The Soviets DID NOT UNLEASHED the hounds in Afghanistan. The last Soviet who had the stomach for that was Joseph Stalin and Afghanistan would have been a cakewalk for the likes of him.
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Documentary = Afghanistan: The Price of Revenge
Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostThe Soviets DID NOT UNLEASHED the hounds in Afghanistan. The last Soviet who had the stomach for that was Joseph Stalin and Afghanistan would have been a cakewalk for the likes of him.Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim
Comment
-
Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View PostThe combined death toll in Afghanistan and Pakistan appears to be between 70,000 to 100,000, depending on the source. Do you find 'tens of thousands of dead civilians' to be less 'grisly' and more 'acceptable'?
And yes, even if we accept these numbers you mention as correct, you have just proved your claim of "hundreds of thousands" of dead civilians as nothing more than hyperbole.Last edited by Firestorm; 12 Jun 13,, 17:57.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chogy View PostIt is sound only insofar as the nation being built actually desires (or at least accepts) what the "conquerors" offer in terms of a sociopolitical construct.
If the USSR conquered Sweden, obliterating Sweden's infrastructure in the process, and then attempted to "rebuild" Sweden into yet another satellite State with a die-hard communist puppet at the helm, there'd be resistance.
The Afghanis apparently do not want what is being offered. And most importantly, it is not the job of the military to build, and arguably, it is not their job to police, although the latter has been accomplished in post WW2 Axis nations. It is the job of the military to destroy, or threaten to do so.
If the Afghanis want to shed themselves of the Taliban rule and eject foreign fighters, then let their young men stand and take up arms. These we'll supply. Otherwise, the mission should have been to gut AQ and the Taliban as necessary, and then simply exit stage left. A not so subtle warning about what happens if U.S. or Allies' assets are attacked in such a manner as they were on 9/11.
As it is now,the war is not even face saving.Is just a racket,to siphon some more money,before it's over.
An NCO returned home a few weeks ago.He was in US for a year,for treatment,after losing both legs and an arm.It adds to the thousands of families that lost somebody or are tormented by the presence of such human ruins.who go and tell these people it was worth it?Those who know don't speak
He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36
Comment
-
Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View Post
Even if we combine them, there are not 100,000 deaths.
In Afghanistan alone, by your own source:
Crawford, Boston University, "Civilian Death and Injury in Afghanistan, 2001-2011" [link removed since it says "page not found"]
Total: 30,400 to 45,600 killed, incl....
Afghan soldiers, police, insurgents: 15,000 to 28,000 killed
Civilians: 12,500 to 14,700 killed
If you split that in 10 years...
I don't want to sound like a ruthless tard, but it's way of hundredS of thousands, which was my initial question.
The point is that the Taliban paid a much lower price than that paid by others in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and the costs continue to accumulate. There was an alternative to war and invasion that was not explored at the time, and it would appear that a lot of people have still not absorbed the lessons from the failures of the Afghan invasion, choosing instead to offer canards like 'we would have been fine if NATO had the freedom to kill more people with abandon' ...No such thing as a good tax - Churchill
To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Double Edge View PostNo, but doing what Sri Lanka did may have helped.Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim
Comment
-
Originally posted by Firestorm View PostAnd yes, even if we accept these numbers you mention as correct, you have just proved your claim of "hundreds of thousands" of dead civilians as nothing more than hyperbole.Originally posted by Doktor View PostI don't know how to put it, but...
I don't want to sound like a ruthless tard, but it's way of hundredS of thousands, which was my initial question.
"The combined death toll in Afghanistan and Pakistan appears to be between 70,000 to 100,000, depending on the source. Do you find 'tens of thousands of dead civilians' to be less 'grisly' and more 'acceptable'?
From US perspective there was no alternative. The message was sent. "Mess with us, and we will find you. Even in your caves, or under the rocks."Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim
Comment
-
Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View PostIt's going to happen whether we like it or not. The Afghans will do it themselves. Ironically, the only thing saving the Taliban is NATO and we're leaving.Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim
Comment
-
Originally posted by Chogy View PostIt is sound only insofar as the nation being built actually desires (or at least accepts) what the "conquerors" offer in terms of a sociopolitical construct.
If the USSR conquered Sweden, obliterating Sweden's infrastructure in the process, and then attempted to "rebuild" Sweden into yet another satellite State with a die-hard communist puppet at the helm, there'd be resistance.
The Afghanis apparently do not want what is being offered. And most importantly, it is not the job of the military to build, and arguably, it is not their job to police, although the latter has been accomplished in post WW2 Axis nations. It is the job of the military to destroy, or threaten to do so.
If the Afghanis want to shed themselves of the Taliban rule and eject foreign fighters, then let their young men stand and take up arms. These we'll supply. Otherwise, the mission should have been to gut AQ and the Taliban as necessary, and then simply exit stage left. A not so subtle warning about what happens if U.S. or Allies' assets are attacked in such a manner as they were on 9/11.Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim
Comment
-
Originally posted by Agnostic Muslim View PostDid both of you miss this part of my previous post addressed to TopHatter?
"The combined death toll in Afghanistan and Pakistan appears to be between 70,000 to 100,000, depending on the source. Do you find 'tens of thousands of dead civilians' to be less 'grisly' and more 'acceptable'?
OK, I will bite it. Not 1 civilian death is acceptable to me personally. However, civilians die whenever there is an armed conflict around them. Guess what, those same civilians tolerated Talibans who put them in that position. Otherwise, they would've overthrown them. Please don't try to twist this around. Deal?
The message obviously didn't sink in, and in the end the US ended up punishing 'tens of thousands' who had nothing to do with Al Qaeda (ignoring the indirect impact on millions in the region).
As for "tens of thousands" you just don't give up. Your own source shows 14-17k civilians dead in A-stan. And see above what I have said above about innocents.No such thing as a good tax - Churchill
To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Doktor View PostSo you turn to a next point when your numbers are repelled.
OK, I will bite it. Not 1 civilian death is acceptable to me personally. However, civilians die whenever there is an armed conflict around them.
Yep, US should have just say, "Oh well, 2 buildings more or less".
As for "tens of thousands" you just don't give up. Your own source shows 14-17k civilians dead in A-stan. And see above what I have said above about innocents.Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim
Comment
-
Originally posted by Doktor View PostSo, all those are to be put on the ISAF's tap?Pakistan is not going to be a theocratic state to be ruled by priests with a divine mission - Jinnah
https://twitter.com/AgnosticMuslim
Comment
Comment