info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Biggest question about Taliban in Afghanistan. Why where they alive?
1 view
Skip to first unread message
Liberals are Vermin!
Aug 21, 2021, 2:14:38 AM8/21/21
to
In WW2, they killed 15,000-20,000 in one battle. So, why / how did 50,000 Taliban survive in Afghanistan for 20 years? What was the U.S. there for? They should have been killing them all the time. They should have killed villagers who willingly harboured them. Search and Destroy, that should have been on the ongoing mission. Instead of "nation building" which is a horribly and proven FAILED strategy.
Eric@
Aug 21, 2021, 5:23:12 PM8/21/21
to
Liberals are Vermin! wrote...
>
> In WW2, they killed 15,000-20,000 in one battle. So, why / how did 50,000 Taliban survive in Afghanistan for 20 years? What was the U.S. there for? They should have been killing them all the time. They should have killed villagers who willingly harboured them. Search and Destroy, that should have been on the ongoing mission. Instead of "nation building" which is a horribly and proven FAILED strategy.
They are supplied by, funded by, and find refuge in, Pakistan.
> In WW2, they killed 15,000-20,000 in one battle. So, why / how did 50,000 Taliban survive in Afghanistan for 20 years? What was the U.S. there for? They should have been killing them all the time. They should have killed villagers who willingly harboured them. Search and Destroy, that should have been on the ongoing mission. Instead of "nation building" which is a horribly and proven FAILED strategy.
Dave Smith
Aug 21, 2021, 9:33:44 PM8/21/21
to
Pakistani military.
Gregory Carr
Aug 27, 2021, 7:02:47 AM8/27/21
to
On Friday, 20 August 2021 at 23:14:38 UTC-7, Liberals are Vermin! wrote:
> In WW2, they killed 15,000-20,000 in one battle. So, why / how did 50,000 Taliban survive in Afghanistan for 20 years? What was the U.S. there for? They should >have been killing them all the time. They should have killed villagers who willingly harboured them. Search and Destroy, that should have been on the ongoing >mission. Instead of "nation building" which is a horribly and proven FAILED strategy.
Burning the ville to save it. Free fire zones. Paying bounties for severed heads and ears. My Lai. Dropping more bombs than in all of WW2 they still lost but the 1975 Saigon bug out went better than Kabul capitulation.
> In WW2, they killed 15,000-20,000 in one battle. So, why / how did 50,000 Taliban survive in Afghanistan for 20 years? What was the U.S. there for? They should >have been killing them all the time. They should have killed villagers who willingly harboured them. Search and Destroy, that should have been on the ongoing >mission. Instead of "nation building" which is a horribly and proven FAILED strategy.
0 new messages