The mission you describe is a fantasy. It has always been a fantasy. Give the details and logistics some thought.
We can knock off some leaders with quick strikes, and it never hurts, but any permanent solution involves changing the landscape that terrorists thrive in. Predator drones can blow up a terrorist headquarters, but unless you follow it up with something that makes the village a hostile place for terrorists to build a headquarters in the first place, it won't buy you the kind of victory where you can eventually go home. That kind of followup needs a lot of boots on the ground, and not just carrying guns.
It took us seven years to leave Japan after WWII.
The core of the fantasy, of course, is the idea that if we had nailed bin Laden in Tora Bora, it all would have just evaporated and we'd never have to worry about planes flying into our buildings again. What I call the "king vampire" theory.
That bin Laden has been sidelined for a few years now, and al Qaeda is still active, should be a clue.
Current Events » in reply to The "good war"
re: The "good war"
The whole thread (22 posts)
- Media moves smoothly from sabotaging the war in Iraq to sabotaging the war in Afghanistan
- Has anyone ever seen an exit strategy for Afghanistan?
- Speaking of moving smoothly from one war to another... (n/t)
- Afghanistan has been an interest of mine all along. BTW, notice the violence in Iraq?
- Speaking of moving smoothly from one war to another... (n/t)
- Has anyone ever seen an exit strategy for Afghanistan?
