NATO will never win Afghan war

[LeGenD]

America have never won a war

Let us be realistic in our assumptions. USA have won many wars. Read US history.

and have always attacked small countries but than when they enter those countries they get their *** kicked on daily bases thousands of their soldiers die thousands are disabled for life

Small country is not an argument. Military strength of a country is not dependent on its geographical size. Israel is decent example. Iraq used to be as well.

And casualties are unavoidable in wars. However, US casualty figure is lot lower in WOT in comparison to figures in some major conflicts.

and billions of dollars lost

Occupation is an expensive venture.

and what is the result those who they threw out from government now the beg them to come back in government and stop hunting them down

Not necessary. Saddam is not coming back as an example.

Taliban survives due to being an ideology.

Sir your thousands of troops have been killed and according your own new reports you don't report all deaths than worse is those who get disabled for life and billions of dollars lost

US is still much more open in disclosing casualty figures in comparison to most Asian countries.

and who are doing this all to you who don't have even proper shoes to wear and world super power is getting their *** kicked by those people this is the biggest shame a super power can face

Taliban is not so incompetent as some make it out to be. It is comprised of battle-hardened warriors who understand Afghan territory very well. And fighting in Afghanistan is not easy. Afghan territory favours guerilla warfare.

Sir Taliban are not a super power they are nothing when compared to American Power they still control most of Afghanistan and are able to hunt down thousands of Americans

Bro, there are many factors to consider in these kinds of matters.

1. How much firepower did US brought in to the theater?
2. What are the objectives of US?
3. Why Taliban survives?
4. How difficult it is to fight in Afghanistan?

And vice versa.

Also, US controls all locations of strategic importance in Afghanistan. This is what counts in an occupation.

 

[Zarvan]

Let us be realistic in our assumptions. USA have won many wars. Read US history.


Small country is not an argument. Military strength of a country is not dependent on its geographical size. Israel is decent example. Iraq used to be as well.

And casualties are unavoidable in wars. However, US casualty figure is lot lower in WOT in comparison to figures in some major conflicts.


Occupation is an expensive venture.


Not necessary. Saddam is not coming back as an example.

Taliban survives due to being an ideology.



US is still much more open in disclosing casualty figures in comparison to most Asian countries.


Taliban is not so incompetent as some make it out to be. It is comprised of battle-hardened warriors who understand Afghan territory very well. And fighting in Afghanistan is not easy. Afghan territory favours guerilla warfare.


Bro, there are many factors to consider in these kinds of matters.

1. How much firepower did US brought in to the theater?
2. What are the objectives of US?
3. Why Taliban survives?
4. How difficult it is to fight in Afghanistan?

And vice versa.

Also, US controls all locations of strategic importance in Afghanistan. This is what counts in an occupation.

Sir you are comparing buch of Taliban with the American Super Power WOW great and the countries they attacked in the past 50 years had pieces of Junk in their Military and what Military for GOD sake Taliban had RPGS and AK 47 which has 2.5 KM range with American M-16 range of 10 KM yes Saddam is not coming back but now the face Mullahs in Iraq which are far worse for Americans than Saddam and they have used Tanks they have used Artillery they have used Stealth Planes they have used F-16 and F-15 what else is left let me guess Nuclear Weapons are you joking and what and they have used several kind of Missiles still getting their *** kicked on daily bases

 

[Burger Boy]

What is winning? and what is losing in this war?

 

[Z Bhai]

What do you mean by "never win" , they have already lost. Now they are in transformation of fleeing, just like in Vietnam

 

[LeGenD]

Sir you are comparing buch of Taliban with the American Super Power WOW great

You can call me bro.

Do some research on 'attrition warfare'.

- Planning is as important as military muscle.
- USA have not committed all of its resources in Afghanistan to defeat Taliban.
- It is important to figure out US objectives in Afghanistan.

and the countries they attacked in the past 50 years had pieces of Junk in their Military

This is not true.

1. In Korea, USA had to contend with Chinese military might.
2. In Vietnam, USSR supplied modern weapons to North Vietnamese.
3. Iraq was a major military power in 1991 - armed with latest equipment of that time.

and what Military for GOD sake Taliban had RPGS and AK 47 which has 2.5 KM range with American M-16 range of 10 KM

Taliban have extensive knowledge of Afghan territory. This gives them advantage. Also, Taliban does not openly challenges US military forces. It prefers to harass ISAF and its Afghan allies to keep pressure on them.

Taliban did openly challenged US during 2001 and ended up getting routed out and defeated in a short span of time.

yes Saddam is not coming back but now the face Mullahs in Iraq which are far worse for Americans than Saddam and they have used Tanks they have used Artillery they have used Stealth Planes they have used F-16 and F-15 what else is left let me guess Nuclear Weapons are you joking and what and they have used several kind of Missiles still getting their *** kicked on daily bases

US attack on Iraq was not legitimate. I accept this. However, Iraq is no longer a threat to US interests. This is all fantasy talk.

What do you mean by "never win" , they have already lost. Now they are in transformation of fleeing, just like in Vietnam

Their is no comparison between Vietnam war and this one.

 

[Zarvan]

You can call me bro.

Do some research on 'attrition warfare'.

- Planning is as important as military muscle.
- USA have not committed all of its resources in Afghanistan to defeat Taliban.
- It is important to figure out US objectives in Afghanistan.


This is not true.

1. In Korea, USA had to contend with Chinese military might.
2. In Vietnam, USSR supplied modern weapons to North Vietnamese.
3. Iraq was a major military power in 1991 - armed with latest equipment of that time.


Taliban have extensive knowledge of Afghan territory. This gives them advantage. Also, Taliban does not openly challenges US military forces. It prefers to harass ISAF and its Afghan allies to keep pressure on them.

Taliban did openly challenged US during 2001 and ended up getting routed out and defeated in a short span of time.


US attack on Iraq was not legitimate. I accept this. However, Iraq is no longer a threat to US interests. This is all fantasy talk.


Their is no comparison between Vietnam war and this one.

Sir Mullahs which are in control of Iran coming to power not threat to America Sir it was never ever threat to America even before attack the problem is with Israel and Israel still can get hurts if Iraq is indirectly controlled by Mullahs Which equipment Iraq had compared to America are you trying to consistently funny or what USA major objective was to get rid of Taliban too but they failed and now they try to cover up by saying that this was not their objective yes and Now America is getting defeated by the same Taliban Sir Taliban never fought at the time of invasion they just went into hiding and came back with power and kicked American ...... and kicking with more power by every passing day

 

[truhind]

Yes!!! absolutely true . They can't win any war in Afghanistan no matter what cuz its the graveyard of empirez.....

Well my friend you should see it from a practical point of view....USSR cud not win in Afghanistan because of a different story altogether as it was backed by .........and ya its already defeated and fucked up by the US, a loud applause for a step to kill terrorism!!!

 

[truhind]

If India wants to attain its full potential and for Indian companies to compete with China India needs to be able to get oil gas at same price. This will only happen through pipelines. So eventually Indian companies will push India to do a deal with Pakistan on more favourable terms than Mushy plan. Or that's the theory

Can somebody please tell this einstein that India would already have considered this option....so dear fellow you will not get that arrow to hit India...lol!!!

 

[truhind]

America have never won a war and have always attacked small countries but than when they enter those countries they get their *** kicked on daily bases thousands of their soldiers die thousands are disabled for life and billions of dollars lost and what is the result those who they threw out from government now the beg them to come back in government and stop hunting them down

Well US never lost a war against Afghanistan or Iraq....it suppresses them and makes strategic bases over there....which these cowards can never think of so called ***kicked, else they will get a deepthroat from US. And ya, now the concept of war is over in Afghanistan and Iraq too. Its only few cowards a***s, who actually can not come in front for their so called claimed or freedom, that is also the result of easiness on part of US. It is utilizing their resources and maintaining their bases...and ya it is successful in that.

 

[lem34]

Can somebody please tell this einstein that India would already have considered this option....so dear fellow you will not get that arrow to hit India...lol!!!

Consider it all you want. Does not change the geo strategic location of Pakistan nor does considering it give access without Pakistani approval

Well US never lost a war against Afghanistan or Iraq....it suppresses them and makes strategic bases over there....which these cowards can never think of so called ***kicked, else they will get a deepthroat from US. And ya, now the concept of war is over in Afghanistan and Iraq too. Its only few cowards a***s, who actually can not come in front for their so called claimed or freedom, that is also the result of easiness on part of US. It is utilizing their resources and maintaining their bases...and ya it is successful in that.

Iran has more influence than it ever had before the Iraq invasion. That was not what they wanted. In Afghanistan they are retreating whilst their soldiers are being killed. As usual Indian we want to be proxy will get excitable but so what

 

[Thomas]

What do you mean by "never win" , they have already lost. Now they are in transformation of fleeing, just like in Vietnam

US goals from the time we went into Afghanistan have pretty much been met. We were never going to stay forever. Is everything perfect? no! I would like to see us stay a couple more years at least with about 100k more boots on the ground and relentlessly go after the Taliban including into the northern tribal areas of Pakistan on a scale not seen yet.

But The Afghan Government has asked us to leave early and Obama is more then willing to oblige him. The problems facing the Afghan Government is:

1.Corruption (seems to be institutionalized within Afghan culture)
2.literacy of it's soldiers and Workers
3.Tribal loyalties rather then National Patriotism
4.Lack of jobs

Until fighting stops on both sides none of these issues can be fully dealt with. and no one side can do it on it's own. There has to be reconciliation eventually or Afghanistan will be continually in chaos. Which some sides I'm sure would like to see. I don't believe that Iran or Pakistan want to see a strong peaceful Afghanistan.

The US could be leaving with 100% of it's goals met and all the US haters would still be crowing "the US has been defeated" simply by the act of leaving.

 

[iajj]

Until fighting stops on both sides none of these issues can be fully dealt with. and no one side can do it on it's own. There has to be reconciliation eventually or Afghanistan will be continually in chaos. Which some sides I'm sure would like to see. I don't believe that Iran or Pakistan want to see a strong peaceful Afghanistan.

and i don't believe americans wanted a peaceful afghanistan for its own good - anglo-americans wanted afghanistan ("stabilized" only in a way they see fit) to be an american bridgehead that can be used against all afghanistan's important neighbors: iran, pakistan, russia and china. so why should it surprise anyone that all neighbors wish ill upon american-occupied afghanistan? and people actually living in this neighborhood (and that excludes anglo-americans) know how tough the neighborhood is and that the best outcome we can achieve in afghanistan is a country of renewed strength and security - to the south of the border. for a strong afghanistan in US or indian influence is dangerously destabilizing in the region and damaging to pakistan and forces the latter to relentlessly pursue a policy of self-assurance and augmentation that will not end until afghanistan falls back into the pakistani fold. a common desire for peace means all afghanistan's real neighbors must support pakistani effort and resist anglo-american design in this region.

Also, US controls all locations of strategic importance in Afghanistan. This is what counts in an occupation.

lol, these americans and their as*lickers don't even know what strategic locations are in a guerrilla war. like mao summarized:
1) every position the enemy wants to hold stops to be strategic to us
2) every position the enemy actually holds becomes strategic for its value of being a target of harassment
3) every position where long-term harassment is possible is strategic because it is the point where we must then strike decisively after we exhaust the enemy
4) every position an exhausted or defeated enemy retreats to is strategic because that is where we get to wipe out a deflated and demoralized enemy.

if there is one thing certain about this, it is that guerrilla warfare is an uncertain science, and the very concept of "strategic location" becomes so fluid in it that for a US army that is able to seize any position on a battlefield but never able to prepare for the onslaught of a popular but irregular insurrection it is impossible to learn its true art. that is why US will never win in afghanistan.

 

[Thomas]

and i don't believe americans wanted a peaceful afghanistan for its own good - anglo-americans wanted afghanistan ("stabilized" only in a way they see fit) to be an american bridgehead that can be used against all afghanistan's important neighbors: iran, pakistan, russia and china.

Bridge head for what? Afghanistan is a very poor bridge to the countries you listed, It is to land locked. It's far more in the US interests to have a stable peaceful Afghanistan.

 

[CENTCOM]

The war in Afghanistan is not a war against the people of Afghanistan or occupation of Afghanistan. It has been a war against a specific group of people who have nurtured and exported terrorism to all parts of the world. That war is coming to its natural end with the capture and death of most terrorist leadership. The victory in Afghanistan can be seen in the faces of young Afghan children who are free to go to schools, especially little girls. Today most Afghans have rejected the terror that had engulfed their nation. They are looking forward to a terror-free and prosperous Afghanistan with freedom for all. Our goals have been to train the Afghan security forces to take over all the security duties of their nation. Soon they will have complete control of all external and internal security of Afghanistan and that is a fact.

Analysis and interviews like this one do not reflect the facts. It gives ammunition to conspiracy theorists to weave a web to confuse the readers. One cannot say in the same breath that the Americans are looking to get out of Afghanistan by 2014 because they have lost the war and then say that they will never leave. The fact is that our mission is coming to its natural end but at the same time we have promised the people of Afghanistan that we will not abandon them but continue to work with them and assist them in achieving better quality of life for all Afghans even after 2014 when our combat troops withdraw from Afghanistan.


Capt. Joseph Kreidel
DET-United States Central Command
U.S. Central Command

 

[lem34]

The war in Afghanistan is not a war against the people of Afghanistan or occupation of Afghanistan. It has been a war against a specific group of people who have nurtured and exported terrorism to all parts of the world. That war is coming to its natural end with the capture and death of most terrorist leadership. The victory in Afghanistan can be seen in the faces of young Afghan children who are free to go to schools, especially little girls. Today most Afghans have rejected the terror that had engulfed their nation. They are looking forward to a terror-free and prosperous Afghanistan with freedom for all. Our goals have been to train the Afghan security forces to take over all the security duties of their nation. Soon they will have complete control of all external and internal security of Afghanistan and that is a fact.

Analysis and interviews like this one do not reflect the facts. It gives ammunition to conspiracy theorists to weave a web to confuse the readers. One cannot say in the same breath that the Americans are looking to get out of Afghanistan by 2014 because they have lost the war and then say that they will never leave. The fact is that our mission is coming to its natural end but at the same time we have promised the people of Afghanistan that we will not abandon them but continue to work with them and assist them in achieving better quality of life for all Afghans even after 2014 when our combat troops withdraw from Afghanistan.


Capt. Joseph Kreidel
DET-United States Central Command
U.S. Central Command

If you were genuine why do you not have fair UN supervised elections and allow Afghanis to have a voice in their future