Quote: @badgervike said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ badgervike said:
I don't have any issue with attacking Afghanistan after 9/11nor should many. We never should have got in the business of nation building...and that was Bush's (jr) fault in both Afghanistan and Iraq. His dad stayed on mission and attacked and overpowered Iraq after building a coalition...and than going home when the original mission was complete.
We agree going after Al Queda and Taliban after 9.11 was the right thing to do. BUT, we should NEVER have sent our boys (and girls) on the ground to Afghanistan.
We didnt learn from Russia's experience there at all
Not just IRAQ, look @ Libya, Look @ Syria and the suffering there to this very day.
They had to go on the ground...it was the only way to defeat Al Qaeda...but we should have got out afterwards. Sending a few cruise missiles into empty Al Qaeda training camps ala Clinton wasn't going to do it....it only served to embolden Bin Laden when Clinton did it.
Emboldened Bin Laden, good lord.
The boots on the ground "or occupation" in Saudi Arabia back in 90/91 is what emboldened Bin Laden. The Saudi's chose the US over it's own sunni saudi brothers to protect the holy land (fresh after pushing back the Soviets in guess where, AFGHANISTAN).
That was the beginning of the Bin Laden vs the US, anything Clinton did or didn't do was inconsequential to OBL and his war on the "infidels"
Quote: @Mike Olson said:
@ JimmyinSD said:
why wasnt the UN involved regardless of who is president? trump should have had them involved with the US exit as part of the agreement, and Bidens admin should have known to get them involved prior to taking whatever actions he did.
U.N. Wanted nothing to do with it. Ever. We were warned. You break it you own it. How many empires have failed there? Sure someay have had a foothold for a generation or two but many empires have failed. We had no busoness being there beyond bombing al quaeda training camps.
We tried to occupy and then we want the U.N. to clean up? Hell I am just amazed at the mere mention of involving the U.N. after how it has historically been talked about here.
Occupy, its not like we were trying to take over the country, we were there to fight the taliban since the aerial assaults were ineffective.
Yes history wasn't on their side, and yes many mistakes have been made. But there was a UN coalition presence there, the problem is that they decided to pull out when the US said they were leaving. What's the point of the UN if they are only going to do the easy work while US soldiers do the heavy lifting.
I dont know the finer points of trumps plan, but I have read that there were stipulations that were in place to prevent or discourage aggression in the US troops absence as they vacated regions. Regardless, the blood is flowing now and I doubt anybody lifts a finger to do anything until it reaches Africa type genocide levels, and even then what will they do? More futile ineffective air strikes on straw targets?
Quote: @Skodin said:
@ badgervike said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ badgervike said:
I don't have any issue with attacking Afghanistan after 9/11nor should many. We never should have got in the business of nation building...and that was Bush's (jr) fault in both Afghanistan and Iraq. His dad stayed on mission and attacked and overpowered Iraq after building a coalition...and than going home when the original mission was complete.
We agree going after Al Queda and Taliban after 9.11 was the right thing to do. BUT, we should NEVER have sent our boys (and girls) on the ground to Afghanistan.
We didnt learn from Russia's experience there at all
Not just IRAQ, look @ Libya, Look @ Syria and the suffering there to this very day.
They had to go on the ground...it was the only way to defeat Al Qaeda...but we should have got out afterwards. Sending a few cruise missiles into empty Al Qaeda training camps ala Clinton wasn't going to do it....it only served to embolden Bin Laden when Clinton did it.
Emboldened Bin Laden, good lord.
The boots on the ground "or occupation" in Saudi Arabia back in 90/91 is what emboldened Bin Laden. The Saudi's chose the US over it's own sunni saudi brothers to protect the holy land (fresh after pushing back the Soviets in guess where, AFGHANISTAN).
That was the beginning of the Bin Laden vs the US, anything Clinton did or didn't do was inconsequential to OBL and his war on the "infidels"
Did the big words confuse you? I didn't say why Bin Laden planned the 9/11 attacks. I said he was EMBOLDENED by Clinton's previous minor response for the USS Cole attack.
verb
- 1.give (someone) the courage or confidence to do something or to behave in a certain way.
Clinton launched some Cruise Missiles into an empty training camp after the Al Qaeda bombing of the USS Cole.....leaving Bin Laden to call the US "paper tigers". His stated goal for the 9/11 attacks was to get the US to remove troops from the ME. He thought the US would turn tail and run. Instead, he got just the opposite.
Quote: @StickyBun said:
I don't have a 'side' in this because I don't like Biden's policies, but this was always set up to fail. Always, no matter who was President. So the OP who calls out 'Where is the President'? is really being silly. Its a shitshow regardless.
At the time I made the post, the clusterphuck had been going on for days and no word from the President or even a time frame when he would speak to the country about the issue. A President should lead and not stay on vacation. He did finally forward, good for him.
You do know that the Democrats would excoriate any Republican POTUS in this same position and would have demanded he/she come forward. Goes both ways.
Quote: @IDVikingfan said:
@ StickyBun said:
I don't have a 'side' in this because I don't like Biden's policies, but this was always set up to fail. Always, no matter who was President. So the OP who calls out 'Where is the President'? is really being silly. Its a shitshow regardless.
At the time I made the post, the clusterphuck had been going on for days and no word from the President or even a time frame when he would speak to the country about the issue. A President should lead and not stay on vacation. He did finally forward, good for him.
You do know that the Democrats would excoriate any Republican POTUS in this same position and would have demanded he/she come forward. Goes both ways.
Agreed 100%.
Quote: @StickyBun said:
We lie about every war we are involved in:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/...documents/
this is incredibly sobering...
Why we didnt get the hell out of there after taking down Al Qaeda is beyond comprehension. POTUS' on all sides of the political spectrum are complicit.
I give Trump/Biden credit for finally ending it. But the execution is clearly lacking - a tragedy.
Quote: @purplefaithful said:
@ StickyBun said:
We lie about every war we are involved in:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/...documents/
this is incredibly sobering...
Why we didnt get the hell out of there after taking down Al Qaeda is beyond comprehension. POTUS' on all sides of the political spectrum are complicit.
I give Trump/Biden credit for finally ending it. But the execution is clearly lacking - a tragedy.
Agreed. We should have been out long ago. Bush was a nation builder, played along with that agenda. Obama did the same.
I am glad when Trump said he was bringing the troops home, but completely agree, the power vacuum left when we pulled out is now being filled by worse than what we went over to remove. And the execution of it is horrible. The weapons, the technology we are giving away pales only in comparison to the loss of life and the suffering of those that will remain.
One small hope is that the people enjoyed enough freedom that now they know what it is. Perhaps that will be enough for them to fight for themselves, because freedom can't be forced on people.
Quote: @greediron said:
@ purplefaithful said:
@ StickyBun said:
We lie about every war we are involved in:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/...documents/
this is incredibly sobering...
Why we didnt get the hell out of there after taking down Al Qaeda is beyond comprehension. POTUS' on all sides of the political spectrum are complicit.
I give Trump/Biden credit for finally ending it. But the execution is clearly lacking - a tragedy.
Agreed. We should have been out long ago. Bush was a nation builder, played along with that agenda. Obama did the same.
I am glad when Trump said he was bringing the troops home, but completely agree, the power vacuum left when we pulled out is now being filled by worse than what we went over to remove. And the execution of it is horrible. The weapons, the technology we are giving away pales only in comparison to the loss of life and the suffering of those that will remain.
One small hope is that the people enjoyed enough freedom that now they know what it is. Perhaps that will be enough for them to fight for themselves, because freedom can't be forced on people.
Crenshaw speaks to that subject above, its how the operation was being framed as a war when in his opinion it really hasnt been one for quite a while and he disagrees that we should have bailed out completely. its a short bit, i would like to hear more from him on the matter.
|
