1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

US Army sergeant held for civilian shootings in Afghanistan.

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by Azrael, Mar 11, 2012.

  1. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    We didn't go in force immediately -- and Bush was criticized for it.

    The initial force was a small number of special forces and CIA paramilitary officers, working with the Northern Alliance.

    The press was quick to make Vietnam analogies, and predicted Mazar-i-Sharif would would be difficult to take. Instead, it took days.

    Removing Mullah Omar and Taliban rule, was quite quick, and relatively easy.

    The nation building -- that comes with the "you broke it, you bought it" mantra -- has been the difficult part.

    But, let's not forget that the vast majority of Democrats supported the war in Afghanistan. Even as they criticized the war in Iraq, they spoke in positive terms of our involvement in Afghanistan. It was the good war. The right war.

    Of course, that's mostly because casualties were relatively low in Afghanistan, as Jihadists made Iraq their battleground.
     
  2. YankeeFan

    YankeeFan Well-Known Member

    Ah, this is just the article I was thinking about -- quagmire!

    But, it was dead wrong at the time.

    Do I get credit if I predict the Cubs will win the World Series, and they do -- in 2022?
     
  3. Uncle.Ruckus

    Uncle.Ruckus Guest

    DEAL!
     
  4. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    We had 20,000 troops in Afghanistan by 2004.

    afghanistan.blogs.cnn.com/2011/06/22/chart-u-s-troop-levels-over-the-years/


    Not sure how you figure Johnny was "dead wrong at the time."

     
  5. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    [​IMG]

    We should have kept the levels around 25,000 max.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  6. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    We were warned at every step in Afghanistan. The same people howling politics to get us out now were the ones howling patriotism to get us in then.
     
  7. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    I'm one of those people. At the time it was the right thing to do. I started 'howling" in 2008 when we went from 25,000 troops to the current levels of 100,000.
     
  8. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    It was never the right thing to go into Afghanistan in force.
     
  9. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    How are you defining "going into Afghanistan in force"?

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  10. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    Anything bigger than Seal Team 6.
     
  11. Boom_70

    Boom_70 Well-Known Member

    This graph makes it fairly clear that the only result of the surge is more US Soldiers killed:

    [​IMG]
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 15, 2014
  12. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

    And who was asking for a 'surge?'

    www.nytimes.com/2008/10/01/world/asia/01iht-military.4.16620651.html
     
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page