Thread: Taliban attacks in Afghanistan target NATO, embassies, parliament

ahoy eohrnburger,

In a wave of attacks that rolled through the diplomatic and government centers in the Afghan capital and struck at least three eastern provinces as well, the Taliban on Sunday launched a complex assault using teams of suicide bombers and gunmen who held buildings for hours after the first explosions.

A statement by the Taliban called the attacks the start of their spring offensive, adding: “It is also a message to those foreign commanders who claim that the Taliban have lost their momentum. We have just showed that we are here and we can stage an attack whenever we want.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/wo...l.html?_r=1&hp

matey, i know the US military hath never lost a war ('tis always the fault 'o the US civilians that we lose - whilst should we emerge victorious, all credit goes the military) but thar be blame all 'round fer this decade long project;

1) first and foremost, the US public fer sanctionin' such an adventure and then ignorin' it whilst it descended into disaster.

2) tied fer first would be President George W Bush fer initiatin' the conflict and the manner it was fought.

3) President Obama fer doublin' down in Afghanistan - whether he was cleanin' up Mr. Bush's mess, or stickin' to his campaign rhetoric (afghanistan was portrayed as the good war), or he honestly believes purgin' Afghanistan 'o the Taliban be a critical lynchpin in the "war on terror"...the President hath been a failure in this endeavor.

the United States should just surrender in Afghanistan and retreat. aye, i know this will severely damage our credibility abroad when dealin' with revolutionaries and freedom fighters that we try to nuture and support - and it be an international embaressment to both our military and the strength 'o US foreign policy...

...but who cares, aye?

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy eohrnburger,

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/16/wo...l.html?_r=1&hp

matey, i know the US military hath never lost a war ('tis always the fault 'o the US civilians that we lose - whilst should we emerge victorious, all credit goes the military) but thar be blame all 'round fer this decade long project;

1) first and foremost, the US public fer sanctionin' such an adventure and then ignorin' it whilst it descended into disaster.

2) tied fer first would be President George W Bush fer initiatin' the conflict and the manner it was fought.

3) President Obama fer doublin' down in Afghanistan - whether he was cleanin' up Mr. Bush's mess, or stickin' to his campaign rhetoric (afghanistan was portrayed as the good war), or he honestly believes purgin' Afghanistan 'o the Taliban be a critical lynchpin in the "war on terror"...the President hath been a failure in this endeavor.

the United States should just surrender in Afghanistan and retreat. aye, i know this will severely damage our credibility abroad when dealin' with revolutionaries and freedom fighters that we try to nuture and support - and it be an international embaressment to both our military and the strength 'o US foreign policy...

...but who cares, aye?

aye.

- MeadHallPirate

The US always likes to extend its control and lost sight of the real purpose revenge. This need to pretend we are spreading democracy when attempting to control other cultures is foolish. Boom goes the bombs ... your repayment for helping with 9/11. See yah next time.

Originally Posted by michael h

The US always likes to extend its control and lost sight of the real purpose revenge. This need to pretend we are spreading democracy when attempting to control other cultures is foolish. Boom goes the bombs ... your repayment for helping with 9/11. See yah next time.

ahoy Michael H,

i pretty much agree, matey...yet look at the mass media, Foxnews fer example; this be today's front page on thar site -
Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos.

the attacks in Afghanistan barely merits a mention.

a humiliation fer the US military and an embaressment fer Obama administration (and Mrs. Clinton), yet hardly a ripple here in the United States.

'tis all so wretched.

gettin' us into a war in Afghanistan with such ill defined and absurd metrics fer "victory" makes President George W Bush the worst president in me lifetime, and imma surprised that our continuein' meanderin' course in Afghanistan doesn't dominate the newscycle - 'cept imma not surprised, because Americans do not, in general, really care about the fate 'o thar armed forces.

yarrrr!

- MeadHallPirate

Of all the things that make you think Bush is the worst President ever, it is because he went to war in Afghanistan?

By the way in your post above you blamed him for initiating the conflict to start with but didn't the war that he wage base itself as a retaliation for the original attacks waged by Al Qaeda, harbored and supported by the government of Afghanistan? Doesn't sound like Bush started it to me.

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Michael H,

i pretty much agree, matey...yet look at the mass media, Foxnews fer example; this be today's front page on thar site -
Fox News - Breaking News Updates | Latest News Headlines | Photos & News Videos.

the attacks in Afghanistan barely merits a mention.

a humiliation fer the US military and an embaressment fer Obama administration (and Mrs. Clinton), yet hardly a ripple here in the United States.

'tis all so wretched.

gettin' us into a war in Afghanistan with such ill defined and absurd metrics fer "victory" makes President George W Bush the worst president in me lifetime, and imma surprised that our continuein' meanderin' course in Afghanistan doesn't dominate the newscycle - 'cept imma not surprised, because Americans do not, in general, really care about the fate 'o thar armed forces.

yarrrr!

- MeadHallPirate

Don't know if the headlines changed but apparently the prostitution scandal is really important. Always a dick in the crowd that don't want to pay his "services" bill.

I always felt the Afghan solution was revenge ... not control. We bomb the shit out of you for 3 months ... stop ... come back next year and do the same thing again. Film everywhere showing death and destruction ... satisfaction accomplished ... allow people to control their own culture. On the other hand if the war continues as it has ... defense contractors will make oodles of cash. Leave these people alone ... if they want to be Taliban again fine ... if they invite Al Qaeda in again to terrorize America ... nuke them 5 or 6 times to send a more vengeful message.

Originally Posted by michael h

I always felt the Afghan solution was revenge ... not control.

hail oh Michael H,

the motivation that provided the support 'o the American public was indeed revenge.

the impetus fer the Bush adminstration to put our forces thar and thar manner 'o goin' about thar business in Afghanistan mystifies me, though.

the complete disinterest among the american public 'o how badly we're flounderin' o'er thar completely baffles me. it dissapoints me, aye.

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

hail oh Michael H,

the motivation that provided the support 'o the American public was indeed revenge.

the impetus fer the Bush adminstration to put our forces thar and thar manner 'o goin' about thar business in Afghanistan mystifies me, though.

the complete disinterest among the american public 'o how badly we're flounderin' o'er thar completely baffles me. it dissapoints me, aye.

- MeadHallPirate

The American public's understanding of motivation is somewhat naive. We are spreading democracy ... woo hoo ... forcing it on other cultures ... and profiting our M/I complex. I recently blathered on about the US's abandonment of Taiwan in favor of communist China. Agreeing Taiwan should be a communist province as opposed to a democratic country. Of course this sellout came with the China card and US card against the Soviets and also access to cheap labor for US corps. The spread of democracy through control by our military ... unless of course that democracy is inconvenient and unprofitable.

OK. Suppose the coalition forces withdraw from Afghanistan. The Taliban would move in, topple the Afghan government and re-establish their previous regime complete with all the human rights violations, and probably launch another 9/11 style attack on US soil or at least US interests abroad. We'd get pulled back in all over again, and would have lost the progress (and ground) gained at great expense.

No, I'm thinking that as history has taught us, that it's easy to get into Afghanistan, but very difficult, and expensive to get out. I'm thinking that it's going to lengthen the involvement of the coalition forces for much longer than what anyone believes.

While I'm not hung up on spreading western style democracy in Afghanistan, I'd be pretty insistent on a government at least stable enough to ward off the Taliban trying to get back in country.

Originally Posted by eohrnberger

OK. Suppose the coalition forces withdraw from Afghanistan. The Taliban would move in, topple the Afghan government and re-establish their previous regime complete with all the human rights violations...

ahoy Eorhnberger,

why would i care about human rights violations in Afghanistan? thar be human rights violations all o'er the globe, afterall.

and if i did care, why would i want someone like Fishjoel (a fellow poster here ondeck who be in the military) to possibly die there so some Afghani schoolgirl could attend public schools?

- MeadHallPirate

Originally Posted by eohrnberger

OK. Suppose the coalition forces withdraw from Afghanistan. The Taliban would move in, topple the Afghan government and re-establish their previous regime complete with all the human rights violations, and probably launch another 9/11 style attack on US soil or at least US interests abroad. We'd get pulled back in all over again, and would have lost the progress (and ground) gained at great expense.

No, I'm thinking that as history has taught us, that it's easy to get into Afghanistan, but very difficult, and expensive to get out. I'm thinking that it's going to lengthen the involvement of the coalition forces for much longer than what anyone believes.

While I'm not hung up on spreading western style democracy in Afghanistan, I'd be pretty insistent on a government at least stable enough to ward off the Taliban trying to get back in country.

How about a half dozen well placed nukes for offense #2?

Originally Posted by MeadHallPirate

ahoy Eorhnberger,

why would i care about human rights violations in Afghanistan? thar be human rights violations all o'er the globe, afterall.

and if i did care, why would i want someone like Fishjoel (a fellow poster here ondeck who be in the military) to possibly die there so some Afghani schoolgirl could attend public schools?

- MeadHallPirate

Fair point. Well made. If that's how the Afghans want to live their lives and structure their society, OK by me as well. If their country becomes a safe heaven from which to launch terrorist attacks on us, well, that's something entirely different then, isn't it? Although I don't see any sort of nuclear option being any sort of realistic option. Frankly, with our current military, I don't think it's needed.

The point that I was making is that if the coalition pulls out before the Afghan government than effectively thwart the Taliban, I only see the cycle repeating sometime in the future. The OP point was that it would appear that the rumors of the Taliban's death have been greatly exaggerated.

Originally Posted by eohrnberger

Fair point. Well made. If that's how the Afghans want to live their lives and structure their society, OK by me as well. If their country becomes a safe heaven from which to launch terrorist attacks on us, well, that's something entirely different then, isn't it? Although I don't see any sort of nuclear option being any sort of realistic option. Frankly, with our current military, I don't think it's needed.

The point that I was making is that if the coalition pulls out before the Afghan government than effectively thwart the Taliban, I only see the cycle repeating sometime in the future. The OP point was that it would appear that the rumors of the Taliban's death have been greatly exaggerated.

The Taliban will be a part of any solution. Its their choice if they desire to be targets. A nuke option may not be necessary given the quality of munitions ... but it will certainly send a message.

We could simply continue bombing the country and avoid involvement in culture / politics. Make it clear that attacks won't be tolerated and revenge will be sought. That's what we should have done to begin with.

Originally Posted by eohrnberger

Fair point. Well made. If that's how the Afghans want to live their lives and structure their society, OK by me as well. If their country becomes a safe heaven from which to launch terrorist attacks on us, well, that's something entirely different then, isn't it? Although I don't see any sort of nuclear option being any sort of realistic option. Frankly, with our current military, I don't think it's needed.

The point that I was making is that if the coalition pulls out before the Afghan government than effectively thwart the Taliban, I only see the cycle repeating sometime in the future. The OP point was that it would appear that the rumors of the Taliban's death have been greatly exaggerated.

ahoy Eohrnberger,

the Taliban seems to be functionin' okie dokies if they can inflict that kinda terror in the capital 'o Afghanistan...i mean, if such an attack had successfully been pulled off in Washington DC, the entire country would be seized in a state 'o panic.

'tis interestin' that Afghanistan be seen as a "safe haven" from which the attacks sprung, me friend. i thought that almost all 'o the 9/11 buccaneers hailed from Saudi Arabia and they recieved a good bit 'o thar trainin' in Germany.
thats two countries that we forgot to invade in our rush fer vengeance.

at any rate, imma kinda with Michael H, though imma more hesitant to be the first country to use nuclear weapons since....well....since we used'm last time. if thar be another attack, we can counter attack...we can launch surgical strikes...we can send in our special forces to keelhaul a high value target, what have ye.

what we don't do, is commit our nation to a decade plus war....a war with no end in sight, and a war that no one wants to pay fer. the bombin' in Kabul be another clear indication that our nation hath failed.

we've lost.

'tis time to say "uncle" and admit we be in o'er our noggins.

- MeadHallPirate