We can win the war in Vietnam!

User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17457
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Aresen »

Hugh Akston wrote: 10 Dec 2019, 10:41
Aresen wrote: 09 Dec 2019, 23:03 I fully expect that, after the eventual pullout, there will be those who argue "We were winning, but we were stabbed in the back by the liberals/MSM/libertarians/etc."
There are miletry loiers who make this very argument about Viet Nam 1.0
I had that individual in mind. There are also several others who post similar comments in the same place.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 19843
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: Elev. 5280 ft

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Hugh Akston »

I was worried that the horrific attacks on the Kabul maternity ward would kibosh America's planned withdrawal from Afghanistan, but it looks like it's still on track.
US officials say they will reduce to 8,600 troops by July 15 and abandon five bases. By the second quarter of 2021, all foreign forces are supposed to withdraw, ending the US's longest war. Yet the outlook for peace is cloudy at best. In the absence of Afghan peace talks, the administration of US President Donald Trump may face the prospect of fully withdrawing even as the Taliban remains at war with the government.

Hopefully Trump's narrative obsessed myopic blundering will come in handy for once.
That has concerned some lawmakers, including Representative Liz Cheney, a Republican and member of the House Armed Services Committee.

She says the US needs to keep a military and intelligence presence in Afghanistan to prevent groups like al-Qaeda and the ISIL's Afghan affiliate from forming havens from which to attack the US

"Withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan won't end the war - it will just let the terrorists win," she told The Associated Press.
Bless your heart.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman
User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17457
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Aresen »

Hugh Akston wrote: 16 May 2020, 16:47
Liz Cheney wrote:She says the US needs to keep a military and intelligence presence in Afghanistan to prevent groups like al-Qaeda and the ISIL's Afghan affiliate from forming havens from which to attack the US

"Withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan won't end the war - it will just let the terrorists win," she told The Associated Press.
Bless your heart.
Yup, Liz. The terrorists will win because your dad & his boss set up impossible conditions for the US to 'win' in Afghanistan.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
User avatar
dead_elvis
Posts: 1801
Joined: 01 May 2010, 15:26

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by dead_elvis »

Hugh Akston wrote: 16 May 2020, 16:47 "Withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan won't end the war - it will just let the terrorists win," she told The Associated Press.
Couple trillion dollars down the toilet, thousands dead and tens of thousands wounded. Whaddya mean, "will"?
"Never forget: a war on undocumented immigrants by necessity is a war on all of our freedoms of association and movement."
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30384
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Warren »

dead_elvis wrote: 17 May 2020, 12:36
Hugh Akston wrote: 16 May 2020, 16:47 "Withdrawing US troops from Afghanistan won't end the war - it will just let the terrorists win," she told The Associated Press.
Couple trillion dollars down the toilet, thousands dead and tens of thousands wounded. Whaddya mean, "will"?
Not to mention all the recruiting we're doing for them.
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
User avatar
lunchstealer
Posts: 19168
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:25
Location: The Local Fluff in the Local Bubble

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by lunchstealer »

Image
"Dude she's the Purdue Pharma of the black pill." - JasonL

"This thread is like a dog park where everyone lets their preconceptions and biases run around and sniff each others butts." - Hugh Akston

"That's just tokenism with extra steps." - Jake
User avatar
Pham Nuwen
Posts: 8985
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 02:17

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Pham Nuwen »

God that is depressing.
Goddamn libertarian message board. Hugh Akston

leave me to my mescaline smoothie in peace, please. dhex
User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30666
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by thoreau »

If Trump gets his withdrawal from Afghanistan, what will it actually amount to? Will it be an actual emptying of bases and recall of all personnel who aren't stationed at the embassy or very deep undercover in the CIA? Or will it be that all "boots on the ground" are removed but the Special Forces, contractors, and other people in non-boot footwear will remain in the same old bases?
"saying 'socialism' where normies can hear it is wrapping a bunch of barbed wire around a bat, handing the bat to the GOP, and standing with your head in the strike zone."
--Lunchstealer
User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17457
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Aresen »

thoreau wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 14:01 If Trump gets his withdrawal from Afghanistan, what will it actually amount to? Will it be an actual emptying of bases and recall of all personnel who aren't stationed at the embassy or very deep undercover in the CIA? Or will it be that all "boots on the ground" are removed but the Special Forces, contractors, and other people in non-boot footwear will remain in the same old bases?
I'd take the latter if that was all we can get. Obviously, I'd prefer the former.

Someday, some POTUS is going to have to eat that shit sandwich.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 19843
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: Elev. 5280 ft

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Hugh Akston »

As usual, don't trust Trump when he says he's going to pull out
Under the plan,which the sources said is being finalized. there would be about 2,500 U.S. troops total in each country once the drawdown is completed.
TBF, a lame duck session is the ideal time to order a withdrawl. But Trump is waiting long enough for Uncle Joe to reverse the order a few weeks later.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30384
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Warren »

Hugh Akston wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 16:11 As usual, don't trust Trump when he says he's going to pull out
Under the plan,which the sources said is being finalized. there would be about 2,500 U.S. troops total in each country once the drawdown is completed.
TBF, a lame duck session is the ideal time to order a withdrawl. But Trump is waiting long enough for Uncle Joe to reverse the order a few weeks later.
You think he would? What's the percentage on that?
THIS SPACE FOR RENT
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20610
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

Warren wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 19:35
Hugh Akston wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 16:11 As usual, don't trust Trump when he says he's going to pull out
Under the plan,which the sources said is being finalized. there would be about 2,500 U.S. troops total in each country once the drawdown is completed.
TBF, a lame duck session is the ideal time to order a withdrawl. But Trump is waiting long enough for Uncle Joe to reverse the order a few weeks later.
You think he would? What's the percentage on that?
Pretty good. He wants to patch things up with NATO, etc. Pax Americana is better in their eyes than Pax Anybodyelsea.
User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30666
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by thoreau »

It's hard to say whether Biden would "reverse" immediately. If withdrawal means "Some regular troops leave but special forces, contractors, intelligence agencies, and whatever else is needed to support them stay" then Biden doesn't have to actually reverse much of anything to keep the US operating in Afghanistan. None of those people count as "boots on the ground" in the fictions accepted by journalists and the political class, so Dynamite Joe can keep things chugging along and even increase troops-that-don't-count-as-troops levels while proclaiming that we have no regular forces there.

OTOH, if Trump actually pulled everyone out (aside from people with such deep cover that they can stay without anyone knowing they're with the US government) then, yeah, Diamond Joe would have his hombres back there pronto to kick some ass and raise some hell.
"saying 'socialism' where normies can hear it is wrapping a bunch of barbed wire around a bat, handing the bat to the GOP, and standing with your head in the strike zone."
--Lunchstealer
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20610
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

thoreau wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 19:46 It's hard to say whether Biden would "reverse" immediately. If withdrawal means "Some regular troops leave but special forces, contractors, intelligence agencies, and whatever else is needed to support them stay" then Biden doesn't have to actually reverse much of anything to keep the US operating in Afghanistan. None of those people count as "boots on the ground" in the fictions accepted by journalists and the political class, so Dynamite Joe can keep things chugging along and even increase troops-that-don't-count-as-troops levels while proclaiming that we have no regular forces there.

OTOH, if Trump actually pulled everyone out (aside from people with such deep cover that they can stay without anyone knowing they're with the US government) then, yeah, Diamond Joe would have his hombres back there pronto to kick some ass and raise some hell.
I think you're way overestimating the "boots on the ground" thing. Mercenaries aside, any deployed military forces have a long tail to tooth ratio but there's not much good in leaving the tail without the tooth. Plus, I'll repeat I don't think the overwhelming majority of Americans care that much about casualties, which is why we've been fighting the Forever War since the 1990s and you don't see demonstrations on the streets or even politicians making it an election issue.
User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30666
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by thoreau »

Regarding "boots on the ground", the people supporting the tip of the spear are usually less likely to suffer casualties, as long as they have safe ways to move supplies around. So even if they count as "regular" troops, the casualties are mostly people who don't count as "regular" troops.

As for public opinion, yeah, the general public is mostly OK with whatever they understand the status quo of US operations in Afghanistan to be. But both parties do have elements in their base that fancy themselves isolationist, so it's beneficial for a president to be able to say that they've ended some aspect of the war, or brought home some troops, or whatever.

If nothing else, Trump wants to leave office believing that he did something that Obama and Bush could never do.
"saying 'socialism' where normies can hear it is wrapping a bunch of barbed wire around a bat, handing the bat to the GOP, and standing with your head in the strike zone."
--Lunchstealer
User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17457
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Aresen »

thoreau wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 20:03 If nothing else, Trump wants to leave office believing that he did something that Obama and Bush could never do.
Well, he's made GWB look good by comparison, so he's already cleared that bar. :P
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20610
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

thoreau wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 20:03 Regarding "boots on the ground", the people supporting the tip of the spear are usually less likely to suffer casualties, as long as they have safe ways to move supplies around. So even if they count as "regular" troops, the casualties are mostly people who don't count as "regular" troops.

As for public opinion, yeah, the general public is mostly OK with whatever they understand the status quo of US operations in Afghanistan to be. But both parties do have elements in their base that fancy themselves isolationist, so it's beneficial for a president to be able to say that they've ended some aspect of the war, or brought home some troops, or whatever.

If nothing else, Trump wants to leave office believing that he did something that Obama and Bush could never do.
Which is why I'm recommending mass pardons of nonviolent federal prisoners. That actually would own the libs.
User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 19843
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: Elev. 5280 ft

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Hugh Akston »

1) If anything, Uncle Joe is gonna follow the example of his Black Friend Barry by promising no boots on the ground and ramping troop levels up so slowly that almost nobody notices.

2)
thoreau wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 20:03 But both parties do have elements in their base that fancy themselves isolationist
No. Nobody inside the Overton Window is isolationist. Some of them may want to withdraw from the forever wars overseas, but that's not what isolationist means.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman
User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17457
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Aresen »

Hugh Akston wrote: 18 Nov 2020, 00:49 1) If anything, Uncle Joe is gonna follow the example of his Black Friend Barry by promising no boots on the ground and ramping troop levels up so slowly that almost nobody notices.
*sigh* I think you are right: One team of 'special advisers' at a time.
2)
thoreau wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 20:03 But both parties do have elements in their base that fancy themselves isolationist
No. Nobody inside the Overton Window is isolationist. Some of them may want to withdraw from the forever wars overseas, but that's not what isolationist means.
The definition of 'isolationist' is elastic. It is usually a smear aimed at someone who doesn't want to bomb another country. To John Bolton, if you don't want to nuke Iran, you're an 'isolationist'.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 19843
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: Elev. 5280 ft

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Hugh Akston »

Aresen wrote: 18 Nov 2020, 00:56
2)
thoreau wrote: 17 Nov 2020, 20:03 But both parties do have elements in their base that fancy themselves isolationist
No. Nobody inside the Overton Window is isolationist. Some of them may want to withdraw from the forever wars overseas, but that's not what isolationist means.
The definition of 'isolationist' is elastic. It is usually a smear aimed at someone who doesn't want to bomb another country. To John Bolton, if you don't want to nuke Iran, you're an 'isolationist'.
It's actually not that elastic. It's always used as a smear. Nobody who is anti-war refers to themselves as isolationist. I don't know that actual isolationists even exist in America, so I have trouble imagining anyone using the term affirmatively in any circumstance. Anyone who applies the term to the United States or any political party or coalition therein is either a complete moron or a complete moron who wants to kill people.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20610
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

It's a catchall term and, yeah, usually used as an insult. I'm an isolationist to Forever Warriors insofar as I don't support the Pax Americana but I'm an internationalist (almost as insulting) because I'm fine with global trade, At the far end, I guess you could say Kim Jong-un is the apotheosis of isolationism.
User avatar
Hugh Akston
Posts: 19843
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:51
Location: Elev. 5280 ft

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Hugh Akston »

Australian Special Forces killed Afghani prisoners and civilians
Australia said on Thursday that 19 current and former soldiers will be referred for potential criminal prosecution for allegedly killing the 39 Afghan locals.
The report said the majority of those killed, which included prisoners, farmers and other Afghan locals, were captured when they were killed and therefore protected under international law.
“There is credible information that junior soldiers were required by their patrol commanders to shoot a prisoner, in order to achieve the soldier’s first kill, in a practice that was known as ‘blooding’,” the report read.

Once a person had been killed, those allegedly responsible would stage a fight scene with foreign weapons or equipment to justify their action, the report concluded.

The actions did not immediately come to light due to what the report concluded was a culture of secrecy and compartmentalisation in which information was kept and controlled within patrols.
Although it has been the subject of rumour, Australia’s official investigation only began after the publication of classified documents about alleged war crimes in Afghanistan.

A former military lawyer, David McBride, has been charged with providing the classified papers to the Australian Broadcasting Corp. He admits that he supplied the papers, but says it is in the national interest.
"Is a Lulztopia the best we can hope for?!?" ~Taktix®
"Somali pirates are beholden to their hostages in a way that the USG is not." ~Dangerman
User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 15239
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Eric the .5b »

I just call it non-interventionism to avoid the "oh, so you want economic autarky" business.
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.
User avatar
Aresen
Posts: 17457
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 20:18
Location: Great White Pacific Northwest

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Aresen »

Eric the .5b wrote: 20 Nov 2020, 14:37 I just call it non-interventionism to avoid the "oh, so you want economic autarky" business.
We have a large number of people in Canada who somehow think Canada can dictate terms to the US because 'they need our resources'. I try to point out to such people that the US is the country that comes closest to being able to cut off the rest of the world entirely. The US is richer because of trade, but that doesn't mean the US needs us.
If Trump supporters wanted a tough guy, why did they elect such a whiny bitch? - Mo

Those who know history are doomed to deja vu. - the innominate one

Never bring a knife to a joke fight" - dhex
User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 15239
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: We can win the war in Vietnam!

Post by Eric the .5b »

Aresen wrote: 20 Nov 2020, 14:43
Eric the .5b wrote: 20 Nov 2020, 14:37 I just call it non-interventionism to avoid the "oh, so you want economic autarky" business.
We have a large number of people in Canada who somehow think Canada can dictate terms to the US because 'they need our resources'. I try to point out to such people that the US is the country that comes closest to being able to cut off the rest of the world entirely. The US is richer because of trade, but that doesn't mean the US needs us.
Even ignoring that, suggest they ask the developing world how the resource extraction sectors of their economies put them economically in charge of the planet.

(If that doesn't work, try pointing out that there's a reason 90% of the Canadian population lives within 100 miles of the border, but not so much in the US case.)
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.
Post Reply