|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events Middle East Troop surge in Afhganistan???|
Go
|
New
|
Find
|
Notify
|
Tools
|
Reply
|
|
Member |
http://www.navytimes.com/news/2008/01/army_afghanpolicy_080129w/
I fear we will need much...much more than a surge in Afghanistan....and I am sickended by the lack of help coming from NATO!  |
||
|
|
Member |
Do you forget YOU are part of NATO?  |
|||
|
|
Member |
no, i don't think Goondawg has forgotten that. After all, he is American, which does the bulk of NATO's dirty work. When the Serbs were chewing up the moslems back in the mid-90's, in Europe's front yard, it was primarily US airpower that changed the Serbs mind. French, UK, Dutch and Danish contributions cannot be discounted, but why not the Germans, Italians, Spanish etc.? The same thing is going on in a-stan now. The US should have known the germans were NOT gonna fight. So, they stay up north, handing out blankets, social workers in uniform. They go back to thier barracks, drink beer and play cards. They have reneged on thier NATO commitments. This is NOT a peacekeeping op. Its a battle with islamofacists who wish to impose thier will on people who do not want them. NATO is in danger of becoming an org. with no credibility. 4 members fight, 4 don't. there are troops from non-NATO countries fighting. Australia, Poland have sent troops to FIGHT. The Germans have to make a decision. The other Nato Generals, Ministers, have publicly chastised them, but privately they are being told wat it looks like. They were hesitant to allow a 350 troop QRF to cover the Danes when they rotate. Germany's pols are gutless, and NATO will become a paper tiger. Take a look at DerSpiegelOnline. They are at a crossroads.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
This strategy was espoused by the same think tank that recommended we do it in Iraq. The troops are already there, they are led by gutless politicians and disdain for the US. NATO is an alliance. An attack on 1 member is an attack on the alliance as a whole. There are some that are reneging on thier Nato commitments. This is NOT a peacekeeping mission, its a combat op. Gates is right, it looks like a 2 tiered alliance, 4 or 5 that fight and die, and 4 or 5 that are actually social workers in military uniforms. DISGRACE. The Germans became an economic powerhouse while the US spent billions on defense. It would have been American blood spilled 1st if the Soviets decided they wanted to unite germany-under a communist flag. NATO is losing credibility, and CANNOT lose in A-stan if NATO is to survive. Art. 5, NATO charter...seems some members have a hard time finding it in the NATO charter.
 |
|||
|
|
New Member |
some of the countries do have relations with other countries. their now gonna ruin their business with those countries. they fight their own battles as well. that's international politics for ya. to also answer the questions of non nato they are allies to Nato. just in case you didnt know that. but hey it was our fight techinically we should be there full force. but were stuck in bush's operation in iraq. so techinically they dont need to do sh%t. |
|||
|
|
Member |
Dawg, do not expect much help from Europe, it ain't coming. If the French, now that the scumbag Chirac is gone, under Sarkozy would commit 1,000 or more, it would give the Canadians a lift. France spends the most of any European country on defense, so they have the muscle. NATO cannot fail here. It would lose ALL credibility, and wat would be the sense of staying in an alliance that in REALITY only exists on paper. I wish for the same as you. We cannot fail. |
|||
|
Super Member |
LOL...only took you 3 months to respond to gd's post.
|
|||
|
|
Member |
LOL!! Yup, must have been something in my coffee that morning...so I responded. Better late than never  I wonder who the p-stani's will be using those F-16's against? That is a reward for a GOOD ally.  |
|||
|
|
Member |
It just keeps getting more unbelievable as events unfold, and truths are found out. Does the US gov. even know wat kind of people in p-stan they will be dealing with? Its like a bad B movie...the T-ban/AQ now are being protected by the P-stani's. So we reward them with a couple sqaudrons of F-16's...wonder how India feels?
|
|||
|
|
Super Member |
<--- UNDESERVED!!
Hopefully paranoid enough to buy 126 upgraded models.  |
|||
|
|
Suspended Member. To be re-instated only by Forums Administrator. Silent_Surface Lead Moderator Hot Topics |
If they sent another 200k troops to Afghanistan they would still be chasing ghosts. It's really not a nation but an impossible collection of militant groups with territories and warlords one after the other strecthing the entire length and width of the country. It was unwinnable 2 thousand years ago and it is unwinnable today, especially when using conventional means. The romans didn't stay away from this area for no reason, even they knew how impossible it was. These are people who have been engaged in warfare for 5 thousand years and who thrive on it. Only the genius of Alexander along with his diplomatic skills were able to get the job done. There is no one today who can match such skills or can do such a thing.
|
|||
|
|
Suspended Member. To be re-instated only by Forums Administrator. Silent_Surface Lead Moderator Hot Topics |
Not happening. India is most likely going to purchase SU-31's from Russia. India doesn't feel secure knowing that the U.S. can flip a switch and prevent them from having full effectiveness with f-16's (source codes and stuff like that). In fact, I don't even think that india HAS any f-16's, so purchasing them would be costly and stupid for them being that the infrastructure to support f-16's may not even exist. The f-16 at this point in time as a purchase by ANY nation who looks for technological edge, could only be considered as "stop-gap" solution anyway since there are other aircraft such as the EF, F-35 and the Russian SU-37 which are next generation and superior and are either on the scene now or will be on the scene in the near future. |
|||
|
|
Super Member |
Flawed synopsis...the US (and NATO) is not trying to conquer Afghanistan. We are only trying to help buy time for the majority of Afghanis, so they can eventually gain control over and marginalize the influence of the terrorist groups, war lords and their Taliban allies. |
|||
|
|
Suspended Member. To be re-instated only by Forums Administrator. Silent_Surface Lead Moderator Hot Topics |
"gain control"?, never happen, ever. Which now I would once again point you to my original statement , which still holds true--------------------------------------------> If they sent another 200k troops to Afghanistan they would still be chasing ghosts. It's really not a nation but an impossible collection of militant groups with territories and warlords one after the other strecthing the entire length and width of the country. It was unwinnable 2 thousand years ago and it is unwinnable today, especially when using conventional means. The romans didn't stay away from this area for no reason, even they knew how impossible it was. These are people who have been engaged in warfare for 5 thousand years and who thrive on it. Only the genius of Alexander along with his diplomatic skills were able to get the job done. There is no one today who can match such skills or can do such a thing. ENJOY! |
|||
|
|
Super Member |
Yes...they will, eventually.  |
|||
|
|
Suspended Member. To be re-instated only by Forums Administrator. Silent_Surface Lead Moderator Hot Topics |
I doubt it, it's been almost 7 years since NATO got involved there and hardly a dent has been made, so far, you are incorrect and I don't see your assertion that they will somehow "gain control" over the warlords all over the Afghanistan. It hasn't happened yet and it WILL not happen. Book it |
|||
|
|
Super Member |
Greece is nothing more than a second-rate tourist destination with lazy sheep herders, fat women and no zero influence on the world stage. Accept it.
|
|||
|
|
Suspended Member. To be re-instated only by Forums Administrator. Silent_Surface Lead Moderator Hot Topics |
We don't need to have influence upon the entire world, only the Balkan region, which we have more influence than anyone else .....please doubt it so I can disprove you again
|
|||
|
|
Member |
Sarkozy is making noise about French deployments, I hope he has the guts to deploy a substantial amount of troops to A-stan. Surge? Not really. More of an infusion, that is badly needed.
|
|||
|
|
Super Member |
 |
|||
|
| Powered by Eve Community | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
Military.com Forums Hot Topics & Current Events Middle East Troop surge in Afhganistan???
