U. S. to halve troop number in Afghanistan.

D

Deleted 24582

Guest
I don't think we can kill our way out of the problem.

Some people will always need to die.

But I think we need a better plan.
I disagree at this point. Unless you would like to spend the next 100 years trying to nation build, and nobody does . As it is a long game the public will not support.
 
I disagree at this point. Unless you would like to spend the next 100 years trying to nation build, and nobody does . As it is a long game the public will not support.
I suppose the point is, would you rather deal with terror organisations away from your home soil? Or wait until they’re on it?

The other point is if you have ‘states’/organisations like IS (-K, IL, IM etc) AQ and so on, who manage to get their message across to their believers around the world, is it better to neutralise the message before it’s been sent? Or try and prevent its receipt? Or have programmes to ‘prevent’ radicalisation? Or a combination of all three?
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
I suppose the point is, would you rather deal with terror organisations away from your home soil? Or wait until they’re on it?

The other point is if you have ‘states’/organisations like IS (-K, IL, IM etc) AQ and so on, who manage to get their message across to their believers around the world, is it better to neutralise the message before it’s been sent? Or try and prevent its receipt? Or have programmes to ‘prevent’ radicalisation? Or a combination of all three?
The GWOT has been ongoing since 2001 and slowly expanding.

In order to stop the message you have to kill the messengers and everybody they know.

If you want to prevent radicalization, then you have to erase an entire religion.

Which will not happen.

Drone Strikes and SOF are the name of the game.
 

sunny james

Old-Salt
I suppose the point is, would you rather deal with terror organisations away from your home soil? Or wait until they’re on it?

The other point is if you have ‘states’/organisations like IS (-K, IL, IM etc) AQ and so on, who manage to get their message across to their believers around the world, is it better to neutralise the message before it’s been sent? Or try and prevent its receipt? Or have programmes to ‘prevent’ radicalisation? Or a combination of all three?
The Septics have always preferred to fight their wars on foreign soil. Who wouldn't?
Remember all this kicked off because someone brought a war to them.
 
The GWOT has been ongoing since 2001 and slowly expanding.
GWOT is so last decade: UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy | Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force
GCT
In order to stop the message you have to kill the messengers and everybody they know.
Capture or kill. Or prevent the message being formed
If you want to prevent radicalization, then you have to erase an entire religion.

Which will not happen.
That’s a bit simplistic
Drone Strikes and SOF are the name of the game.
They are two tools in a very big box and do not prevent the root cause
 
The Septics have always preferred to fight their wars on foreign soil. Who wouldn't?
Which is my point
Remember all this kicked off because someone brought a war to them.
According to OBL it kicked off when Bush Snr parked a few tanks in KSA and used them to liberate Kuwait. That and US support of the invasion of Lebanon. That’s what he said.
 
Didn't the Taliban say you have the watches, we have the time?
I think we should have left the Russians to it. Giving the Mujahedin Stingers was a big mistake.
Hindsight is a wonderful thing. Would the Sovs have stopped at Afghanistan? Or would they have gone on?
 

triggerigger

War Hero
I'm sure we could kill our way out of the problem. Just loosen up the ROE a bit.
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
GWOT is so last decade: UN Global Counter-Terrorism Strategy | Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force
GCT

Capture or kill. Or prevent the message being formed

That’s a bit simplistic

They are two tools in a very big box and do not prevent the root cause

We hate the UN, so drop that nonsense.

Simple is not PC but is very effective.

The root cause is a religion that has been in conflict with all the non believers they come into contact with.

So you either kill them all, or kill the worst of the bunch. But throwing money into rebuilding their countries and trying to change their society is a waste.
 
We hate the UN, so drop that nonsense.
It’s a phrase and has been signed up to
Simple is not PC but is very effective.
I’m sure the Armenians hold no grudges
The root cause is a religion that has been in conflict with all the non believers they come into contact with.
The radicalisation of that religion. Primary factors are water and food with population densities being unsustainable along with actions which have led to that radicalisation.
So you either kill them all, or kill the worst of the bunch.
One part of the solution. Preventing it in the first place is obviously better
But throwing money into rebuilding their countries and trying to change their society is a waste.
Why ‘rebuild’? What led to it needing rebuilding? The problem is your ‘solution’ goes round and round (forever) rather than deal with what causes the problem.
 
The GWOT has been ongoing since 2001 and slowly expanding.

In order to stop the message you have to kill the messengers and everybody they know.
Funny that previous CIA Directors have said "we cannot kill our way out of this".

Which is where I got the phrase from....
 
D

Deleted 24582

Guest
It’s a phrase and has been signed up to

I’m sure the Armenians hold no grudges

The radicalisation of that religion. Primary factors are water and food with population densities being unsustainable along with actions which have led to that radicalisation.

One part of the solution. Preventing it in the first place is obviously better

Why ‘rebuild’? What led to it needing rebuilding? The problem is your ‘solution’ goes round and round (forever) rather than deal with what causes the problem.
The UN has many skeptics here, many of us don’t believe the agency is worth it and don’t support it.

As Haley steps down at the UN, should the US do the same?

They have been going about this since the religion was formed. Muhammad was a kiddy fiddling ****, who wrote their gospel. If time travel were legit he would be fecked.

Why rebuild? It is a political do-gooder theme we inherited from WW2. Some people think we are morally inclined to improve their lot in life.
 
The UN has many skeptics here, many of us don’t believe the agency is worth it and don’t support it.
Well aware of that. You started it and for obvious reasons you don’t like what it has become
While you’re the biggest kid on the block. When you’re not, it may prove useful
Why rebuild? It is a political do-gooder theme we inherited from WW2. Some people think we are morally inclined to improve their lot in life.
That’s fine. The next time a group in that country gains succour from the ruling govt and decides to do something more than hijack four planes and crash them into various key points, don’t be surprised.


Influence Ops is the way forward. You only need to see the influence certain trolls have worldwide to realise that.
 
Finally turning the corner? Also giving Putin another opportunity to advertise his international negotiating and 'peacemaking' skills.

'The United States on Friday, April 26 found backing from rivals Russia and China on the key formula of a peace deal it is negotiating in Afghanistan – withdrawing troops in return for Taliban pledges not to welcome foreign extremists.

“The three sides call for an orderly and responsible withdrawal of foreign troops from Afghanistan as part of the overall peace process,” the statement issued by the U.S. State Department said.

They also said that the Taliban has made a “commitment” to fight Islamic State and to “cut ties with Al-Qaeda, ETIM [East Turkestan Islamic Movement], and other international terrorist groups.”


US, Russia and China agree on Afghanistan foreign troop withdrawal
 

Latest Threads

Top