US to ask Taliban for peace

[Yeekim]

If you decide to call a war in which we won every major engagement with the enemy that ended with the Paris Peace Accords as a loss, then thats your business.

As much as I hate to agree with Form...

Winning every major engagement and still miserably failing to achieve any of stated goals kinda adds an extra level of fail. It basically says you lost the war before it even started.

 

[Flying Pig]

It's up for debate whether it counts as losing when your objective is to establish a stable situation and it breaks; but Vietnam was screwed up even if not lost - plus it lead to American officers hating special forces guts right up until we stormed across Iraq after the scuds.

 

[MobBoss]

I don't understand why or how you can possibly take the Peace accords in isolation in order to claim the Vietnam war was somehow a success for the US.

I never said it was a success. I am simply advocating we didnt 'lose' the military campaign.

Our major goal of preserving South Vietnamese independence, failed miserably.

I agree, but I see that as a political goal which failed because our will at home failed, not because our military failed. Again, people dont realize how close to collapse the NVA were. Tet was their last gasp, and although it was a military defeat for them, it was a political success at home.

The US population lost the will to fight.

This is the truth.

But we didnt fail in all our goals there either. We showed our willingness to confront communism as an ideal, and our commitment to counter it worldwide. You may not think that made much of a difference in the world, but I do.

Essentially a waste of 50,000 US lives and 2 million Vietnamese in order to prevent something that was inevitable. If thats what you call a success what do you call a defeat?

Again, I never called it a success. But I certainly dont think those lives were wasted at all, and in fact, I think it dishonors them to believe that.

 

[Flying Pig]

But I certainly dont think those lives were wasted at all, and in fact, I think it dishonors them to believe that.

Indeed. Whatever the reason behind a military action, those who give their lives in it deserve nothing less than full honour. The fighting in the first place was a waste maybe, but never say that anyone's life was wasted who died for his country

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man layeth down his life for his friend

 

[GenMarshall]

I know. Sounds kinda like Jumbo Shrimp, doesnt it?

Seafood, no thanks.

 

[Karalysia]

I never said it was a success. I am simply advocating we didnt 'lose' the military campaign.

Just like Germany never 'lost' World War I, what with their soldiers still deep in Entenate territory and their army undefeated. Right?

No. A loss is a loss no matter if it comes due to politics or military action.

Tell me what their deaths accomplished, what exactly did 50,000 US soldiers and 2 million Vietnamese die for? It was a terrible waste.

 

[GenMarshall]

The Vietnam War was one of those mixed bagged wars. Up until the Tet offense, we were handling the war quite well. It was the Tet Offense where we lost psychologically.

 

[MobBoss]

Just like Germany never 'lost' World War I, what with their soldiers still deep in Entenate territory and their army undefeated. Right?

No, considering the terms of the Treaty of Versailles, it was pretty much a loss on any scale.

No. A loss is a loss no matter if it comes due to politics or military action.

And what if North Vietnam had abided by its peace agreement? Success?

So its only a loss because NV violated its peace accord?

Tell me what their deaths accomplished, what exactly did 50,000 US soldiers and 2 million Vietnamese die for? It was a terrible waste.

I already mentioned it. It showed our determination to confront communism on a worldwide scale.

 

[Flying Pig]

Tell me what their deaths accomplished, what exactly did 50,000 US soldiers and 2 million Vietnamese die for? It was a terrible waste.

Their mates? Whatever Americans say for Queen and Country? Remember the Light Brigade? Theirs not to make reply, theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die... When can their glory fade?

 

[Verbose]

Their mates? Whatever Americans say for Queen and Country? Remember the Light Brigade? Theirs not to make reply, theirs not to reason why, theirs but to do and die... When can their glory fade?

And the Russians later sniffed the breath of captured survivors assuming they had to be drunk doing that. While the comment of the French cavalry general watching it alongside the British high command was: "It's magnificent, but it's not war." Never mind the fact the British general lied through the teeth about the circumstances, beginning with the late arrival of the British forces, while the Turkish infantry had stolidly taken a magnificent beating all morning holding their positions, only to have their effort completely disparaged, by not recognising how long they actually held waiting for the British. On top of this, the Russians kept the positions taken on the day regardless of the high-level British bungling, which decimated the British cav to such an extent it ceased to be of effective use for the remainder of the campaign. Fortunately most of the actual fighting in that campaign was carried by the French and the Turks!

It really seems a special British talent to dress even their utter cock-ups up as somehow something heroic. After the Norwegians had slapped the British South Pole expedition silly, by applying things like knowledge, competence, planning etc., Scott managed to get himself and his expedition killed, and the British dressed him up as some kind of martyr of science, rather than as a bumbling fool. It really annoyed Amundsen, enough to make him coin the phrase: "The English are a race of sore losers."

 

[Verbose]

Indeed. Whatever the reason behind a military action, those who give their lives in it deserve nothing less than full honour. The fighting in the first place was a waste maybe, but never say that anyone's life was wasted who died for his country

"Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori", eh? Was that really what they did? (Sure looks like one of the more advanced examples of US "positive thinking".)

 

[say1988]

I already mentioned it. It showed our determination to confront communism on a worldwide scale.

And it showed the unwillingness of the US people to back a war where their people were dieing with no discernible benefit. Which has been used by other parties against the US. All the comparisons of Iraq and Afghanistan to Vietnam, etc...

Completely ignoring the troops, who did their jobs extremely well and deserve to be honoured, the politicians wasted 50,000 lives and however many millions of dollars.

And what if North Vietnam had abided by its peace agreement? Success?

So its only a loss because NV violated its peace accord?

As far as I know it was pretty much a given that the South was going Communist, it was merely a question of how long it would take and by what means. I don't see how a reasonably intelligent person looking at it objectively could have denied that. Then completely ignoring your ally after the peace you negotiated broke down.

I am simply advocating we didnt 'lose' the military campaign.

I completely agree with that, unfortunately a war is more than a series of military campaigns. The final outcome is the result, no matter how you got there.

It's a special British talent to dress even their utter cock-ups up as somehow something heroic.

The whole event was horrible, but I doubt there were many units that could have done what teh Light Brigade did. But, yes, the British do seem to prefer to remember their glorious defeats rather than their victories. The Light Brigade is by fare more famous that the Heavy Brigade's charge or even the Thin Red Line of the same day.

 

[capslock]

It's interesting how that objective has changed over time.

"We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them." -- George W. Bush, 9/20/01

"Every nation has a choice to make. In this conflict, there is no neutral ground. If any government sponsors the outlaws and killers of innocence, they have become outlaws and murderers themselves. And they will take that lonely path at their own peril." -- From George W. Bush's speech announcing that attacks on Afghanistan had begun

"And you all also may remember that early on, I said if you hide a terrorist, if you feed a terrorist, if you provide comfort to a terrorist, you're just as guilty as the terrorist. The Taliban now knows what we mean. They're gone. And, guess what? People in Afghanistan don't miss them one bit." -- George W. Bush rallies the troops in Alaska on 2/16/02

WHOOOOOSH

Thats the sound of what I said going right over your head.

 

[capslock]

Thats really doesn't matter, ye beat the VC nearly every time militarily and lost there too. Beating them militaril every time is not winning the war for you, paradoxical as that is.

Well, its important we display total dominance over them in the field or why would scared locals trust us to protect them? I agree, though, the kinectic war is just one part of a much larger conflict. Alot of the "fighting" isn't done with guns.

But that's not happening now, is it? Not by a long shot. And its not going to happen, the US cannot exterminate the Taliban.

Like I said, we don't have to exterminate them. What makes you think we do or that its even an objective at all?

But eventually, ye will, and every Afghan citizen knows that. As does every Taleb.

If we do it right, they won't need us to stay.

That's true (Iraq isn't won yet either), and I have admitted Afghanistan could yet be won, but I just dont see it happening. Do you, realistically?

I do.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Taliban for peace? Sure...


...so long as I have there leader's heads on a silver plate, including Osama's.

Because Osama is a Taliban

 

[MobBoss]

Because Osama is a Taliban

I thought he was Al Qaeda not Taliban.... The Taliban took him in and aided him as an honored guest.

 

[say1988]

I thought he was Al Qaeda not Taliban....

That would be the point.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

We declined to renew hostilities over it.

That's one way of putting it.

 

[Counterclaw]

First, there are those who suggest that Afghanistan is another Vietnam. They argue that it cannot be stabilized, and we're better off cutting our losses and rapidly withdrawing. I believe this argument depends on a false reading of history... To abandon this area now -- and to rely only on efforts against al Qaeda from a distance -- would significantly hamper our ability to keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and create an unacceptable risk of additional attacks on our homeland and our allies.

America will have to show our strength in the way that we end wars and prevent conflict -- not just how we wage wars. We'll have to be nimble and precise in our use of military power.

Or....we could just give power back to the Taliban and turn this into Vietnam. That would be lovely!

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Or....we could just give power back to the Taliban and turn this into Vietnam. That would be lovely!

Negotiating peace is the same as giving power back?