Under pressure but not down , PM Nawaz Sharif rightly asks USA stand with Pakistan against India !

[LeGenD]

two major failures in Iraq and Afghanistan has taken quite a toll in American war machinery.

Major failures in what sense?

US forces invaded Iraq (to end the reign of Saddam Hussein) and Afghanistan (to end the reign of Mullah Omar); both lost power and are dead. Baath Party is gone but Taliban exists in some form because it is an ideology.

And if these two wars have taken quite a toll on US war-machinery then how come they bombed Libya back to stone age?

We should worry about how to handle the issue of militancy (internally) and also in Afghanistan because US have minimized its role in Afghanistan in recent years and will hold Pakistan responsible for issues in Afghanistan in years to come. Pakistani leadership is not stupid, it realizes that US will place much of the burden on Pakistan's shoulders for matters pertaining to Taliban and Pakistan cannot afford this nonsense since Pakistan is no longer in good terms with Taliban. This is one of the major issues that Pakistan have raised in US.

 

[salarsikander]

US forces invaded Iraq (to end the reign of Saddam Hussein) and Afghanistan (to end the reign of Mullah Omar);

Hi,
Entirely wrong Sir,
The first one was to capture Iraq and have unprecedented access to its oil wealth, secondly for Afghanistan, due to its strategic location and to end the Era of Taliban which far from over !

As for your last paragraph it doesn't makes sense to my post (Irrelevant)

 

[LeGenD]

Hi,
Entirely wrong Sir,
The first one was to capture Iraq and have unprecedented access to its oil wealth, secondly for Afghanistan, due to its strategic location and to end the Era of Taliban which far from over !

As for your last paragraph it doesn't makes sense to my post (Irrelevant)

Only Americans can tell what their intentions were in Iraq and Afghanistan. If US wants to forcefully extract resources from these nations, nobody can stop it.

Bush junior went into Iraq to finish the job that his father started. This is common knowledge.

As for Taliban, it is an ideology and nobody can eliminate it with military operations unless the populace of Afghanistan is exterminated. You think that Taliban still have same men in its ranks since war with USA? No, bro. It always finds new recruits from different sources.

Al-Qaeda network was the primary target in Afghanistan and Pakistan; Taliban just stood in the way.

 

[salarsikander]

Only Americans can tell what their intentions were in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Bush junior went into Iraq to finish the job that his father started. This is common knowledge.

As for Taliban, it is an ideology and nobody can eliminate it with military operations unless the populace of Afghanistan is exterminated. Al-Qaeda network was the primary target; Taliban just stood in the way.

Hi,

The idea was to destroy the terrorist network and their capacity to carry out attack, as I said which is far from over.

What happened in Iraq we all know that very well, So no point in acting naive

 

[TMA]

Hi,
Entirely wrong Sir,
The first one was to capture Iraq and have unprecedented access to its oil wealth, secondly for Afghanistan, due to its strategic location and to end the Era of Taliban which far from over !

As for your last paragraph it doesn't makes sense to my post (Irrelevant)

Not just for oil wealth. Iraq is included in the Biblical frontiers of the Holy Land. These wars are for Israel messianic mission!

 

[salarsikander]

Not just for oil wealth. Iraq is included in the Biblical frontiers of the Holy Land. These wars are for Israel messianic mission!

Hi,
Ikr
its always the juice

 

[LeGenD]

Hi,

The idea was to destroy the terrorist network and their capacity to carry out attack, as I said which is far from over.

Yes. And Al-Qaeda network was primary target. Taliban just stood in the way.

US realizes that Taliban is an ideology and political movement and it is willing to negotiate with its leadership on conditional basis. As I pointed out, you cannot eliminate an ideology with military operations.

What happened in Iraq we all know that very well, So no point in acting naive

Here is good summary of developments that led to invasion of Iraq: Why Did We Invade Iraq? | National Review Online

Contrary to the popular belief, Americans are not interested in taking over Iraqi resources. This kind of imperialism is really hard to justify in current times.

9/11 granted Bush junior an opportunity to finish what his father started. There is even a Saudi-angle in this. With Saddam Hussein out of the picture, GCC's superiority in the Middle East would be affirmed. Unfortunately for GCC, Iran stepped up its game. GCC didn't realize that Saddam kept Iranians under check too.

 

[salarsikander]

Contrary to the popular belief, Americans are not interested in taking over Iraqi resources.

Hi,

Then i wonder why just about half trillion of dollar was spent on this war. Just to remove a so called dictator ?

In that case we have far more tyrants in North Korea and in Iran.

You just don't see American Unreasonably invading any country, unless it suits their interests

 

[ito]

It is not what NS desires, but what India desires. India just doesn't want to talk to Pakistan.

 

[LeGenD]

Hi,

Then i wonder why just about half trillion of dollar was spent on this war. Just to remove a so called dictator ?

In that case we have far more tyrants in North Korea and in Iran.

You just don't see American Unreasonably invading any country, unless it suits their interests

That cost includes operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya and additional fronts.

Saddam Hussein was hostile to both US and GCC in the Middle East. Removing him from the picture would imply that both US and GCC could pursue their interests in the Middle East without any issue. They however underestimated Iranian angle.

 

[salarsikander]

That cost includes operations in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Iraq, Libya and additional fronts.

Saddam Hussein was hostile to both US and GCC in the Middle East. Removing him from the picture would imply that both US and GCC could pursue their interests in the Middle East without any issue. They however underestimated Iranian angle.

Hi,

Have a look Google

 

[LeGenD]

Hi,

Have a look Google

Thanks for the share.

Much of that cost includes logistics that stretched from continental USA to frontlines in Iraq.

Anyways, we are witnessing power struggles in the Middle East.

1. Iran wants to rule Middle East.
2. GCC wants to rule Middle East.
3. Greater Israel.

US interests co-align with those of GCC and Israel in the Middle East. You may have noticed that GCC and Israel are at peace. Saddam Hussein was a threat and his removal made sense. This would have happened sooner or later. Even Saddam knew it.

Iraqi resources are not the target. No player in the Middle East is short on resources.

 

[salarsikander]

Much of that cost includes logistics that stretched from continental USA to frontlines in Iraq.

Hi,

Would love to get specific figures, if you can provide to back up your claim.

Regardless, Iraq was an easy target. Arabs funded iraq-Iran war for 10 years, thereby isolating it from rest of the arabs and exhausting it.

It seemed to be an easy target to prowl on, or so it seemed.

 

[LeGenD]

Hi,

Would love to get specific figures, if you can provide to back up your claim.

Logistics is the most costly aspect of any military operation, bro.

Logistics includes shipment of equipment and personal, maintenance of equipment, replacement of damaged equipment, supply lines, salaries of personal involved, fuel and maintenance costs in general.

Regardless, Iraq was an easy target. Arabs funded iraq-Iran war for 10 years, thereby isolating it from rest of the arabs and exhausting it.

It seemed to be an easy target to prowl on, or so it seemed.

Agreed.

All major players in the Middle East such as GCC, Israel, Turkey, USA, Syria and Iran perceived Saddam Hussein as a threat. But he was a tough guy and removing him from power was not an easy task. Only US had the resources and power to do such a thing and therefore it got the tacit approval of others in doing so.

Ironically, Saddam Hussein was the good guy as long as he targeted (Shia) Iran. But he became a devil when he targeted Kuwait. Invasion of Iraq have a long history in the making.

 

[salarsikander]

Logistics is the most costly aspect of any military operation, bro.

Logistics includes shipment of equipment and personal, maintenance of equipment, replacement of damaged equipment, supply lines, salaries of personal involved, fuel and maintenance costs in general

Hi,

Regardless the cost was involved we can't simply strike it off. Again to back up your claim please provide hard evidence !

Secondly, US didn't just spend the entire amount for nothing. Its quite obvious that US had its own interests in the share of natural resources.

You don't smoke that staggering amount just to remove a TYRANT !