"We could be in Afghanistan for the next 40 years"

How is it that recognizing and holding ourselves accoutable to the unnacceptable acts that our own people commit is somehow making those things equal to the heinous acts of a terrorist and/or insurgent group that we have already acknowledged as being of the worst kind by sending our military forces to stop them? We cannot run around the world constantly stating and implying that our culture and way of life is the best, most moral, and most 'developed' and then, when we fall short of those ideals, not hold ourselves accountable for them. This isn't about comparing the mental and emotional trauma of sexual humiliation to video taped beheadings and determining which is worse. It's about not being hypocrites. We either hold ourselves to the standards we present to the world or we shove them aside and stop pretending our way is any better than anyone else's.
 
The question about Vietnam is simply that North Vietnam was communist and America hates communists therefore it's right for American troops to die for that belief. Vietnam was frankly none of America's business, other countries such as Zimbabwe have to sink or swim without interference from 'superpowers'.

You are talking about American media, the OP was about a British commander stating we'd be in Afghanistan for the next forty years.

Thats right, I forgot that the only nations that shouldnt be left to their fates are European ones....
icon6.gif
 
The problem is that, although we are slowly (too slowly) learning the lesson, we are treating this with the mindset of a conventional war. If we continue to do so, the problem will never actually be solved.

However, even if we do wage a successful 4th generation war mindset, it will still take us at least a generation, probably two, to successfully deal with the problem. Even then, there will be pockets of discontent, people who will remember that their grandfathers/uncles/parents, etc, fought died due to U.S./British involvement.
 
Thats right, I forgot that the only nations that shouldnt be left to their fates are European ones....
icon6.gif

Snarky aren't we? You got paid for all the help you gave in the last war, your economy was bust before the war and booming afterwards so don't whinge that we were ungrateful, we've only just finished paying you millions of pounds a year for the privilege of your help.



I don't mean to offend anyone else here, I'm just really really fed up of everytime a non American says something, one or two people have to say exactly what Archangel has said. We are grateful for the help we received and we honour thoise who died but there's no denying America prospered while Europe had to rebuild, both due to the war.
 
The problem is that, although we are slowly (too slowly) learning the lesson, we are treating this with the mindset of a conventional war. If we continue to do so, the problem will never actually be solved.

However, even if we do wage a successful 4th generation war mindset, it will still take us at least a generation, probably two, to successfully deal with the problem. Even then, there will be pockets of discontent, people who will remember that their grandfathers/uncles/parents, etc, fought died due to U.S./British involvement.


As I said it's not our first war there so it's likely great and great great grandfathers who died against the British are remembered. I think it's a war we are fighting differently from you as sadly we've had more experience than yourselves at this type of warfare. We've fought this guerilla type action in Malaya as well as Northern Ireland before. Before that we've fought all alone the North West Frontier plus we thave the Gurkhas who are doing brillianty out there, liasing with the locals who respect them as everyone knows who they they are there. Their fighting skills are phenomenal, totally nice guys and totally scary.

http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/2007/10/hearts-and-minds/
 
It was a disturbing but not entirely unexpected statement to be made with regard to the length of time it is being envisaged for us to spend on Afghan soil.

It was never going to be any different with a country so heavily balkanised along political, ethnic and religious divides. Attempting to homogenise such a country into a state amenable to the economic ambitions of external bodies is not quite a forlorn hope but pretty close to one.

The distressing thing is the lives that will be lost and the money expended to achieve a foreign policy goal that is not, in my opinion, in our best interests.
 
Off topic, slightly.

I think if you read my posts I’m pretty neutral and pragmatic when it comes to most things (….except religion…:))

I feel that some of the allies in Afghanistan need to come out and relieve the UK, Canadian, Dutch and American troops doing most of the combat. I am most thankful for American aid when Canada and the world has needed it, as I’m sure the US is thankful for Canadian and world help during its hard times. (Yes we were/are there during Katrina, 9/11, forest fires, etc, etc. There is one Hell of a lot of cross border cooperation.)

But why is it you get the odd person stepping up and throwing WW2 and American involvement in Europe into European faces every once in a while?

I don’t see Canadians, Australians, South Africans, New Zealanders, and other countries “throwing” it, and holding it over the UK, why do some Americans get their knickers in a knot about it? No one has ever, as far as I know not been grateful for the help.

At the end of WW2, Canada had the worlds 4th largest navy and 3rd largest air force, with over 1.1 million Canadians serving in the military, out of a population of just over 11 million. We are damn proud of helping rid the world of fascism, but I’ll be damned if I’ll hold it over the heads of the Europeans just to make myself feel good
 
Back
Top