Those were wars between states, when you captured the enemy capital, the war was essentially over. The defeated state remained in place, with most of it's institutions intact. But it's a different game with non-state actors, there is no capital to capture, it's like trying to bottle smoke. They can go on for decades, and we don't have the stamina to face an enemy like that.
Since Dubya never did any good in terms of foreign relations or activities, there was nothing much to throw away.
There are enemy capitals to capture or liberate in this war - Islamabad, the capital of Pakistan and Riyadh, the capital of Saudi Arabia. Not that I propose we accomplish regime-change by invading either capital with ground forces - there are other ways but we'd be wise in this war to not make the mistake that goober has made - to think that Al Qaeda and Taliban are somehow "non-state actors". Al Qaeda and the Taliban are indeed state-sponsored actors - they do the bidding of their master states - Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. And there is no excuse for goober or anyone to be ignorant of the relationship between state and state-sponsored terrorists when I have posted the BBC's Secret Pakistan videos a number of times, most recently in post #97. So how long are flat-Earthers like goober going to stay in denial about our terrorist enemies? How long will goober keep parroting the big lie that Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are telling? Get your head of the sand there goober. Get a grip on reality there goober. Watch the videos FFS! America's 'allies' Saudi & Pakistan: 'enemies' more like! [video=youtube;T1dcwrucnAk]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T1dcwrucnAk[/video]
Al Qaeda works for the Pakistani military intelligence (and is funded by Saudi Arabia). Both Pakistan and Saudi Arabia have all of those assets - bases, naval yards, air force bases, motor polls, tank factories - well Pakistan has anyway. Al Qaeda's tank factories = Pakistan's tank factories Now to say that Al Qaeda "doesn't have its own tank factories" is just as stupid a point as saying the US Navy Seals "don't have their own tank factories" or the Chinese Women's Militia "doesn't have their own tank factories". Or the French Foreign Legion "doesn't have its own tank factories". No, none of those forces, those military units does have their own tank factories - but the military organisations from which they take their orders do! Al Qaeda doesn't have its own tank factories but Pakistan does The US Navy Seals doesn't have its own tank factories but the United States does The Chinese Women's militia doesn't have its own tank factories but China does The French Foreign Legion doesn't have its own tank factories but France does. I am making the same point over and over and over again. I will try bigger letters to see if that helps. Al Qaeda and the Taliban are not stand alone independent forces. They are state-sponsored forces. They take their orders from the Pakistani military intelligence service, the ISI! But here it is one more time. Just watch the videos people!
Using your logic then the Taliban had tanks, jets, satellites back in the 80s when we were using them against the Russians. Do you have any idea how stupid you sound right now. Being allied with someone and receiving money from them is not the same as actually being a member of that group. Can an Al Queda pilot walk up to the Saudi's and use of one of their jets? Can you even begin to comprehend how completely unsound your reasoning is?
More than a few people lamented that we invaded the wrong country in the Gulf War, and should have taken out Saudi Arabia as well as Saddam.
President Barack Obama makes a state visit to Pakistan. Michelle and the kids come too. Obama is a guest of the Pakistani military but sadly a military dog savages Sasha to death before the US Secret Service can shoot the dog dead. Obama, tears in his eyes, says to the ISI general whose dog it was - "I'm so sorry. Can I buy you a new dog?".
I was reading recently that the last of the USAF KC-135Rs based at Manas AB in Kyrgyzstan has finished their mission. All told, in the 12.5 years of supporting operations in Afghanistan, they have transferred 12.2 billion gallons of fuel to 135,000 receiving aircraft. To put this in perspective...although in the case of aerial refueling they use JP-4 jet fuel...the average household uses around 142.5 gallons of gasoline per year. Aerial refueling is just a facet of the multi-faceted logistical equation...and the operations in Afghanistan could be regarded as a small war, protracted, but nonetheless a small war.
Well we needed the Afghan operations regarded as a small war against Pakistan (in simple terms though with Pakistan it helps to know who exactly our enemies are - namely, the Pakistani military intelligence service, the ISI and the generals and former generals who dictate military policy to sponsor terrorists to the ISI). Now every time NATO logistics uses Pakistan for supply it means Pakistan gets a get-out-of-war-free card. So really, it is almost an act of treason for NATO logistics to be using Pakistan for supply - it is conspiring with the enemy to give them protection from NATO military action against our enemies in Pakistan. Pakistan has blocked and unblocked their roads to lead us a merry dance to their tune when we should have stopped using their roads altogether long ago. Pakistani protesters were blocking Pakistani roads and we were told in the media that blocking the transit routes through Pakistan somehow "complicates" NATO's plans for Afghanistan. Actually no, blocking the anti-NATO stranglehold supply route through Pakistan simplifies matters for NATO a whole lot, and makes victory in Afghanistan much easier to achieve but no thanks to idiot NATO chiefs. With Pakistani supply routes thankfully blocked by someone, anyone, NATO would be freed up from the demands of our own traitor bean-counters who said it was "cheaper" to supply via Pakistan, paying Pakistan and giving the Pakistani military a "Get-out-of-war-with-NATO" free card in the process. It's a tragedy that NATO & the Pentagon are commanded by such idiots that they could not get themselves out of a trap of their own making and have to rely on Pakistani protesters to do so for a time anyway if for the wrong reason. Someone has to try to get this into NATO logistics' and chiefs' thick skulls - we do need to confront the Pakistan military intelligence sooner or later so make alternative plans to get logistics out from under any dependence on using Pakistan for supply routes!
The "Taliban" per se did not become a force to be reckoned with in the Kandahar region of south Afghanistan until 1994, well after the CIA-armed anti-Soviet Afghans had ousted the Soviet-backed regime in 1992. Wikipedia: Taliban You've never used my logic. You've even misread what I wrote in plain English. And to that list we can add the 1980s anti-Soviet Afghan forces and their ISI & CIA backers. The 1980s anti-Soviet Afghan forces didn't have its own tank factories but Pakistan and the US did The ISI doesn't have its own tank factories but Pakistan does The CIA doesn't have its own tank factories but the US does Even versatile all-arms forces like the US Marines - which is like an army, a navy and and air-force rolled into one, doesn't have its own tank factories but the US does. Which is why it was very difficult for the Soviets to defeat the anti-Soviet Afghan rebels because they were getting support from Pakistan and the US and in order to stop that support then the Soviets would have had to confront Pakistan and the US, which could have led to a much bigger maybe world war. So it is easier to confront and defeat the Taliban not because they aren't state-sponsored - because they most certainly are - but the state-sponsors are less powerful than the 1980s anti-Soviet Afghans had supporting them. Most importantly, the Taliban don't - or shouldn't - have the US funding them. I say "shouldn't" because the biggest problem we have had defeating the Taliban is that the US has continued to aid Pakistan and Pakistan sponsors the Taliban using the US's aid money. No but neither can a US Navy Seal "pilot" walk up to a US air force base and use one of their jets. What is really, really stupid is for the US to keeping aiding Pakistan and trading with Saudi Arabia because those states (and some others) are state sponsors of the Taliban and Al Qaeda we are supposed to be waging a war on terror on. What is really stupid sounding to me is when our leaders keep calling Pakistan an "ally" when so much of the core Pakistani state is more of an enemy than an ally.
Do you think they got it for free? As far as I know, Kyrgyzstan doesn't refine aircraft fuel. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/12/world/asia/12manas.html?_r=0 A typical Russian extortion racket against it's smaller neighbors: http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Central_Asia/NB02Ag02.html
Naturally, they are being lured away by the West, so the West can use these small countries to install military bases and rocket systems. Russia has high and long-term priority to be castrated = Putin removed! Also, let's not feel sorry for those countries. Most of them have crooks in high places who do the looting. Russia, too, had that problem and Putin tried to get a grip on it. Ukraine wasn't any better. I read Putin's recent interview where he mentioned this problem. Look over to Afghanistan and the Karzei family of crooks. Is the US any better? Blackwater, Haliburton come to mind. And Canada? We have crooked politicians too. Sometimes a scandal surfaces, like the Mulroony affair. In his recent interview Putin gave a good clarification about oil pricing: QUESTION: Gazprom has already said that it is reverting to its old gas prices beginning in April. VLADIMIR PUTIN: Gazprom could not have said that; you were not listening carefully or it did not express itself clearly. Gazprom is not reverting to the old prices. It simply does not want to extend the current discounts, which it had agreed to apply or not apply on a quarterly basis. Even before all these events, even before they hit the crisis point. I know about the negotiations between Gazprom and its partners. Gazprom and the Government of the Russian Federation agreed that Gazprom would introduce a discount by reducing gas prices to $268.50 per 1,000 cubic metres. The Government of Russia provides the first tranche of the loan, which is formally not a loan but a bond purchase – a quasi-loan, $3 billion dollars in the first stage. And the Ukrainian side undertakes to fully repay its debt that arose in the second half of last year and to make regular payments for what they are consuming – for the gas. The debt has not been repaid, regular payments are not being made in full. Moreover, if the Ukrainian partners fail to make the February payment, the debt will grow even bigger. Today it is around $1.5-1.6 billion. And if they do not fully pay for February, it will be nearly $2 billion. Naturally, in these circumstances, Gazprom says, “Listen guys, since you don’t pay us anyway, and we are only seeing an increase in your debt, let’s lock into the regular price, which is still reduced.” This is a purely commercial component of Gazprom’s activities, which plans for revenues and expenditures in its investment plans like any other major company. If they do not receive the money from their Ukrainian partners on time, then they are undercutting their own investment programmes; this is a real problem for them. And incidentally, this does not have to do with the events in Ukraine or any politics. There was an agreement: “We give you money and reduced gas rates, and you give us regular payments.” They gave them money and reduced gas rates, but the payments are not being made. So naturally, Gazprom says, “Guys, that won’t work.” See? A totally different story than what the West is propagating through its controlled media. Take it as an example for future analysis. http://www.tlaxcala-int.org/article.asp?reference=11635 -------------------------- The West turns everything Putin does into a negative. They should rather look into the mirror and broom in front of their own door, because there is LOTS of dirt!!!
Mere posturing by Putin, and meaningless as future predictions. he's trying to bully Ukraine into reverting back to one one of Russia's puppet states by feigning 'generosity', just as he did with other small states. You can buy the snake oil if you want, but nobody who stays up on this believes a word he says; he dreams of being another Krushchev and a new Russian Empire to lord over, while a gullible 'leftist' press fawns and goo goos over anything that can be spun as 'anti-American'. If you think letting this guy go unchallenged and expanding his power without opposition is a great thing you've never read history, especially Russian history, and how this kind of pandering leads to far bigger and deadlier wars if Putin types aren't stood up against early and strongly. You're the one being controlled by propaganda, not the other way around.
Here is a description of Putin's Foley. Back multiple decades ago the ability of one country to contain or have an edge Militarily was all about CLOSE POSITIONING OF FORCES. This is still true to a great extent as in the case of North Korea....the North has huge numbers of Artillery Pieces positioned right up to the DMZ line and since the South Korea capitol...Seoul....is so close to this line if the North were to open up with artillery huge South Korean casualties would ensue. Now...even without the use of Nuclear Weapons....if the North launched a full scale attack on the South....both the South Korean Military allied with the U.S. Military would prevail in such a war and North Korea KNOWS THIS. But it is the fact of the POSITIONING OF NORTH KOREAN ARTILLERY AND FORCES....that allows North Korea to get away with a lot of S#!% that they do as even though North Korea would lose any war....they would still do a GREAT amount of damage to the South before they finally were defeated. Well....Russia and Putin have the EXACT SAME MILITARY MENTALITY OF POSITIONING FORCES IN FORMER SOVIET STATES....and this is Putin"s eventual goal. BUT...here is PUTIN'S FOLEY. Even if it were possible for Putin to achieve this re-positioning of forces specific to creating a defensive buffer zone between Russia and NATO.....by the TIME Putin was able to force this upon former Soviet States never mind the economic hardships such a policy would cause for the Russian people.....by the TIME Putin could get this done...The United States will have finished completing the current scheduled installation and deployment of 21st Century High Technology Defensive and Offensive Weapon Systems that will once again change the face of warfare. While Putin is chasing a WWII concept of Military Force Projection and Capabilities in Asia and Europe....the United States will have COMPLETED an INTEGRATED LAND, SEA, AIR AND SPACE DIRECT ENERGY WEAPONS SYSTEM. Many such Direct Energy Systems have already been DEPLOYED on Land and on U.S. Navy Ships as well DARPA has already completed testing Air Platform D.E. Systems....and U.S. Space Command has already placed into orbit F.E.L. Targeting Satellites. This U.S. Direct Energy Weapon's System will allow the targeting and vaporizing of any target WORLDWIDE. This is NOT SCI-FI....this is NOW. In particular if members are interested look up such U.S. Direct Energy Weapons both Lethal and Non-Lethal specific to MICROWAVE EMISSIONS. There are videos on the internet showing the use of a Non-Lethal Microwave Weapon which is mounted on a vehicle and once aimed will cause any group of people to JUMP OUT OF THE WAY of the Beam. Now....imagine....while Putin attempts to preposition Russian Forces along Boarders and Lines in a WWII mentality.....and imagine...GOD FORBID....hostilities breaking out....and imagine a FREE ELECTRON LASER....being supplied power from two A1B Nuclear Reactors....being fired from a U.S. Ford Class Stealth Carrier over 2000 Miles Away.....and this F.E.L. beam strikes and reflects off a Over The Horizon Targeting Satellite using Prism Compound Insect like..."EYE'S....which can rotate and flex...and then this beam can be sent as a single beam or SENT AS A split beam targeting 100 Aircraft.....or vaporize a hole through a Submarine 800 feet below the ocean....or vaporize TANKS, MISSILES, ARTILLERY...ETC. Imagine Microwave Beaming ENTIRE AREAS. Imagine Drone Based PARTICLE BEAMS. Discover Magazine had an article that stated the New U.S. Military Free Electron Laser if supplied power by two A1B Nuclear Reactors could vaporize a hole 1 cm in diameter through 1000 FEET OF SOLID STEEL. Usually any Laser that tries to melt through thick steel causes the melting steel to refill the hole being created...but since the new F.E.L. if properly powered can generate a beam capable of exceeding SOLAR CORE TEMPERATURES.....the steel would simply VAPORIZE and the hole would not refill with molten steel. But all this tech is WORTHLESS unless you have the COMPUTER CAPABILITY capable of tracking huge numbers of targets globally moving in air, on land in or on the ocean and in space. Currently we use a networked stack of IBM Supercomputers but this is being replaced by 1000 Quibit or more Quantum Computers. In conjunction with new extremely capable radar systems....the Quantum Computation will even allow a carrier and cruiser based FEL system to track, target and vaporize incoming .50 Caliber Rounds that could be shot from small fast attack boats such as those employed by coastal Iranian Naval Forces. AboveAlpha
Depends on how you look at it. It has prevented another world war, handled the post-colonial chaos and development of independent states well, checked and blocked Soviet and Chinese imperialism, developed Japan and Germany into major economic powers and democracies, and much, much more. It has been a great positive influence, given the alternatives, all of which were far worse from any standpoint.
For as many mistakes as the U.S. has made....they have been far exceeded by the benefits. Members should ask themselves....imagine what the world would be like now if Russia or China was the sole remaining Superpower...or Hyperpower as the Chinese are now calling us? I don't know about other members but Putin and Russia invades a country when that country LEGALLY removes it's own leader from office. We are not talking about invading a nation supporting a massive Terrorist Org....we are not talking about invading a nation that is systematically ETHNICALLY CLEANSING PART OF IT'S OWN POPULATION....we are not talking about invading a Nation which has used Chemical Weapons on it's own people... ....we are talking about Russia invading the Ukraine because Putin doesn't like the fact the Leader he backed has been LEGALLY REMOVED. That would be a scary world indeed. AboveAlpha
Thanks to a free press, the U.S. makes an effort to amend its mistakes, completely unlike the vast majority of other nations. The Brits generally left their colonies in better shape than other powers did, to their credit, including us, and certainly better off than they would have achieved on their own historical paths, to name another country, also with a free press. A comparison with former British colonies with other European countries' colonies would be an interesting topic in itself. Indeed. Putin does his best to destabilize neighbors he doesn't own, then demands they turn over their assets for his 'help' in the aftermath of the instability he himself instigates. And some here have the clueless lunacy of supporting him, even some Americans who do so simply because of who is the White House, a partisan polemic tactic I'm not at all fond of; it smacks of treason, backing a corrupt, violent foreign power over your own President and weakening his options, whatever his flaws. Save it for domestic issues. They can vote for a new one in 2016 if they don't like the current one. Until then, he won the last election, so get over it.
I was attached to the marines with 1st ID for Fallujah. It was not as you're trying to describe it. The US military faced the heaviest urban combat since Hue city in the 68 tet offensive.
Taxcutter says: Thank you for your service with the First Marine Division. Considering that neither the Marine Corps nor the US Army has had any major urban combat since Hue the statement that Fallujah was "...the heaviest urban combat since Hue city in the 68 tet offensive." is hard to refute. My point is that Victor Charlie and the NVA would have exacted at least five times the casualties the enemy in Fallujah exacted. At Hue, the enemy was well-supplied, a whole lot better trained and led than the Iraqis, and had more heavy weapons. This might cause a fight, but I suspect you could make the case that today's Marines are better prepared for such combat than Vietnam-era Marines were. Certainly, Fallujah was not up to the standards of Belleau Wood, Guadalcanal, Tarawa, Iwo Jima, or Chosen Reservoir. Even the urban battle of Hue does not compare to those five Marine battles. Belleau Wood may have been the toughest of all those. There the Marines faced the cream of the German stosstruppen and stopped them cold but paid the price. That the Marines proudly refer to themselves as "devil dogs" is an acknowledgment of the prowess of a worthy foe that hung that nickname on them. The British say that if you have not fought the Germans you don't know war. "Devil dogs" is the Marines bona fide in that respect. Certainly nobody would compare the Fallujah Sunnis to the German stosstruppen, Imperial Japanese Naval infantry, the Imperial Japanese Army or the People's Liberation Army.
Phantom Fury was not a cakewalk by any means, probably the largest firefight in the entirety of the global war on terrorism. I don't think it's severity should be down played. These were entrenched insurgents, who would not willingly give up the city (Fallujah)...they had to be weeded out, building by building.
I see your point to an extent, but when you're clearing a major urban center the enemy doesn't need major weapon systems to hold up better trained an better equipped opponents. The terrain favored the insurgents from the get go, and like any military operation terrain dictates. If Fallujah would have been a cake walk, we wouldn't have had to use Abrams, Bradleys, Arty, and Air power to flush them out of buildings. Having all those assets was great, but it still took grunts clearing block by block, building by building, and room by room. Even the marines got held up in the Jolan district, that's not a knock on them, because thats where the the biggest concentration of insurgents were.
Oh yes, they just stick it in their pockets and fly away with it. Actually, less then 20% of oil from Iraq goes to North America (US, Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean). The same amount roughly is exported to South America. Over 40% goes to Asia (primarily China), and most of the rest (around 20%) goes to Europe. Sounds more like you need to stop listening to the tinfoil hat brigade.
Scale means little to those individuals involved in street level warfare. A firefight is a firefight for those in the middle of them, whether in Viet Nam, the Philippines, or an alley in Chicago, regardless if it's in a unit of 12, 1,200, or 12,000 as far as individuals go; no difference as far as intensity and adrenaline goes, and you can end up just as dead or crippled. I don't make any distinctions re that sort of thing, and don't get how anybody else can, frankly.
