Afghanistan

Okay, DreamWeaver, I really did need the full explanation.  To be honest, I so hate war, I stick my head in the sand.   It doesn't help that I know Afghanistan is desirable because we want to run oil pipe lines through it.  I didn't pay attention to the given explanation for invading.   I am not 100% certain, 9/11 happened the way we are suppose to believe it happened.  I don't trust the people behind the New Century American Project.   Like if there are terrible people in Afghanistan, why didn't NATO  let the USSR resolve the problem?  Why did we give Laden and his people military training and weapons, if the people of Afghanistan are so bad?   Why use our tax dollars and the lives our our people, to fight a war, the USSR was willing to fight?   I think the give reason is BS, and honestly didn't pay attention to what it was.   

Edited by Carol - 01-Aug-2010 at 22:32

Facts;
The following was written by E. E. Moise

http://www.clemson.edu/caah/history/FacultyPages/EdMoise/viet8.html

"The Tet Offensive was militarily a defeat for the Communists; it had weakened them very substantially. However, in public relations it was a Communist victory. There were several reasons for this.

1) The most important was the way the optimistic statements US spokesmen had been making about Communist weakness contrasted with the strength the Communists had shown in this battle. US spokesmen had been saying for months that the Communist forces were weakening. The Tet Offensive made it obvious that the Communist forces were far stronger than US spokesmen had admitted. When the same spokesmen said after the Tet Offensive that the Communists had been badly weakened, they were telling the truth for a change, but they had a lot of trouble persuading anyone to believe them. When General Westmoreland, the US commander in Vietnam, asked for 200,000 more American soldiers to be sent to Vietnam, this made people even less willing to believe that the Tet Offensive had been a brilliant American victory.

2) The Tet Offensive made the brutality of the war very visible to Americans. The US Air Force had been bombing South Vietnamese villages for years; during Tet the Air Force was bombing South Vietnamese cities. The ARVN had been killing prisoners for years; during Tet the American television viewing public actually got to watch a prisoner, with his hands bound behind his back, being shot through the head by a South Vietnamese general. The Communists also committed atrocities, of course; the Communists appear to have killed several thousand civilians in the city of Hue during the period they held parts of that city. That, however, did not happen within sight of American television cameras.

3) Tet, although militarily it was a clear American victory, had not been a cheap victory. The total number of US soldiers reported killed in Vietnam during the year 1968 was about 14,000, the highest number for any year of the war.

4) The US and ARVN forces shifted their activities toward the cities for a while as a result of the Communist attacks on those cities. Therefore, the weakening of the Communist forces in the countryside was not immediately apparent.

For all of these reasons, the Tet Offensive made the US news media, and the US public, much less enthusiastic about the war than they had been previously. General Westmoreland did not get the 200,000 additional troops he had requested, and in less than two years the US began withdrawing substantial numbers of troops. Negotiations began between the US and the Communists, and for most of the time the negotiations were going on, the US imposed limits on its bombing of North Vietnam. One might reasonably say that in the long run the Tet Offensive was a victory for the Communists, because of the way it reduced the American will to fight."


Edited by opuslola - 29-Jul-2010 at 05:39

It might be nice to have a point system.  A person would get points for using facts, and loose points for making personal attacks, because personal attacks have only a negative social value, and do not honor the person making them.   However, providing information does have social value, so this would be a positive point in the authors favor.  Then at some point in a thread we could add up the points to determine the real losers and winners.  

Edited by Carol - 28-Jul-2010 at 23:05

Originally posted by DreamWeaver Lessons should have been learnt from Malaya. How much of the friendly government asking for assistance to maintain its power by the USSR wasnt just a ploy by the USSR itself? Realpolitik after all. Ticked all the justification boxes for the USSR so thats all that matters. Likewise 9/11, Bin Laden and the Taliban did the same of NATO in 2001.

Originally posted by opuslola Mediocre Simba, when American casualties hit 25,000 or so, then I will be worried! Until then it is still a chance to win friends and influence people! I really don't care what you and your Marxist (Anti-USA) friends tend to think about it! With friends like you and your friends, the USA doesn't really need anymore enemies!

I am sorry.  I started this thread hoping to get information.  I have read every post and do not see an explanation of the US invasion of Afghanistan.   There was some acknowledgment that Afghanistan was divided as was Vietnam divided, but this has not added to my information.   I have no idea why the US has felt justified in invading Afghanistan and maintaining a war there.  Like if there is a problem in Afghanistan to resolve, why did the US prevent the USSR from resolving it?  Why does it become the US problem to resolve?   Why?

Notice that 1968 marked a new feeling within America, it just took a long time for this feeling to be filtered to the war effort!

And, the eventual end was a miserable and disgusting performance! I have Viet friends whose fathers spent 15 years in N. Viet / Cong prison camps because they were officers in the ARVN!

I lived the era, I heard the newscasts first hand, and I knew a lot of guys who were killed, and a lot who came home, to be spit at and called "baby-killers" by "little marxist, peace at all costs", dip sh-ts like you!

I would even imagine that some of you are planning a similar welcome home party for our Afgan troops sometime in the future!

But, all that being said; I love you man!

Edited by opuslola - 28-Jul-2010 at 17:27

Lessons should have been learnt from Malaya.


How much of the friendly government asking for assistance to maintain its power by the USSR wasnt just a ploy by the USSR itself? Realpolitik after all. Ticked all the justification boxes for the USSR so thats all that matters. Likewise 9/11, Bin Laden and the Taliban did the same of NATO in 2001.

Actually, we probably could have won in VN if we had not thrown in the towel after the famous Tet Offensive!

The NVA and all of their munitions and armour were destroyed!

But, since loosers like you were running the media then, we decided to pull out!

But, that is "yesterday's NEWs"!

Mediocre Simba, when American casualties hit 25,000 or so, then I will be worried!

Until then it is still a chance to win friends and influence people!

I really don't care what you and your Marxist (Anti-USA) friends tend to think about it! With friends like you and your friends, the USA doesn't really need anymore enemies!