• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Obama: 'Victory' Not Necessarily Goal in Afghanistan

see post #69
As noted:
I accept your continued refusal to prove your claim as an admission that you know you cannot.
Thanks for playing.
 
Not as many soldiers dead and this incorrect idea of victory in a country where failure is the only outcome?

You keep railing about soldiers dying; what do you think soldiers do?

I understand that you can only view things through an emotional perspective and your own emotional state, but does it occur to you that men do not sign up for the military because they think it is a "peace corps", they sign up because they want adventure and have a profound desire to serve and if necessary, give up their lives serving for the causes they believe in. Many enjoy the idea of firing a weapon and blowing things up and the idea of killing the enemy. After 9-11, many signed up for the specific purpose of being sent to the ME to kill these bastards who had the audacity to attack us.

I am amazed how little Liberals comprehend of the idea of sacrifice. I am equally stunned when Liberals take the efforts of these brave men and women and impugn them with naive notions about how to confront an enemy who thinks nothing of murdering as many innocent civilians as they can for the mere reason that these innocents do not have the same fanatic religious faith that these murderers have.

I am fairly certain that MOST of the men and women who are dying do not appreciate your efforts to "save" them by suggesting that they cannot win this fight.

:roll:
 
History demonstrates the same cycle and the same outcome. Failure.

The same curtains will fall on UK and US's turn

Only if Liberals are in charge. Let us hope that this trend reverses before it is too late. :2wave:
 
I'm doing them a better service by keeping them alive than sent out to fight a war that is doomed to failure. I am not belitting their sacrifice by pointing out the obvious.
British soldiers do not even have the equipment, uniform, helicoptar. Our freaking GENERAL of the Army didn't even have a helicoptar and was reduced to flying in a US LENT one. Does that sound like a Army that will win a war in a country where no army have suceeded in?
 
Last edited:
I want a real leader--one who actually leads.
As opposed to The Obama, who just warms over things that GWB told us years ago.

One would think that The Secular Messiah would be able to come up with His own rhetoric.
 
Only if Liberals are in charge. Let us hope that this trend reverses before it is too late. :2wave:

Oh yeah, get some blood thirsty conservatives in power.
Score!
That'll get us somewhere seeing it was them creeps that got us into this war :2wave:
 
I'm doing them a better service by keeping them alive than sent out to fight a war that is doomed to failure. I am not belitting their sacrifice by pointing out the obvious.
There is absolutely no support for the prediction that the war in Afghanistan is doomed to fail. That others have failed in no way necessitates that someone else will; according to your reasoning, the Panama Canal should never have been built.

Unless, of course, you're referring to the fact that The Obama is now running the war...
:mrgreen:
 
As opposed to The Obama, who just warms over things that GWB told us years ago.

One would think that The Secular Messiah would be able to come up with His own rhetoric.
He can only quote the Gospel According to Saint Teleprompter.
 
Oh yeah, get some blood thirsty conservatives in power.
Score!
That'll get us somewhere seeing it was them creeps that got us into this war :2wave:

Fascinating use of hyperbolic BS to describe a philosophy wrapped in the emotional nonsense that appears to make up most of your arguments.
 
History demonstrates the same cycle and the same outcome. Failure.

The same curtains will fall on UK and US's turn
History doesn't declare the outcome of wars.
The outcome of wars declare history.

One way or the other, you cannot decide whether this little war will be a victory or a failure before it's even close to the end.
 
He can only quote the Gospel According to Saint Teleprompter.
Ahh... so His writers are copying text from GWB....
... and The Obama didn't notice.
 
I'm doing them a better service by keeping them alive than sent out to fight a war that is doomed to failure. I am not belitting their sacrifice by pointing out the obvious.
British soldiers do not even have the equipment, uniform, helicoptar. Our freaking GENERAL of the Army didn't even have a helicoptar and was reduced to flying in a US LENT one. Does that sound like a Army that will win a war in a country where no army have suceeded in?
Forgive me but it's quite silly to risk the nation for the sake of its soldiers.
Soldiers serve the nation in order to protect it, and not the other way around.
 
see post #69

see post #69

I saw the link you posted and nothing in it supports your farcical assertions. Let’s recap:

Didn't your dear leader already claim Victory in Iraq and Afghanistan.....:lol:

Are you THAT unfamiliar with the history of Rumsfield and Cheney and their neo-con agenda regarding Iraq that dated back decades before 9/11???;)

Yes we are aware there are a lot of sources out there, but that is not the point. We are saying that your assertions were FALSE and asked you to provide YOUR source that supports it.

I cannot find a source that supports your farcical and false assertions and as such, it is incumbent upon you to prove them with credible facts and sources. The burden of proof lies with you to make your case, not for us to do your research for you; we have and are calling you out on it.
 
There is absolutely no support for the prediction that the war in Afghanistan is doomed to fail.

Pick up a history book.
The main reason soviets failed was because of the moutains and structure of Afghanistan is such that people will never win. British tried it 3 times and failed.
Soviets had 100,000 soldiers there. How many do we have?

We will fail. I am just accepting the inevitable before any of you.
 
You keep railing about soldiers dying; what do you think soldiers do?

I understand that you can only view things through an emotional perspective and your own emotional state, but does it occur to you that men do not sign up for the military because they think it is a "peace corps", they sign up because they want adventure and have a profound desire to serve and if necessary, give up their lives serving for the causes they believe in. Many enjoy the idea of firing a weapon and blowing things up and the idea of killing the enemy. After 9-11, many signed up for the specific purpose of being sent to the ME to kill these bastards who had the audacity to attack us.

I am amazed how little Liberals comprehend of the idea of sacrifice. I am equally stunned when Liberals take the efforts of these brave men and women and impugn them with naive notions about how to confront an enemy who thinks nothing of murdering as many innocent civilians as they can for the mere reason that these innocents do not have the same fanatic religious faith that these murderers have.

I am fairly certain that MOST of the men and women who are dying do not appreciate your efforts to "save" them by suggesting that they cannot win this fight.

:roll:

You are a little extreme in your assertions sir. I am a Democrat and think that the soldiers are doing a superb job. I have hope that Iraq will survive as a strong democracy. I supported the surge, though felt it was too late, and understand well the sacrifice that is necessary in order to preserve freedom.

I feel that most mix partisan sentiment with patriotism in the discussion of Iraq. Was it the best time to make a regime change? No, not with Afghanistan unfinished, but did Saadam need to go? Yes. Ultimately, the past is the past and people should attempt to pull together and focus on the same outcome, a free Iraq. However, I think your partisan painting of people's sentiment about Iraq failing has nothing to do with the soldiers abilities to win a ground war, but everything to do with whether the Iraqi people can maintain their freedom and withstand and overcome their own differences, as well as prevent terror groups from hijacking their country. To say that anyone who questions this, questions the U.S. military's abilities is false and strawman, as you well know.

War is an evil necessary, and if I were needed I would go in a minute. This country is based on the principle that the people can preserve their own freedom and govern themselves. This requires the ultimate sacrifice sometimes, and for Republicans to insinuate that they have such a thing cornered in ludicrous, at best.
 
Forgive me but it's quite silly to risk the nation for the sake of its soldiers.
Soldiers serve the nation in order to protect it, and not the other way around.

I'll risk the entire ME. Like i care

Soldier serve to protect UK. Afghanistan is not Britain. They should not be protecting anyone apart from us.
 
Pick up a history book.
So long as you refuse to address what I said, I will be happy to repeat it:

That others have failed in no way necessitates that someone else will; according to your reasoning, the Panama Canal should never have been built
 
Afghanistan's cultural, ethnic and tribal divides mean that it will never have a fully functional, accepted central government. They'd have to unite and defeat all the separate tribal forces and thats proved quite difficult, almost ridiculously so, in the past. Even if you DO beat them you have to comprehend the fact the most Afghans have tribal and not national loyalities. The PDPA tried and failed and they had waaaay more manpower.
 
One way or the other, you cannot decide whether this little war will be a victory or a failure before it's even close to the end.

Brown is on the edge, if the British withdraw troops (which the British people do want occur) then where will US go next? Does it have the money to fund this war for years to come? It is up **** creek, its economy is in ruins. How much is it in debt by?
How much are Americans willing to sacrifice for something not even certain to result in a victory? How much are the British and allied forces? We do not have the will to continue this war for as long as is necessary nor do we have the manpower or funding.
 
By securing Afghanistan from terrorism, you defend your nation from Afghanistan's terrorists.

The goal is to defend the US

We are not US.
It was not UK under threat from anyone. Hell we should have taken a leaf out of France and Germany
 
What is victory?
We will not defeat a ideology through guns and bombs. Everyone knows this. If making Al Qaeda and Taliban disappear is our idea of victory. We lose.
Taliban and Al Qaeda are different. The Taliban are actual Afghanis, they are the citizens of a country. Most likely people who wear flip flops and walk past our soldiers patrolling but at night bring out the guns. It is them who are our goal.
What we should do is build schools in the places we are 'occupying' and promote education. Build clean waters and roads. Show to them that it is much better our way than theirs. That is victory to me. If we weaken the ideology and its stranglehold, we can never destroy it

Hang on im bit confused here. First your saying we should be building roads and schools and then we,re saying we should be pulling the troops out. Do you think we,ll be able to build schools if the taliban take over again? Also bear in mind that if the schools are teaching girls then its likely both the schools and those teaching in them wont meet a pleasant end if the Taliban is allowed to gain ground.
 
Afghanistan's cultural, ethnic and tribal divides mean that it will never have a fully functional, accepted central government. They'd have to unite and defeat all the separate tribal forces and thats proved quite difficult, almost ridiculously so, in the past. Even if you DO beat them you have to comprehend the fact the most Afghans have tribal and not national loyalities. The PDPA tried and failed and they had waaaay more manpower.

I agree with some of your statements, but Afghanistan functioned quite well before the Soviet invasion, why can this not happen again if the Taliban is crushed?
 
We are not US.
It was not UK under threat from anyone. Hell we should have taken a leaf out of France and Germany
You share the naivety of Western Europe's leaders during the raise of Hitler, Laila.
 
Hang on im bit confused here. First your saying we should be building roads and schools and then we,re saying we should be pulling the troops out. Do you think we,ll be able to build schools if the taliban take over again? Also bear in mind that if the schools are teaching girls then its likely both the schools and those teaching in them wont meet a pleasant end if the Taliban is allowed to gain ground.

I don't think we should be in there.
Do we need soldiers to build buildings? I thought we needed builders.
But now we are there, might as well fund schools
 
Back
Top Bottom