Wednesday, July 23, 2008
Very Good News Regarding Afghanistan
I have to admit that I'm having trouble following the Democratic 'logic' that the landlocked, non-Arab, non-oil producing strategically insignificant country of Afghanistan is a more important front in the Jihadi War than the front in Iraq, which is the central front according to Zawahiri and bin Laden (the latter said in 2004:
But let's take the Democrats at their word and turn our attention from our extraordinary successes in Iraq to the supposedly neglected backwater of Afghanistan. How's it going there?
Pretty well, it seems. More of our soldiers are dying there, more's the pity, but just dead and wounded soldiers makes for a tricky metric--our greatest losses in the Pacific front of WWII came in the last year of the war when victory was pretty much certain. What you always need to do to win a war is to destroy either the willingness or the ability of the enemy (and preferably both) to continue to wage war against you. So, with this in mind, how's it going, really?
Well! We're killing their leaders, capturing their leaders, and causing them to resort to IEDs (generally the tactic of the loser) and car bombs, which kill fellow Afghans, further alienating the populace, which is death to an insurgency movement (just look at Iraq as a recent example).
The British spokesman Lt. Col. Robin Matthews said:
Will our forces take casualties as they cause them in the other side? Of course, but look at the proper metrics and you'll see that we're winning in both Afghanistan and Iraq. All we need to do is to continue doing what we're doing, and the Taliban's and al Qaeda's ability to launch war winning attacks will subside and end, and they will be properly consigned to the ash heap of history where they belong. Only a Democrat as commander and chief can turn such nearly sure victory into defeat.
The most important and serious issue today for the whole world is this Third World War, which the Crusader-Zionist coalition began against the Islamic nation. It is raging in the land of the two rivers. The world's millstone and pillar is in Baghdad, the capital of the caliphate.)
But let's take the Democrats at their word and turn our attention from our extraordinary successes in Iraq to the supposedly neglected backwater of Afghanistan. How's it going there?
Pretty well, it seems. More of our soldiers are dying there, more's the pity, but just dead and wounded soldiers makes for a tricky metric--our greatest losses in the Pacific front of WWII came in the last year of the war when victory was pretty much certain. What you always need to do to win a war is to destroy either the willingness or the ability of the enemy (and preferably both) to continue to wage war against you. So, with this in mind, how's it going, really?
Well! We're killing their leaders, capturing their leaders, and causing them to resort to IEDs (generally the tactic of the loser) and car bombs, which kill fellow Afghans, further alienating the populace, which is death to an insurgency movement (just look at Iraq as a recent example).
The British spokesman Lt. Col. Robin Matthews said:
The Taliban's senior leadership structure has suffered a shattering blow. They remain a dangerous enemy, but they increasingly lack strategic direction and their proposition to the Afghan people is proving ultimately negative and self-defeating.
Will our forces take casualties as they cause them in the other side? Of course, but look at the proper metrics and you'll see that we're winning in both Afghanistan and Iraq. All we need to do is to continue doing what we're doing, and the Taliban's and al Qaeda's ability to launch war winning attacks will subside and end, and they will be properly consigned to the ash heap of history where they belong. Only a Democrat as commander and chief can turn such nearly sure victory into defeat.
The photo is of a Canadian APC. Nice, eh?
Labels: Jihadi War; Afghanistan Front
# posted by Roger Fraley @ 11:11 AM 
Comments:
<< Home
Roger,
Let me remind you how Willie Sutton responded when someone asked why he robbed banks. "Because that's where the money is," he said.
So why should we be in Afghanistan and the the tribal areas of Pakistan? Because that's where the terrorists are.
See the terrorists weren't in Iraq b/f we deposed Saddasm Hussein. Yeah, yeah, he gave shelter to a few but there were no al Qaeda training camps the way there were in Afghanistan.
I guess you're right. We should just w/draw from Afghanistan and allow the warlords and the Taliban to fight it out. Let the poppy economy bloom. Let OBL rebuild his training camps.
I have said this b/f. Iraq was a patient that we put in the hospital. Al Qaeda, like an opportunistic bacteria, infected the patient. So now we have pretty much quelled the infection.
In the great scheme of things, this is progress as Iraq w/o the infectuion is much better than Iraq w/ the infection. But let's not pat ourselves on the back too much or dance the Kazachok b/c the patient is still in the hospital w/ all of the injuries and underlying problems.
T
Let me remind you how Willie Sutton responded when someone asked why he robbed banks. "Because that's where the money is," he said.
So why should we be in Afghanistan and the the tribal areas of Pakistan? Because that's where the terrorists are.
See the terrorists weren't in Iraq b/f we deposed Saddasm Hussein. Yeah, yeah, he gave shelter to a few but there were no al Qaeda training camps the way there were in Afghanistan.
I guess you're right. We should just w/draw from Afghanistan and allow the warlords and the Taliban to fight it out. Let the poppy economy bloom. Let OBL rebuild his training camps.
I have said this b/f. Iraq was a patient that we put in the hospital. Al Qaeda, like an opportunistic bacteria, infected the patient. So now we have pretty much quelled the infection.
In the great scheme of things, this is progress as Iraq w/o the infectuion is much better than Iraq w/ the infection. But let's not pat ourselves on the back too much or dance the Kazachok b/c the patient is still in the hospital w/ all of the injuries and underlying problems.
T
# posted by 
: 9:47 AM
: 9:47 AM
Unless the authorities in Pakistan give us permission (unlikely), we can't go into the tribal areas of Pakistan without taking on a nuke possessing state. Is that your real solution? (it appears to be Obama's).
And where did you get the idea I support withdrawal from Afghanistan? My post was on misplaced priorities. After we've won in the central front in Iraq we should step up the fight against them on the minor front in Afghanistan; but since they are waging war against us, it would be impolite (and anti-our security) not to return the favor.
The reason we have to step up in Afghanistan is that for a long time the Taliban was a no show at the fight. They've decided to come back to the fight and we should react rationally. Right?
Post a Comment
And where did you get the idea I support withdrawal from Afghanistan? My post was on misplaced priorities. After we've won in the central front in Iraq we should step up the fight against them on the minor front in Afghanistan; but since they are waging war against us, it would be impolite (and anti-our security) not to return the favor.
The reason we have to step up in Afghanistan is that for a long time the Taliban was a no show at the fight. They've decided to come back to the fight and we should react rationally. Right?
<< Home
