JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
Originally posted by: Hayabusa Rider
The greatest chance Afghanistan had for freedom was when we went in originally. Rumsfeld was so enthralled by technology he believed we didn't need a larger force to secure the country. Rumsfeld was calling the shots, so the number of troops were enough to "win", but not achieve lasting results.
Because the administration put Saddam at a higher priority than Al Qaeda, resources were spent in Iraq. I believe that a 500k force along with all the fancy bells and whistles Rummy was so fond of would be necessary to rout the Taliban and the others.
Once that happened, an understanding of social and political dynamics could have secured the peace, however we assumed that they were Little Americans just waiting to burst forth like tulips in spring, which was complete horseshit.
Now there is no military option which will work because the Taliban is firmly entrenched and has firmed up ties with the local controlling powers. They might be chased out, but not the Taliban are the "good guys" and we aren't.
I can't think of an administration less capable of understanding war and it's consequences than the last one. An eight year train wreck.
I don't know what to say other than that you are entirely correct in your assessments. ALL of them including the last line but i would like to include the UK gov in that too. Especially Blair who was for the UK what Karzai is for Afghanistan. (or Brown for that matter)
