RNC Chairman Michael Steele Is Right: Afghanistan Is A War Of Obama's Choosing And Is Unwinnable
Travis
concentrate on
and he has injected far more troops into Afghanistan than Bush ever did.
Obama has said
he is committed to winning the war in Afghanistan, but what does that mean?
It can be argued that Bush never invaded Afghanistan as in 2001 and 2002 as
the U.S used
only air power and the Northern Alliance of Afghans to drive out the Taliban
and effect regime. But the mass of Afghan territory was never taken, let
alone controlled. There was, however, change in Kabul. But the U.S. never
began a campaign of nation building in Afghanistan until Obama took power.
Many Republicans like William Kristal, editor of the The Weekly Standard, in
calling for Steele's resignation are off base. Steele said the war is
unwinnable, which it probably is,
depending on how one defines winning. If it requires establishing a Western-
style liberal democracy in this country it is unwinnable.
Julie Epstein, a Democrat advisor said on Fox T.V. that Michael Steele to
the Democrats
is a cartoon, by his saying that Afghanistan has never been conquered in
past history. But it is Steele who is right. The British did not conquer
Afghanistan in the 1840s. Just like the Soviets in 1989 they were defeated
and driven out. Epstein continued with his history lesson for Steele by
saying that Afghanistan was conquered by Genghis Khan, India and he could
have added Alexander the Great. But winning a few skirmishes in a rugged
tribal country like Afghanistan and then departing is not what I would call
conquering it.
--
By the test of serious intellectual
persuasiveness, Marx was hardly a
a 'great thinker", though he often appears
as such in low-level academic curricula.
---Robert Conquest "Reflections on a
Ravaged Century".
Sid9
"Travis" <sull...@live.ca> wrote in message
news:enIXn.3947$xZ2....@newsfe07.iad...
.
.
The Mujahedeen had a strong ally in defeating the Soviet Union.
It was a horrible mistake for the United States to support the Mujahedeen.
It's the Mujahedeen that has morphed into the Taliban.
Bret Cahill
> concentrate on
You ain't thinkin' of cuttin' 'n runnin' are you?
If you don't support the troops when they are in harm's way you are an
America hater.
Bret Cahill
Neolibertarian
"Travis" <sull...@live.ca> wrote:
> Obama stated long ago that Afghanistan not Iraq was the war the U.S. should
> concentrate on
> and he has injected far more troops into Afghanistan than Bush ever did.
> Obama has said
> he is committed to winning the war in Afghanistan, but what does that mean?
>
> It can be argued that Bush never invaded Afghanistan as in 2001 and 2002 as
> the U.S used
> only air power and the Northern Alliance of Afghans to drive out the Taliban
> and effect regime. But the mass of Afghan territory was never taken, let
> alone controlled. There was, however, change in Kabul. But the U.S. never
> began a campaign of nation building in Afghanistan until Obama took power.
>
> Many Republicans like William Kristal, editor of the The Weekly Standard, in
> calling for Steele's resignation are off base. Steele said the war is
> unwinnable, which it probably is,
> depending on how one defines winning. If it requires establishing a Western-
> style liberal democracy in this country it is unwinnable.
The world trend is toward more freedom, more democracy, more classical
liberalism. This forward motion is several centuries old at this point,
and is only gaining in momentum as time goes by.
This, among many other factors, is why the jihadis began focusing and
lashing out at the West, especially from the 1990's onward.
>
> Julie Epstein, a Democrat advisor said on Fox T.V. that Michael Steele to
> the Democrats
> is a cartoon, by his saying that Afghanistan has never been conquered in
> past history. But it is Steele who is right. The British did not conquer
> Afghanistan in the 1840s. Just like the Soviets in 1989 they were defeated
> and driven out. Epstein continued with his history lesson for Steele by
> saying that Afghanistan was conquered by Genghis Khan, India and he could
> have added Alexander the Great. But winning a few skirmishes in a rugged
> tribal country like Afghanistan and then departing is not what I would call
> conquering it.
Afghanistan was never really conquered because no one ever /wished/ to
conquer it, least of all the United States. Even less so, the Afghanis,
themselves. Afghanistan is at least four different countries, separated
by fractured culture, language and a terrain that resembles the moon.
You don't get wars like football games anymore. Quantum Mechanics has
seen to that.
The problem is, because of nuclear weapons (the apocalyptic nature of
which only a few historians and scientists still understand), you can't
allow your distant neighbors to form Molotov�Ribbentrop Pacts ever
again, either.
Damned if you do, but damned even more if you don't. You may not like
the choices, but the choices, themselves, are exceedingly clear.
--
Neolibertarian
"[The American People] know that we don't have deficits
because people are taxed too little; we have deficits
because big government spends too much."
---Ronald Reagan
Greg Carr
They tied up 100,000 Soviet troops and drove Moscow to distraction at
the height of the cold war.
Turban Joe Balasootoe
> "Travis" <sulliv...@live.ca> wrote in message
>
> news:enIXn.3947$xZ2....@newsfe07.iad...
>
>
>
> > Obama stated long ago thatAfghanistannot Iraq was thewarthe U.S.
> > should concentrate on
> > and he has injected far more troops intoAfghanistanthan Bush ever did.
> > Obama has said
> > he is committed to winning thewarinAfghanistan, but what does that
> > mean?
>
> > It can be argued that Bush never invadedAfghanistanas in 2001 and 2002
> > as the U.S used
> > only air power and the Northern Alliance of Afghans to drive out the
> > Taliban and effect regime. But the mass of Afghan territory was never
> > taken, let alone controlled. There was, however, change in Kabul. But the
> > took power.
>
> > Many Republicans like William Kristal, editor of the The Weekly Standard,
> > in calling for Steele's resignation are off base. Steele said thewaris
> > unwinnable, which it probably is,
> > depending on how one defines winning. If it requires establishing a
> > Western- style liberal democracy in this country it is unwinnable.
>
> > Julie Epstein, a Democrat advisor said on Fox T.V. that Michael Steele to
> > the Democrats
> > past history. But it is Steele who is right. The British did not conquer
> > and driven out. Epstein continued with his history lesson for Steele by
> > have added Alexander the Great. But winning a few skirmishes in a rugged
> > call conquering it.
>
> .
> .
> .
> The Mujahedeen had a strong ally in defeating the Soviet Union.
>
> It was a horrible mistake for the United States to support the Mujahedeen.
>
>
> - Show quoted text -
Knowing this. It is still unclear as to what the Soviets were trying
to accomplish in 1979--oil and gas rights? Heroin takeover?
The Reaganites, esp. blockhead and genius/fraud Geo Schultz,
had not the slightest idea of what they were doing in the Moslem
world unless it was an effort to ensure our having a new enemy,
one that would stand the test of time. Winning the so-called Cold
War morphed into a combination of Hot Wars and a
'Controlled Terrorism' guided by the Koran and Sharia
idealism. It's an Orwellian road show.
Btw, once we start talking "winning hearts and minds"--we are
talking LBJ/Oceanic insanity. It's a quagmire/state of nirvana-
cornucopia for defense contractors.