SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: JohnM who wrote (113689)9/2/2003 10:25:41 AM
From: carranza2  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
And with Clinton's military.

C'mon, John, the Afghanistan war was a walk in the park. The Taliban folded like a cheap shirt. Even a severely depleted American military would have had no problem against a horse-riding, Soviet-era equipped "force." Heck, the French could have done it given enough time.

Using the Afghanistan war as an example is a bit much.

By the time the war with Iraq came about, the Bush Administration's imprint on the military was much more noticeable.

You forget an important point: the military abhorred Clinton. His personal foibles, draft-dodging and, yes, spouse, were anathemas to military culture. Not so Bush. While I can't prove the point empirically, it is my opinion that a military force with Bush as CinC would have undoubtedly performed better than an identical one under under Clinton's command. A matter of spirit and leadership.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News