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: cnyndwllr who wrote (271679)12/1/2009 7:11:04 PM
From: Hawkmoon3 Recommendations  Read Replies (1) of 281500
 
I'M ASSERTING THAT WE CANNOT SPEND ENOUGH MONEY TO SAFEGUARD THE LIVES OF OUR SOLDIERS.

It's called war Ed. We didn't have enough money to safeguard the lives of our soldiers who stormed Normandy Beach, or fought in the Battle of the Bulge either.

. WE DON'T HAVE THAT MUCH MONEY AND MONEY WON'T PROTECT THEM WHEN THE ENEMY ENJOYS TOO MUCH SUPPORT AMONG VARIOUS AFGHAN FACTIONS

Then you act to undermine that support by freeing them from Taliban domination, or buying them off to flip sides.

These are tribal people Ed. And even within the Pashtun nation, there are tribal differences and rivalries. We must use that in our favor and prevent the Taliban theology from morphing into a nationalist ideology.

Their ideas are NOT too strong. IF they were, then we would not be seeing Iraq stabilizing to the extent that it has (although certainly not perfect).

People don't want to live under the Taliban form of extremist Islam. But if they don't have means to repel or confront them, they will say "Inshallah" and join in.

If you REALLY think their ideas are that strong, then you should only be even MORE CONVINCED that we must oppose them at every turn. Because a weak idea is not going to proliferate and spread. A strong one, such as global Jihad and restoration of the Caliphate WILL PROLIFERATE to the point where the costs we incur NOW will pale in contrast to what we have to spend in blood and treasure in the future.

WE HAVE TO DEFEND AGAINST ATTACKS THAT CAN BE CHEAPLY AND SAFELY LAUNCHED AT TIMES OF THEIR CHOOSING, PLACES OF THEIR CHOOSING AND THROUGH METHODS THEY CHOOSE

How are we going to defend our own homeland against the WMD equivalent of IEDs? A container ship, or cargo airliner, containing chemical or biological weapons, neither of which are particularly difficult for a minor nation to organize and create can easily slip into a US port, or airspace, and kill more Americans than the number of soldiers who have died in BOTH Iraq and Afghanistan.

We can have American Muslims, like Hasan, believers in these "strong ideas", storming through shopping malls around America, killing Americans..

One thing I can guarantee you, given the psychology of Islamic militants, is that they only respect strength. If you show weakness, you're sending a signal to them that "Allah is with them".

The only way, unfortunately, that we can deal with them is to defeat them with ideas and military force, and a subtle psyops effort aimed at spreading the belief that their repeated defeats in the face of the "crusaders" is a sign that they do not have the favor of Allah.

If we do it your way, we might as well just hoist up the white flag from 1600 Pennsylvania with a crescent moon and star flag flying above it.

You might want to quit, but they don't. And if you leave Afghanistan with our tail between our legs, we'll face the same problem the Soviets did.

Hawk
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext