Quote:
Originally Posted by Kevy Baby
I say pull our troops out and nuke the joint.
|
Your joke about killing millions of innocent people is hilarious.
I have to say that I don't have anything to add to the conversation either, mostly because it seems we can't "fight wars" and "win wars" anymore. They just aren't the same. You'd think that after 50 years of failing in wars on the other side of the world we'd have figured that out and not tried to do the same damn thing again.
Yes, I agree with GD, that we needed to invade Afg. after 9/11, but thinking about it now, if the goal was to rout Al Quaeda, did we think it would be the kind of war where they would surrender, peace would prevail, and we'd leave with a handshake?
I think we better come to grips with the fact that we as a nation can't do sh.t about what goes on in some other country without entering the now proverbial quagmire. And if that's the case, is it really worth all the damages, ie. dead Americans, dead foreign civilians, a disrupted country, and an angry public both in and outside of the US? (I'm not saying this isn't necessarily worth it in Afg, but if it IS, then we all have to shut up and face the burdens. It's much like relying on the "free market" to deal with financial bubbles but then crying when they burst. It's the nature of the free market.)
Or rather, as the pundits have been saying for 8 years and longer....what does victory look like? Do our leaders know? Did they know going in? If they changed the definition of victory in the middle of the conflict, then we've all been swindled, bait and switched, scam scam scam scam baked beans and scam.