Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Diesel and AV8
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="av8torntn" data-source="post: 278852" data-attributes="member: 8259"><p>Curious as to what you see here. </p><p> </p><p>I see great news. This is why. Afghanistan forces did the majority of the fighting here. I did get to talk to one of my buddies this morning and he said we did quite a bit of work but this looks like one step closer to these guys being able to control the taliban on their own which is one step closer to our guys coming home on our terms. I did find it interesting that this General officer thinks we need more force there can you guess why? Okay I will tell you there is sometimes a rift in SOF and regular forces so which side do you think he falls on? </p><p> </p><p>My guess is that you take what he says about wanting more forces in Afghanistan and you want to run with that. The real question is since only about half of our active duty Army has deployed to combat since 9-11 and Congress writing blank checks for the war do you not really think if the powers that be wanted more troops in Afghanistan that they would be there? The real success story is not that we won in Afghanistan it is how we won in Afghanistan. If I remember the story correctly the Soviet military fought to a standstill after years in that country with the game plan that you want. Our side toppled the taliban government with a shade over 200 men on the ground. The overwhelming success that we have had there is very impressive. Would it have been nice if they would have dropped a Ranger BN at Tora Bora? Yes. My guess would be that that is a big decision that went the wrong way. Was it worth not doing to save American lives? I am not sure. It does seem to have worked out for the best for now. If we get Osama or have him than it will end up being the right call in my not so humble opinion. If he died in that fight than it was the right call. </p><p> </p><p>When you keep saying that you want to concentrate on the war against the Taliban I thought at first you would see this article as a success. I never really saw this as a negative. I do think that the original plan was to take back this town with mainly US forces this past spring. I see now why they waited. I will make an educated guess that there were other reasons to wait also. They may have even been waiting for the taliban to come out of their hiding places to rally in town much like we were doing in Anbar a couple years ago. Whatever the reason is I assure you it was not because we did not think we could take it back. </p><p> </p><p> </p><p>No need to answer any of these questions I know you will take the opposite position you think I take. I just really see this as good news since we have not had lots of success there in the winter.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="av8torntn, post: 278852, member: 8259"] Curious as to what you see here. I see great news. This is why. Afghanistan forces did the majority of the fighting here. I did get to talk to one of my buddies this morning and he said we did quite a bit of work but this looks like one step closer to these guys being able to control the taliban on their own which is one step closer to our guys coming home on our terms. I did find it interesting that this General officer thinks we need more force there can you guess why? Okay I will tell you there is sometimes a rift in SOF and regular forces so which side do you think he falls on? My guess is that you take what he says about wanting more forces in Afghanistan and you want to run with that. The real question is since only about half of our active duty Army has deployed to combat since 9-11 and Congress writing blank checks for the war do you not really think if the powers that be wanted more troops in Afghanistan that they would be there? The real success story is not that we won in Afghanistan it is how we won in Afghanistan. If I remember the story correctly the Soviet military fought to a standstill after years in that country with the game plan that you want. Our side toppled the taliban government with a shade over 200 men on the ground. The overwhelming success that we have had there is very impressive. Would it have been nice if they would have dropped a Ranger BN at Tora Bora? Yes. My guess would be that that is a big decision that went the wrong way. Was it worth not doing to save American lives? I am not sure. It does seem to have worked out for the best for now. If we get Osama or have him than it will end up being the right call in my not so humble opinion. If he died in that fight than it was the right call. When you keep saying that you want to concentrate on the war against the Taliban I thought at first you would see this article as a success. I never really saw this as a negative. I do think that the original plan was to take back this town with mainly US forces this past spring. I see now why they waited. I will make an educated guess that there were other reasons to wait also. They may have even been waiting for the taliban to come out of their hiding places to rally in town much like we were doing in Anbar a couple years ago. Whatever the reason is I assure you it was not because we did not think we could take it back. No need to answer any of these questions I know you will take the opposite position you think I take. I just really see this as good news since we have not had lots of success there in the winter. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
Diesel and AV8
Top