Bass Fishing Forum - Westernbass.com

Gee's I'd hate to hear all the Monday morning quarterbacking after Obama decides the fate of Afghanistan. I hope you guys don't have to wait until you get all pumped up on Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck after he makes his decision. I know whatever he does will be the exact opposite oof what they think he should do, right?

Here's my two cent's.

Being an enlisted Vietnam Era Vet, June 66 through December 68 (non combat) and living through that period, I'm afraid of this becoming another Vietnam.

Having said that, I don't think Vietnam was unwinnable, I think politicians make wars unwinnable. I think That was the case in both Korea and Vietnam.

Therefore with the correct political backing, I say send in more troops and scour the countryside - BUT!

Lets have a clear cut short term objective in mind and a cooperative mindset with what we're leaving behind. If we can't agree on the goal with whom we leave behind there's no sense wasting lives.

That makes it difficult for me because I'll never be in on those talks between the current Afghan government and the U.S.

So speak your piece now or STFU after the decision is made.

Marty, Stock, Dan,Swank - what have you to say?

I think we should get in thier,send all the troops we can,get who we have to get. When we are done send most of troops back and leave some troops thier for awhile just in case.There's know reason this should be another veitnam.even though it seems like it is for how long we have been thier.

I wish we'd never started these wars. What is happening is were helping create more hatred towards the USA and our troops just simply by being there-Bin Laden stated the reason he knocked down the towers was that we left troops in Saudi after bush 1 left a base there after we were "done" Now back to reality i don't think it's a numbers game i think we think that we can nation build and change minds but what if your house and kid were blown up what would you do. If we want our troops home, they what us out of there, people are dying it seems like a no-brainer. To me it's just a matter of how to get out when you don't liberate or out right win or loose how do you leave what you started much like Vietnam. I don't think wars are so called winnable in our times-more defense less offense. KIds not even born yet will now grow up with so much hatred for the US that never would have thought of us in that light before we started all of this.
P.S. Thank you Greg for your service!

If the people here would tolerate brutality and total destruction we could obliterate any strongholds then pull out completely. No worries about how the people of any given country are going to survive, no consideration to having a democracy or voting, no consideration for killing civilians, no fear of world opinion. If you were responsible for harboring the people who attacked us then you will be devastated and left to rebuild. Never going to happen with our current culture. We are simply not brutal enough to send a powerful message, that has been true since Viet Nam. We are way to feminized to win a war unless we are forced to defend our own soil. That is my opinion and I would just pull out all troops in Iraq and Afghanistan with a warning that we will return and destroy the countries if we need to. I have no interest in protecting the opium fields and handing hundreds of billions to drug lords and corrupt officials. If we want a fight then better be prepared to kill them all and let God sort them out.

swank wrote:Thank you Greg for your service!

Thanks, but your answer wasn't very direct. You skirted the subject in my opinion. so, bring all the troops home now and lets our collaborators in Afghanistan be butchered by the Taliban? Can you be more direct?

If you are asking me then yes I would see how motivated our collaborators were to survive. They are fine with our people taking a bullet but don't seem too excited to use the arms we are giving them to fight. My bet is that they would fight like a cornered rat and they know exactly where the Taliban are hiding. If we are not willing to support our troops with no holds barred then they will be there another 20 years getting killed with handcuffs on that we locked.

Didn't really see a specific question-you just asked for an opinion. War is such an easy thing to decide. Is it more troops vs. the same amount-i'm not sure we even have the capability.

End this war! If we could go back I would say focus on Afghanistan and get the job done. But now that things have spread out I say we regroup and focus on the US. It amazes me that we go and fight these wars for countries and we have have sooo many problems at home. Who are we to tell another country what to do and how to do it. We ourselves are in such a mess.
There are soo many problems we could fix here at home with that money.

This is a tough one for BHO because he is now being forced to demonstrate some actual leadership.

A good start would be to abandon the foolish attacks on FOX and other critics and the incessant "it's Bush's fault" blame game that this adminstration resorts to continually.

I really like what Charles Krauthammer said recently:

"I want to point out one thing about what Obama had said when he talked about “the long years of drift.â€

I think BHO should listen to his commanders in the theater verbatim and provide them all the support and help they request. They know how to fight and win, let them do their job. I trust their judgement a gazillion times more than BHO's. His judgement so far has been utterly abysmal, especially in regards to what he championed as a "war of necessity".

If we listened to all the commanders of the past we would be in all sorts of wars. IF Obama says we stay then yes he should listen to his commander. But I think he needs to address if we should even still be there.

Greg_Cornish wrote: Gee's I'd hate to hear all the Monday morning quarterbacking after Obama decides the fate of Afghanistan.

Yeah I remember all the monday morning quartetrbacking all to well.



My 02

I'm not privileged to enough pertinent information to make that kind of call.
That’s why we have Generals and Admirals of the armed forces and a Commander in Chief.
The problem I have with Obama is his inability or unwillingness to be a Commander in Chief and make a commitment and follow the advice of his general.
I do wish the politicians would stay out of the strategic battle decisions and let the military do what they do best.

Marty, Stock, Dan,Swank - what have you to say?

I'm a little hurt for not being invited to the party Greg

I guess I'll crash.

I heard this http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript ... =113582498 interview on NPR when it came out and learned more about Afghanistan in a few minutes than I had from any other source since we invaded.

This quote stood out:

Mr. DAVID LOYN (Author): Afghanistan is a country mostly of deserts and mountains, a very small part of the land is irrigable agricultural land. And all invaders have found it a really difficult place to hold. The British general, famous General Wellington at the beginning of the 19th century, said a small army would not be not be able to hold the country and a large army would starve.

So did this one:

And this has been one of the constant problems in Afghanistan right from the beginning. Afghans tend to ally against a foreign enemy when the enemy comes in. But then they tend to fall apart like sand when you try and govern them from inside, and many Afghan kings have discovered that.

I might buy the book to read the rest :David Loyn is author of "In Afghanistan: 200 years of British, Russian and American Occupation."


I don't know what our "leaders" know but from historical accounts it doesn't look like our involvement there will do anything but transfer even more money from our children's pockets into the military-industrial complexes vacation homes, kill our and their people and provide excuses to spill evermore into Pakistan, possibly destabilizing them to the point where we "have to assume control" of them to prevent their nukes from going missing.

Not good.

Anybody with a weapon is not a civilian – the uniform of the enemy is the gun!

That is precisely the argument they will be using on us should we ever revolt here Marty. I don't want to lend any credence to that line of thinking. Considering the Afghan's history of feuding I would think they have legitimate needs for protecting themselves, just like we do here. They are not all suicide bombers. Even the suicide bombers are not all volunteers.

Vince E wrote:
I'm a little hurt for not being invited to the party Greg

I guess I'll crash.

If you are going to crash lets hear YOUR opinion not just some regurgitating. Lay it out.

My lack of enough knowledge would make any opinions I have negligible at best, dangerous at worst.

That said I am leaning towards Ron Paul's statement "We marched right in and we can march right out again."

I don't think anything good will come from continued involvement there. We are already driving them into nuclear armed Pakistan. If we did anything more it should be to try and drive them back out of Pakistan and then leave.


A horrible mess would be left behind but I don't think that could be avoided no matter what we did. I voted for the maniac that did this and I will have to live with that knowledge. Never again for me. If there aren't ships off our shores with planes and troops headed our way we should save our men and our money and stay the hell out of it.

If Americans don't want to have to live with knowing what we did to so many innocent people then we should be very, very hesitant to ever wage a war. That should be the lesson we all take from this and we should think back to it next time someone starts beating the war drums to stimulate a sense of nationalism and popularity for their political party.


What about 911?
That was indeed the most spectacular thing to happen to our civilians in our history, if you exclude the civil war that is.
It wasn't the worst thing to happen to us though. The worst thing to happen to us was when our Republic was subverted by the creation of a central bank. It just wasn't as graphic.

They never would have got those planes near the towers if our people weren't such frightened sheep to begin with. Do you think a plane loaded with Israeli's would let them get that far?
We just wait for our Govt. to save us, just like we are trained to.
Rather than spending our blood and money going out and attacking the wrong people we should concentrate our efforts on building up the independent resourcefulness of our people.
At the same time we should put a stop to our fascist/corporatist union of elite business and Govt. from expanding its plundering empire around the world under the lies that we are spreading democracy. There is a reason why they chose the center of our financial world to attack.
All of our federal "aid" to other counties comes with strings attached just like it does to our own states.
Our people are the only ones so naive as not to see what we really are. With that in mind it's really no wonder some people might hate us enough to attack us and when we attack back we just create more extremists.

Stop the war and for those so inclined ask for forgiveness and the wisdom to never make these kinds of mistakes again.

Thanks, good enough. Now that you're in you can join the rest of us Monday Morning Quarterbacks. We all have to live with what we thought except for this guy who reserves the right to listen to Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck first before he starts pissing and moaning. He probably thinks those two are privileged enough.

2ndsuks wrote:
I'm not privileged to enough pertinent information to make that kind of call.

First, give the commanders the troops they are asking for. Then, give the boys a clear objective, ie: who, what, and where are are the targets. If it is Taliban they are looking for, and terrorist cells within that country, then so be it....get the job done.
Second, they already know the bad guys are running next door to Pakistan to hide. We either get what we need from the Pakistan government, which is complete and total cooperation to go up to that side of the border, and root out the same folks mentioned in the previous paragraph, OR we stop all aide and monies flowing their direction. Period.
Thirdly, a six month, and one year assesment of what those things are actually doing, on the ground, needs to be inacted. We dont put business plans in place, then let them run willy nilly, hoping that they work......you monitor and check on the efforts.
Fourth, a comprehesive plan, to help the locals in Afganistan, will be the only way to obtain total victory. Trying to force a democracy on a country that is 1,000 years behind will not work, so, work with what you have.....help the local tribes, governments, and peoples.....with clean water supplies, schools, road building, and such, as you clear each village and area. If they hate us as bad as the Taliban, then a vacumm will be created, which will be filled by the next radical group to come along there.
So there it is, set a military objective and let the boys achieve it. Force Pakistan to put up or shut up. Recheck your work. Help the peoples who are inevitably left in the wake of this conflict.
Sort of crap or get off the pot.

Vince E wrote:

Anybody with a weapon is not a civilian – the uniform of the enemy is the gun!

That is precisely the argument they will be using on us should we ever revolt here Marty. I don't want to lend any credence to that line of thinking. Considering the Afghan's history of feuding I would think they have legitimate needs for protecting themselves, just like we do here. They are not all suicide bombers. Even the suicide bombers are not all volunteers.

Vince,

We are talking about the War in the Middle East (The Enemy) not Americans! The problem with Ron Paul’s types is they are fiscally conservative but weak on defense. We can’t live as Isolationists and expect our enemies to leave us alone!

I don’t know but I’m assuming you have never walk point, been in harms way or shlt in your pants because of a fire fight! I’m assuming you are the type that would get slap in the face and you would want to talk about it! It take two willing parties to come to an agreement and if one does not want to – there will be no agreement no matter how well your talk - unless you live under their rules – are you willing to do that.

Why is it you want to give our constitution rights to others, you want to be a Nation builder? If they wanted them then they should have enact them but they chose the way they live. I’m offering a way for they will not get confused with the enemy and protection and all they have to do is lay there weapons down!

We are not fighting a uniform Army and the terrorist hide behind their fellow citizens. If those citizens chose to hind the enemy then they are just as guilty and if they are innocence then they should turn over the terrorist and move out of harm way. If they chose not to, so be it!

I would rather destroy then lose one my men! I would not put one of my men in harms way to protect the enemy populaces. That is why men will follow me into war and not you! With your attitude we have already lost the war before even getting involved.

Vince E wrote:My lack of enough knowledge would make any opinions I have negligible at best, dangerous at worst.

Marty wrote:
Vince,

We are talking about the War in the Middle East (The Enemy) not Americans! The problem with Ron Paul’s types is they are fiscally conservative but weak on defense.

They aren't weak on defense, They just aren't strong on offense. After listening to Scott Ritter on the radio this morning, I'm having a change of heart about bringing the troops home. After 911 he Taliban was asked to hunt down Osama Bin Laden. They said they would but wanted the U.S. to provide them with the proof that it was actually Bin Laden's fault. They wanted to review the intelligence. The U.S. refused to share the intelligence. The Taliban declined. The Taliban were not terrorist. They were the legitimized government (however screwed up that was) that grew out of years of war with the Soviet Union. For every 1 taliban or insurgent we kill, we kill 150 innocent people. Do you think we'll ever establish a legitimate pro-American government under circumstances like that?

I've change my mind. I say, pull out.

Marty wrote:What color burka (sp) are you going to put on your wife?

You need to make up you mind Marty. Are we over there so Afghan women can run around in bathing suits are to fight terrorism?

In several cases we have bombed wedding parties and gatherings with drones flown by someone in Arizona thinking celebration gunfire was aimed at drones. We have mistakenly bombed villages.

Our methods of war are building terrorism. We are fighting a war based on revenge - not common sense - and killing a lot of people who never tried to harm us.

If you ask a military man, "what to we need to win this war," what will he say? "We need more men!"

That's all they know. They are trained in warfare. They aren't trained in negotiation and diplomacy.

And yes, when I feel someone who's smarter than me or has more experience in certain areas than me has enlightened me, I will change my mind. So far you haven't enlightened me.

Greg_Cornish wrote: Thanks, good enough. Now that you're in you can join the rest of us Monday Morning Quarterbacks. We all have to live with what we thought except for this guy who reserves the right to listen to Rush Limbaugh and Glen Beck first before he starts pissing and moaning. He probably thinks those two are privileged enough.

2ndsuks wrote:

LOL

Truth be told Greg, I don't listen to Rush, sorry!
I do watch Glenn Beck at times and enjoy his point of view, he’s a libertarian, I’m an independent conservative so we do not agree on everything.
If you had asked about my idealogical view of going to war, I would have jumped at that chance but a contractor from California talking military strategy is silly and senseless.
It’s simple, General McChrystal asked President Obama for a minimum of 40,000 more troops, if the president grants his request (instead of stalling like he is) and lets the military do their job they will both go down in history as brilliant if they succeed, if they fail, history will not be so kind, I hate to break it to ya but it goes with the job.

Hey guys, I was just as gung ho about the war when we were drumming it up as you guys are. I have just been studying a lot lately and and have come to the conclusion that every war we have been in short of the one in 1776 has been based on lies by a Govt. run by bankers seeking more control. Nothing motivates the people to give all of their money and freedom to the Govt like a real scary monster lurking out there.

With that said once we are in, loyalty to our men is important. But so is exposing the truth behind what has been going on. And to stop it from happening again.
We created those "enemies" with our foreign policy. Its the same as our domestic policy- our elite steals everything it can from the subjects and then rams socialist laws down their throats, like it or not. How do you know they might not be more inclined for peace if we told Haliburton and friends to stay the hell away from them?

Why the hell would I want to be a "Nation Builder"? Quite the opposite. I'd like to see a few deconstructed, bloodlessly if at all possible. A Republic is not the same as a Nation. It doesn't carry the same foolish pride, just a thoughtful sense of protecting liberty from would be tyrants. The "pride of nationalism" is something that a player can use to steer you around.

I don't expect some of you to get this because you will never allow the thought to cross your mind that some of the beliefs you have held close for decades might not be true. Might be based on lies and deception. It is humbling when you realize this. I know.

All war is bad for liberty. Bad for capitalism. Good for crony monopolism but bad for true free market capitalism, the kind you and I can engage in without selling our souls to the bankers.
The truth is, if anyone wanting to wage war on any large scale had to "pay cash" for it it would never happen. The only reason large conflicts are possible is because central banks around the world issue "credit cards" in the form inflatable currency to their Govts.
If we had to finance the conflicts we are currently engaged in by paying them off right now with tax dollars how long do you think we could keep it up? Cut up the "credit cards" of the worlds govts. and the world will naturally become a much more peaceful place.

No Marty, I haven't had the "privilege" of a firefight but I don't back away from oppression of any type, be it from our "leaders" or some bully trying to recharge his "bad" image. If need be they will see just how fast I get to my Sig. I have looked up the barrels of of few guns in my day though. I know what its like wondering what the other guy is going to do.
However the way things are headed I don't think I'll make it through the rest of my life without seeing at least one firefight. I would advise anyone not well armed to get so soon.

Greg_Cornish wrote:You need to make up you mind Marty. Are we over there so Afghan women can run around in bathing suits are to fight terrorism?

There you go Greg – who said anything about putting Afghan women in bathing suits – I have not change the subject from fighting terrorism – you liberals have selective hearing!

Greg_Cornish wrote:In several cases we have bombed wedding parties and gatherings with drones flown by someone in Arizona thinking celebration gunfire was aimed at drones. We have mistakenly bombed villages.

First the remote control of our drones is not operated out of Arizona but Florida. Need to get your facts correct and it that fact is incorrect I have to assume bombing wedding parties and gatherings is also incorrect!

Greg_Cornish wrote:Our methods of war are building terrorism. We are fighting a war based on revenge - not common sense - and killing a lot of people who never tried to harm us.

Again Greg you are adding words to the subject that I did not use! You are going to have the development of new terrorist no matter what you do. Don’t you understand, it is not how we fight the war that makes them hate us – it is we are not Muslim and under their rules that makes them hate us? You think this war just started in the last 233 years – it has been going on since the fall of Jerusalem in or about 500 AD. You Liberals lie and turn the truth around to fit your agenda.

No Greg they are not fighting a war of revenge – the enemy is - that is why you get crazed men to fly planes into buildings.

Greg_Cornish wrote:If you ask a military man, "what to we need to win this war," what will he say? "We need more men!"

Greg, when was the last time you talked to a Grunt besides you already answered your own question when you said:

Greg_Cornish wrote:I think politicians make wars unwinnable. I think That was the case in both Korea and Vietnam.

It is the same here in Afghanistan – let the men fight the war without worrying about going to jail each time they shoot their weapon.

Then you back up that answer with your statement:

Greg_Cornish wrote:“Therefore with the correct political backing, I say send in more troops and SCOUR the countryside.â€

I don't typically join in on these kind of debates, but this one has rubbed me wrong. I have spent four of the last five years in Saudi, Iraq, and Afghanistan.

I don't pretend to be a political genuis, but I will lay out a couple of things I don't think have been stressed enough. Leaving without finishing the job we started will be a insult to the ultimate sacrifice that many soldiers have made. Also not mentioned very often are those who have survived but have been wounded. Both of these groups include friends of mine. From first hand experience I can assure you that now that we have started this it must be finished or we will leave many that have helped us to the wolves and allow these terrorists an enormous sense of achievement and confidence. I believe this would result in more incidents on American soil.

I can also tell you that being in the military with both presidents in office has been a real eye opener. With Bush you could feel the support, including videos of him addressing all of us at our predeployment meetings essentially letting the troops know that they had the support of the country and commander in chief. With Obama it has not been this way and you can see and feel the frustration in our military leaders. Press leaks should not be necessary to get a president to address requests.

I sincerely respect peoples opinions on this subject and attribute the ability of everyone to express them on living in the greatest country in the world.

So to answer the topic of the thread, I say that we do what is necessary to finish the job. Resolve to not forget why we are there or what we are doing is necessary and asking a month from now why we are still at it doesn't cut the mustard. What should be asked is are we moving towards our goals and if not what do our people need to do so.

As I said I'm not a political debater, but this is my .02

You are a better debater than you give yourself credit for.

Your points are duly noted sir and I'm sure nobody here would mean any disrespect for those of you putting yourselves in harms way for what you believe to be the right thing to do. Quite the contrary, thank you for your service.
I know that you don't want everything you and your friends have given to be in vain. I don't want that either.
I would however hope that if a commander in chief, even one who is currently praising your actions, should start giving orders that become increasingly more difficult to find the merit in that you would think twice before carrying out said orders.

Your experience would qualify you to answer a question I have.
Are most Muslims, in your experience, prone to the kind of violence that we fear here in the US or is it a high profile minority?

Do you think the average Muslim capable of coexisting with the average Christian or even agnostic?

This is a hard question to answer. Everytime you think that you have met nice people they take a pop shot at you later on.

Actually the real answer to question number one is that they do not view the violence the same as us. I do not believe the majority would take part in such actions, but very few would be upset by them. This being more so the more traditional their beliefs are.

For your second question, this is also tough to answer. To answer per their religious beliefs the answer is no. That being said, many will peacefully coexist with christians, but anyone that is agnostic would not be approved of or tolerated. You must also understand that many of the people that we are dealing with are very traditional, behind the times not being a stretch at all. Many places we went didn't even have electricity. In other words, there are very few outside influences. The young people from these areas are conditioned from the start on how evil folks with beliefs like us are. They do not put the same value on life as we do, I saw a horrible accident where a truck with several workers in the back had rolled. The people in vehicles around them were helping each other huck the bodies into the ditch so that they could continue on their way. One of these guys was still alive! Others were taking their shoes and trying them on. This is a pretty harsh story to tell, but I'm just trying to show that our beliefs couldn't be any further apart and that the average person from this area loses no sleep if something happens to you or me.