replies also inline :) On 12/15/05, Tim Heald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Replies inline. > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Tony [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > is there a right answer? > > im not sure there is. > > At least you sound reasonable.
yes, i try to be. im a buddhist by nature, and catholic by birth > > > seems to have more facets than a finely cut diamond. > > is bush all to blame for what is going on now... not really, > > but as the president he chose to wear that hat. > > I don't see how Bush can be given any blame for either 911 or Afghanistan, > hell I don't think it can be laid at Clinton's feet, I think we need to go > back to Carter and Regan, and see what they did. See what their options > were at the time, and see what we could have done differently. > Realistically there were bigger things than Afghanistan being fought over in > that country. It was the cold war made small. We did what we could, > without provoking a nuclear respones. i do not blame him for either of the first two. and yes i agree. > > > i would never choose to wear that hat, too much responsibilty > > and chance for job failure. as we are watching now. > > I hear that. > > > so, im not sure there is a right answer tim. im just not. > > we were really put in a tough situation. fight a war against > > an army with no nation. fight a war against a people who > > know sense of reality. fight a war against people who are > > not only driven by differences of opinion, but differences in > > culture, and religion-- big divide there. > > Sit back and take it? Allow them to turn out more anti-american warriors? fuck no. but figure out a plan, in a reasonable amount of time and go with a better plan. > > > but im sure you like most of us, can agree that we probably > > could have taken a small step back, REALLY evaluate the > > situation with GOOD rock solid intelligence, make quick > > precise strikes and move on. but i think we stumbled into > > the party like a big buffoon with no control of his arms or > > legs, drunk like a sailor. > > cavalier in style and seemingly wanton in course of action. i > > just think we could have maybe had a bit more tact. i dont know. > > You don't think we knew what was going on there? Shit we took that country > with less than 100 men. The problem we made in Afghanistan wasn't tactical, > it was strategic. We took control of American forces in that theater away > from Special Forces and gave it to the convential army. When we did that > the Provincial Reconstruction Teams became less important, winning hearts > and minds became less important, and bodies became more important, because > that's what the conventional army knows. why was that decision made? and by whom? > > > tw > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Purchase RoboHelp from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=59 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:188455 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=11502.10531.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
