Agreed, ISFOR/NATO should have been out of there by 2003 or 2004. On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 1:20 PM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> wrote: > > What I mean by win is that we punished those responsible for 9/11, and made > it possible for the Northern Alliance to have run the country. > > We should have stepped out right then. Provided them with arms and funding > and run for the hills. > > I agree about Pakistan. Saudi and Iran play their part as well. > > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 1:12 PM, Larry C. Lyons <larrycly...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> >> Don't confuse taking the ground with winning. As long as the taliban >> were intact they win. They just followed classic guerrilla warfare >> They have safe havens in the Pakistani tribal regions, and from there >> it was easy to survive. While Mullah Omar was the nominal leader, the >> real controllers appear to be the Pakistani ISI. To me its every >> indication that we are not fighting the right people. We should give >> Pakistan a deadline and after that fully support India. Its much more >> stable and democratic. >> >> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 1:04 PM, LRS Scout <lrssc...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> > All these things being the same, we had basically one the war by 2002. >> The >> > Taliban and Al Qaeda had been taken out as a power in the country, >> > retreating into Pakistan. >> > >> > SOCOM did with around 200 men what we can't seem to do with tens of >> > thousands. >> > >> > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 12:35 PM, Dana <dana.tier...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > >> >> >> >> um. Seems to me it was actually the East India Company and the British >> Army >> >> was repeated defeated defending it. They may have been nominally in >> control >> >> of the place but they soon wished they weren't. Did you ever read >> Kipling? >> >> Here's a link on some of the early history behind the name: >> >> >> >> http://www.britishbattles.com/first-afghan-war/kabul-1842.htm >> >> >> >> On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 6:46 AM, Larry C. Lyons <larrycly...@gmail.com >> >> >wrote: >> >> >> >> > >> >> > The graveyard of empires is really a myth. Afghanistan through most of >> >> > its history was a part of larger empires - the Persian, Mongol, >> >> > British etc. It wasn't until the 1700's that it became effectively >> >> > independent. The British actually controlled Afghanistan from the >> >> > 1880's through 1930 or so. >> >> > >> >> > On Fri, May 25, 2012 at 1:50 AM, Eric Roberts >> >> > <ow...@threeravensconsulting.com> wrote: >> >> > > >> >> > > There is a good reason Afghanistan is called the graveyard of >> Empires. >> >> I >> >> > > don't think the Bush administration was operating in any known >> >> > reality...so >> >> > > this "fantasy" was probably a part of it. The rest is greed and >> giving >> >> > tax >> >> > > dollars to his buddies based on no bid contracts for civilians to >> take >> >> > over >> >> > > many of the military functions...like cooks, mechanics, laundry, >> >> > > construction, etc....also throw in the "protection" role of >> Blackwater >> >> or >> >> > > whatever they call themselves these days...Xe I think...or did they >> >> > change >> >> > > that too? You have a pretty sweet deal for defense contractors. >> >> > Military >> >> > > industrial complex is swimming in cash...at least until the >> treasury is >> >> > > drained. He certainly didn't try to bolster the treasury with the >> tax >> >> > cuts >> >> > > to the rich. The ones to the middle class and lower class were a >> >> > pittance >> >> > > and in reality didn't do squat. Welcome to the fascist police >> state my >> >> > > friends... >> >> > > >> >> > > -----Original Message----- >> >> > > From: Judah McAuley [mailto:ju...@wiredotter.com] >> >> > > Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2012 10:17 PM >> >> > > To: cf-community >> >> > > Subject: Re: Pics from the NATO Protest >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > Afghanistan also has significant deposits of minerals used in high >> tech >> >> > > manufacturing. >> >> > > >> >> > > However, I really don't think that was the reason we invaded. It's >> >> > possible >> >> > > that some far right delusional folks thought we might take over >> >> > Afghanistan >> >> > > and suppress the Taliban and do a good job extracting resources and >> >> > helping >> >> > > guard against an alliance over oil between Russia and the Middle >> East. >> >> > But, >> >> > > given history, I think that most people in their right minds would >> have >> >> > > regarded that as a rather extreme fantasy. We can bomb a country >> back >> >> to >> >> > > the dark ages, but when it's already in the dark ages? Really, what >> are >> >> > your >> >> > > odds of success? >> >> > > >> >> > > No, we've got the good old fashioned military industrial complex at >> >> > work. I >> >> > > know, seems trite, doesn't it? Eisenhower warned us against it, >> after >> >> > all. >> >> > > That makes it pretty long in the tooth. Obviously just hippy shit >> these >> >> > days >> >> > > that people tell each other as they fit aluminum foil hats. >> >> > > >> >> > > There is a huge amount of money to be made and a huge amount of >> power >> >> to >> >> > be >> >> > > had by simply being at war. Doesn't matter so much with who. >> >> > > There are advantages one way or another with different enemies. >> Sure, >> >> if >> >> > we >> >> > > did manage to triumph in Afghanistan, it would have some nice >> benefits. >> >> > Same >> >> > > thing for Iraq. Or Iran. But that's all secondary. A nice bonus, if >> you >> >> > > will. Keeping people afraid allows you to pass further draconian >> laws >> >> > that >> >> > > blow away privacy. Being at war allows you to funnel massive >> amounts of >> >> > > money to a tiny number of big companies and agencies with secret >> >> budgets >> >> > and >> >> > > no bids. Spending trillions on wars allows you to look at the >> >> increasing >> >> > > deficits and say, "oh no! We need to cut everywhere other than >> >> defense!" >> >> > and >> >> > > put people further into poverty and even more into subjugation. >> >> > > >> >> > > The brilliant part of the "war on terror" is that it isn't a war >> with >> >> > > anyone. It's a war with an idea. No one ever gets to easily claim >> >> "we've >> >> > > won" and be able to show it. There is no white flag from the enemy. >> >> > Anyone >> >> > > who ever says "we're done" will have a well trained group of media >> >> attack >> >> > > dogs jumping them and saying "you gave up and are a coward" and >> "you've >> >> > > placed everyone's children at risk". Hell, that's happened to Obama >> >> and >> >> > he >> >> > > doubled down in Afghanistan. >> >> > > >> >> > > Nope. The legacy of 9/11 is that we have a country where we funnel >> >> almost >> >> > > unlimited (and totally untracked) amounts of money into an endless >> war >> >> > > against unknown and constantly changing enemies while sacrificing an >> >> > untold >> >> > > number of civil liberties for no appreciable end game. There are >> plenty >> >> > of >> >> > > other games within a game (like the millenarian folks that think >> that >> >> > Israel >> >> > > has to have some sort of weird war stuff to happen for the rapture >> to >> >> > come) >> >> > > but when you have hugely profitable companies making large amounts >> of >> >> > money >> >> > > and government power brokers gaining greater control over the >> populace, >> >> > > they'll be pretty happy with a continued state of rolling unrest. >> >> > > >> >> > > Authoritarianism suits large industry and large government. And war >> is >> >> > the >> >> > > best way to ensure that authoritarianism keeps a strong grip on our >> >> > country. >> >> > > >> >> > > Judah >> >> > > >> >> > > On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Larry C. Lyons < >> >> larrycly...@gmail.com> >> >> > > wrote: >> >> > >> >> >> > >> exactly the only greed factor I can see is with KBR, but during >> that >> >> > >> time period they didn't have the same presence as they did in >> Iraq. I >> >> > >> think Tim can enlighten us on that - he was there. >> >> > >> >> >> > >> But the only real money to be made in Afghanistan are with opium >> and >> >> > weed. >> >> > >> >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> >> > >
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Order the Adobe Coldfusion Anthology now! http://www.amazon.com/Adobe-Coldfusion-Anthology/dp/1430272155/?tag=houseoffusion Archive: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/message.cfm/messageid:351418 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/subscribe.cfm Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/groups/cf-community/unsubscribe.cfm
