Quote:
Originally Posted by Slims
While I agree we lack the national will to win this war, we have more than enough troops...
|
IIRC the Soviet Union had well over 120,000 troops deployed in Afghanistan and they still lost. Even with the 30,000 troops President Obama is sending, we'll still only have about 98,000 troops and don't forget that we're also facing enemies in Pakistan. I respect the US military's ability to get things done (to a point), but we'd need more than 120,000 troops to see a likely victory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slims
On another note, the NA was not winning the war against the taliban. They had been pushed back into mountain strongholds but were not in control of any of the major cities (Kabul, Jalalabad, Kandahar, etc). They *may* have been able to outlast the taliban, but like now the taliban was receiving outside support.
|
They had moved out of the mountains, they weren't being pushed back into them. Like the Taliban, the NA had outside help (word is, from the US).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slims
By pulling out now we would save some money but would face negative second and third order effects which, IMHO greatly outweigh the money and lives spent on this war.
|
I'm afraid I don't see how anything that happens in Afghanistan could end up costing the US that kind of money considering that once the US pulls out the Taliban will have to face the much stronger Afghanistan government we've left in place. As I said, there would be civil war, tying up the Taliban for a very long time.