It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by vor78
He's doing exactly what he said he would do during the campaign, which was to refocus our military efforts on Afghanistan and to increase the troop presence there. He's done that.
"letting the military do what it does best" actually mean?
He who wishes to fight must first count the cost. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be dampened. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue... In war, then, let your great object be victory, not lengthy campaigns. -Sun Tzu, the Art of War
Yeah. Kinda makes a person wonder just why China, a major ideological foe of the USA, would lend them so much money & thus fund the wars in Afghanistan & Iraq, eh? Oh Sh!t! You dont think they've read Sun Tzu too, do you?
Wars of "attrition" are doomed from the beginning and are more than likely traps in which the invading force has been lured by enemies who are apparently more intelligent than the fools who fall for such obvious schemes
When you're wounded and left on Afghanistan's plains, and the women come out to cut up what remains, jest roll to your rifle and blow out your brains and go to your gawd like a soldier. Rudyard Kipling