Do Americans realize they lost both Iraq and Afghan wars?

Why wouldn't we hate pointless wars which achieved nothing but death and debt? Isn't the waging of inept, hopeless and indefensible wars more to be pitied; or is this just your attempt at ,'America, (*)(*)(*)(*) yeah!'? How about 'America, (*)(*)(*)(*) off!'?

 

Actually.. he is correct..........

 

Arent you glad Churchill didnt say that?

 

The sad thing is that every word of it is true, as you well know.

Documenting it won't be hard at all.

 

Htownmarine would win the war but only by leaving a massive pile of civilian corpses. Make a desert and call it peace, eh?

- - - Updated - - -

How exactly were Iraq or Afghanistan "stabilized" before Obama was elected?

 

Maybe we can call the units that carry out those question and execution sessions "einsatzgruppen" just like the people you are modeling your tactics off of did.

How'd their efforts against guerrillas go again?

 

The United States has never declared war against either Iraq or Afghanistan. Our recent military antics in those nations may well have been ineffective in achieving the stated goals, but a nation can't "lose" a war that they never fought.

 

As of now those wars can be considered lost.

The only catch is they are not over.

Who will win in the long run remains to be seen.

 

so they loose a war and blame civilians? buncha zip wads.

 

Same thing happened in Vietnam....but at least those guys got to shoot first once in a while.

 

in reality winning either war over there is just not going to happen. We would have to get seriously medieval and kill most all in the Mideast and obviously that wont happen, they are just too backwards over there. Having an army over there allows us to play whack a mole and that's the best we can hope for. Who ever told Bush we will be hailed as liberators in Iraq needs to be in prison for eternity. if you think we weren't shooting first in Iraq when no one was looking you are naïve. when the Iraqis dropped the billions in weapons we gave them and ran that gives you a good idea about how clueless the military was after all those years. stunning.

 

Yeah, I know man. I'd prefer us not having to do something like I suggested, but what other option is there? We can't talk our way out of this or just ignore it and the way we're fighting it now is just prolonging the conflict indefinitely. What other options do we have?

 

1. Sun Tzu said: In the operations of war, where there are in the field a thousand swift chariots, as many heavy chariots, and a hundred thousand mail-clad soldiers, with provisions enough to carry them a thousand LI, the expenditure at home and at the front, including entertainment of guests, small items such as glue and paint, and sums spent on chariots and armor, will reach the total of a thousand ounces of silver per day. Such is the cost of raising an army of 100,000 men.

2. When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength.

3. Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain.

4. Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor damped, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue.

5. Thus, though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays.

 

Sun Tzu also talked about the necessity of needing the people on your side to win wars.

 

al-Qaeda existed long before Bush invaded Iraq.

The reason we invaded was because there was intelligence showing that Saddam was close to nuclear weapons, he had used weapons of mass destruction in the past, he threatened the annihilation of the US, and he refused to comply with inspections.

He could still be in power today if he had chosen to do so.

 

We're not a nation that will go on a genocidal rampage to prove genocidal rampages are wrong. Our hypocrisy has limits.

 

al-Qaeda was in Iraq before we invaded?

 

Yes indeed.

After the Soviet invasion was defeated by the Mujahedeen many of those freedom fighters went back home but the rest were still looking for a fight, they had many weapons provided mostly by the US and Osama Bin Laden became a leader which many of the followed. He reformed those freedom fighters into a group called al-Qaeda.

Saddam hated terrorist groups like Bin Laden's and actively searched them out and tortured and killed him. It had gotten to the point where Bin Laden was set to make Saddam's regime in Iraq his main target for terrorism until Saddam invaded Kuwait and sent his forces to the Saudi border also. Bin Laden went to the Saudi King and said that al-Qaeda was prepared to fight Iraq and could defend the nation, as they did against the Soviets in Afghanistan, but the King refused him and chose to rely on the United States for defense instead.

Bin Laden considered that an insult and focused his new group on hitting US targets instead of Iraqi ones.

 

Soviet invasion was in Afghanistan and Saddam quickly dispatched anti-establishment rebels in Iraq so where was al-qaeda in iraq?

 

The actual motives are far different than winning or losing. The idea was to create a monster, ISIS is it. Also, there was a need to hide huge black budget expenses and war always is a logical way to do that.

Keep in mind, the federal government was infiltrated at the civil war, so there is an agenda of a secret empire in control.

 

He knew what he was talking about.

The way to beat the American military is, don't quit. Because we will eventually.

 

I'd prefer we didn't either, but we've been at war with terrorism for around 30 years now. Little hammer and diplomacy and persuasion operations have failed, just as they have for Israel for 60+ years. We can keep doing the same thing over-and-over-and-over like we have for 30 years or we can do something about it before we're 60 years into this battle of wills/ideology and realize we need to do things differently. I'd push for maximum Russian and Chinese involvement, a grand bargain of sorts. It would be a solution to the problem the West has been dealing with for far too long now. It obviously would not be pleasant, but neither is our current approach of dealing with the problem which is that we're not dealing with the problem but just kicking the can down the road for future generations to deal with.

 

LOL and everyone knows.

 

Ah, the anti American has hurt feelings? You and the OP could be twins or brothers from another mother.

Sorry snake, nothing of value comes from reading your opinions.

 

Anti-American? No; just 'anti' you government's insane and irrational foreign policy, your hopelessly inept and pointless warmongering and the tens of thousands of innocents killed in the name of 'freedom' which, for the Iranians and Afghans, remains as illusory as ever.