq / afghanastan clearly are not in this category) -
Sierra Leone was turned around within weeks after 23 years of blood letting.
Serbia was driven from Croatia / Bosnia after 4 years.
Serbia again from Kosovo.

All three were seen as clear and imminenet needs to help - with little external gain (although diamonds in sierra).

All three were acheived by PMC's.

cheers.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 05:51 AM
link   
The problem with Afghanistan is that it cant function as a democracy ... the only time Afghanistan was ever even remotely near stable was when it was an absolute monarchy prior to 1973 and even then their were lawless areas.

Nations like Iraq, Afghanistan, and much as Africa and the Middle East need STRONG POWERFUL central governments such as absolute monarchs or dictators in order to be governed without anarchy.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by tezzajw
Seriously, what does it take to end this friggin useless war, especially when you have top people in the US and UK forces stating that it can't be won?


But another top US commander, Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman Mike Mullen, said in September that he was not convinced the United States was winning in Afghanistan.

The United States plans to add 8000 troops to the 33,000 troops in Afghanistan by early next year.



First off, useless war ?? What kind of mind altering medication makes people say that ? Especially when this is about Afghanistan ? The CBGB of the Taliban- the very people who gave aid, support and training to some of the most hideous forms of human cowardice in human history - Islamists ? These are the same people who killed 3000 Americans and others. Who sponsored and trained people to blow up buses and subways in Britain and commit acts of terrorism in Bali etc.

Where does this BS about Afghanistan being a "useless war" even begin for any sane person ? Its ridiculous.

As for the fate of the war in Afghanistan, NO American general would EVER say that we have no paths to victory. One because it is not true and two, because its not in American to think of how to give up on a battle. Afghanistan can easily be won if Europe showed a bit more courage and determination. The NATO contingent in Afghanistan is pitiful. Its absurd than more than30 countries cant muster up even 250,000 troops to secure their own best interests! However, America will have to bear this cross again too.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:31 AM
link   
Those who really think, war in Afganistan can be won, can try to relate to a statement made by an Afgani local, who said:

"Afganistan is where empires come to die."

And you really have to look at the history of invasion to this place and try to get into the mind of a local tribesmen, who father and grandfather great grandfather and great great grandfather and great great great grandfather have all been fighting some form of military force in the history. And do you think they really care under what kind of banner they are marching? These people have in their blood to fight and to resist. And that is what they know how to do very well.

So how do you win a war in Afganistan?

Get out as soon as possible!



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Those who believe in folk lore and bet against America have always lost.

Just like those in Japan who believed their folk wisdom that they were invincible and their Emperor was God, a few good men and two nukes left their folksy wisdom irradiated and smoldering.

Afghanistan tribals may be used to hiding in caves and shooting from between the rocks but when faced against a united will of an international coalition and a responsive central government, good things do happen.

The same songs of defeatr were sung about IRaq about how it was impossible to bring peace there. But some semblance of peace has reached there as well. And Iraq was worse than Afghanistan is today.



posted on Oct, 7 2008 @ 12:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Souljah
 


You ask how to win a war in Afghanistan? Actually, it isn't that difficult if you can get past some arbitrary sensitivities.

Just like Alexander did. His army was the fastest army of his day. He was notorious for showing up days before expected. But in the Afghani areas he reconfigured his military to meet the need in Afghanistan. He continued to lighten his army and got faster and faster. And once he became blindingly fast?

He depopulated vast regions of the area. He pursued hardest in the winter when mobility was limited. This was a continuation of his previous offers to anyone he came against. He politely offered that they surrender to his rule, as friends to benefit from his vast empire, or they would be exterminated. Most understood the option and gave in.

Afghanistan was a bit different, as it was more tribal than city oriented. Thus, if you want to control Afghanistan, you give them the choice to fall in, or die. After a while, two things happen. The word gets out. Some will flee, some will die, and many will agree. And you keep their feet to the fire.

These backward-assed tribal warriors understand one thing. Force.

It isn't pretty, but that's how it's done. Biblically.



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join