It costs the US $50 million to kill each member of the Taliban (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 14, 2024, 09:35:38 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  It costs the US $50 million to kill each member of the Taliban (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: It costs the US $50 million to kill each member of the Taliban  (Read 1256 times)
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

« on: October 11, 2010, 10:54:32 AM »

http://kabulpress.org/my/spip.php?article32304

Ugh.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

« Reply #1 on: October 11, 2010, 02:56:27 PM »

The objective isn't to kill as many Taliban as possible. If it were, we would just carpet bomb the whole region. The objective is to create some kind of state in Afghanistan that is non-Taliban controlled and stable.

Never in the entire history of the "country" has there even been "some kind of state," much less a "stable" one.  It's an impossible task.
Logged
tpfkaw
wormyguy
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,118
United States


Political Matrix
E: -0.58, S: 1.65

« Reply #2 on: October 12, 2010, 03:30:47 PM »

The objective isn't to kill as many Taliban as possible. If it were, we would just carpet bomb the whole region. The objective is to create some kind of state in Afghanistan that is non-Taliban controlled and stable.

Never in the entire history of the "country" has there even been "some kind of state," much less a "stable" one.  It's an impossible task.

Your grasp of history is appalling.

Quite. It was pretty stable until 1979, IIRC.



There has not ever been an Afghan "government" that has had any sort of effective control of anything beyond the immediate vicinity of Kabul.  The rest is controlled by various tribal warlords or coalitions of warlords.  "Stable" governments in the past have merely avoided irritating the warlords in the rural (for lack of a better word) areas too much.  The idea that Afghanistan can be made some sort of unitary state is historically, culturally, ethnically, linguistically, economically, militarily, and logistically (since much of the country is inaccessible from other parts except by horseback or even helicopter) impossible.  For good reason - "Afghanistan" as a country is an entirely artificial construct brought about by the fact that it was such a crappy and ungovernable scrap of land that neither Britain nor Russia ever felt like including it in one of their 19th-century annexation sprees.

You may want to broaden your grasp of history beyond Wikipedia.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.025 seconds with 11 queries.