Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 37 of 37

Thread: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

  1. #31
    Senior Member Teach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Dellrose TN
    Posts
    17,073

    Re: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

    Ask the Brits how attempting to colonize the entire world and exploiting the resources of those places worked in the long term. "The sun never sets on the British empire" went out of vogue somewhere around the turn of the 20th. century, didn't it?
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    "When a man's down, KICK HIM! If he survives it he can rise above it!"

  2. #32
    Senior Member bisley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    8,738

    Re: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

    Quote Originally Posted by Teach View Post
    Ask the Brits how attempting to colonize the entire world and exploiting the resources of those places worked in the long term. "The sun never sets on the British empire" went out of vogue somewhere around the turn of the 20th. century, didn't it?
    Jerry
    So, what do you suggest? Get out and let them immediately go back to the way they were before we went there?

    All I'm saying is that if it is going to be our policy to attack terrorist camps wherever we find them, we are better off to have some bases there so we don't have to go through the whole process of obtaining flyover permission and building up logistics to support a large enough fighting force to do the job. Besides, we probably need a couple of strong bases to menace Iran.

  3. #33
    Senior Member Teach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Dellrose TN
    Posts
    17,073

    Re: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

    It would make more sense to blaze a trail a hundred miles wide across Syria and Iraq, establish well-protected supply lines, and mobilize on the Iranian border. Then give the mullahs an ultimatum- - - -"surrender or die!" Dismantle their nuclear facilities down to the last isotope, and establish a non-theocratic puppet government. That makes as much, or more sense than fighting over a rockpile like Afghanistan that gets so cold in the winter they even stop fighting amongst themselves! Plus, Iran's got oil!
    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    "When a man's down, KICK HIM! If he survives it he can rise above it!"

  4. #34
    Senior Member tennmike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Under a log
    Posts
    19,304

    Re: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

    Quote Originally Posted by bisley View Post
    So, what do you suggest? Get out and let them immediately go back to the way they were before we went there?

    All I'm saying is that if it is going to be our policy to attack terrorist camps wherever we find them, we are better off to have some bases there so we don't have to go through the whole process of obtaining flyover permission and building up logistics to support a large enough fighting force to do the job. Besides, we probably need a couple of strong bases to menace Iran.
    If we pulled out of that region and left them to their own devices, and CONTAINED them there, I would predict that in the year 3,000 if one peeked in to see the situation that it would be no different then than it is now. With the exception that they'd have adopted the newest weapons available with which to kill each other. They don't shun ALL things modern.
    "Tyranny is wonderfully ingenious in the art of inventing specious phrases to spread over its nefarious designs." From the book Tyranny Unmasked by John Taylor of Caloline County, VA. 1821

  5. #35
    Senior Member Teach's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Dellrose TN
    Posts
    17,073

    Re: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

    Mike, when you rebuilt your house, did you try to "contain" a colony of termites to one corner of the building? As long as these 14th. Century troglodytes exist, they pose a serious threat to stability and peace worldwide. When the "moderate" muslims tolerate, and sometimes even assist them, the problem just keeps getting worse. Over here in the supposedly civilized part of the world, don't the bomb-throwers go by a different name, something called 'democrats"?

    Jerry
    Hide and wail in terror, Eloi- - - -We Morlocks are on the hunt!
    "When a man's down, KICK HIM! If he survives it he can rise above it!"

  6. #36
    Senior Member Make_My_Day's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Lake County, Florida
    Posts
    5,689

    Re: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

    Quote Originally Posted by Teach View Post
    Mike, when you rebuilt your house, did you try to "contain" a colony of termites to one corner of the building? As long as these 14th. Century troglodytes exist, they pose a serious threat to stability and peace worldwide. When the "moderate" muslims tolerate, and sometimes even assist them, the problem just keeps getting worse. Over here in the supposedly civilized part of the world, don't the bomb-throwers go by a different name, something called 'democrats"?

    Jerry
    I'm a believer in the 25-50-25 rule....(my made up estimated figures). 25% of them are either actual terrorists or terrorist sympathizers....50% of them are afraid of the first 25% and won't report any suspicious activity, and the last 25% are decent people trying to have a decent life like everyone else. There's probably no way to identify the actual numbers, and I doubt there's been a study.
    I DISLIKED COMMUNISTS BEFORE THEY CHANGED THEIR NAMES TO LIBERALS AND PROGRESSIVES

  7. #37
    Senior Member bisley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    East Texas
    Posts
    8,738

    Re: Nation building - No/ US presence -Yes

    I was trying to discuss realistic approaches to achieve the original goal of stopping world-wide terror organizations from using Afghanistan as training base/network center.

    Sure, 'containment' is a halfway measure. But, what else are you going to get from politicians who are trying to get re-elected by constituents who lose patience with any plan that lasts more than a couple of weeks? Having 'training bases' of our own that can launch overwhelming strikes on short notice seems like a workable plan, and having it pay for itself from the country's natural resources is a good thing for taxpayers. It also diverts attention to local targets that can defend themselves.

    Of course, it depends a lot on whether they actually have the minerals, and whether mining them can be cost effective. The articles I read about it did not pose a question about whether it was just a rumor, but rather, presented it as fact.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •