BluePlanet wrote: » Why would the Pakistanis do that? Neverminding the shear scale of the operation and logistical difficulty in manning border outposts throughout mountain ranges that are essentially no mans land and controlled by warlords.
kildare lad wrote: » You've misread a reply I wrote to a previous post . I know the Taliban are heavily involved with Pakistan .
Gatling wrote: » They didn't defeat America , America just didn't have any real plan for the medium to longer terms .
Labaik wrote: » You could use that same logic with the Soviets. The Americans were defeated in both Afghanistan and Iraq, these are wars the west havent got the stomach to win as they will sustain massive casualties on the ground just like they did in Vietnam. Only a mad man would say the intervention in the middle east and the war on terror was a success, it was a resounding failure.
Dr. Bre wrote: » That’s why the Russians left - you can’t win in Afghan
BluePlanet wrote: » It wasn't a resounding failure. Al-Qaeda is basically a tiny shadow of what it once once and their aims totally neutralized.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Afghanistan is one of those places where "win" is impossible to define.
kildare lad wrote: » What is there to win ?
[Deleted User] wrote: » Dust.
kildare lad wrote: » Well worth a trillion dollars and tens of thousands of lives .
Jimbob1977 wrote: » In many ways, the last 20 years have been total folly. The status quo has returned. The Taliban are effectively in power and the Afghan government will disintegrate rapidly
[Deleted User] wrote: » It was worth it to the companies that supplied the military.
spring lane jack wrote: » Wonder what will happen to the Heroin trade and how long will it be till we see the effects on the ground here in Ireland. I'm sure Drew Harris's old crew will figure out someway to keep the cash flowing. Pre 9/11. https://www.nytimes.com/2001/05/20/world/taliban-s-ban-on-poppy-a-success-us-aides-say.html
suicide_circus wrote: » Perhaps the Taliban are the right men to run Afghanistan
TheValeyard wrote: » Has to be a better alternative. Strict interpretation of Islam running the country is a pretty crappy situation to be in.
Labaik wrote: » You could use that same logic with the Soviets.
charlie_says wrote: » I wonder if we will see articles regarding the Taliban treatment of women and gay people that will blame Trump.
Beta Ray Bill wrote: » The only way to win, is to win the hearts and minds of the people there. And that just isn't going to happen. The US would have been better off with a softy softy approach to try an get them or at least some of the onside after 911 but the American public were calling for an aggressive response. I think if it were to ever happen again and the US had to invade/do something, they'd just do something awful to them (Off the books like)