ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags donald trump , lying charges , Trump controversies , Trump-Russia connections , US-Russia relations , vladimir putin

Reply
Old 21st April 2017, 02:08 AM   #561
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,388
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
Perhaps, we should take a look back into history on how the war in Europe began when Britain and France became ignorant and overlooked Hitler's violations that eventually embolden Hitler and led to the slaughter of millions of people before the war in Europe ended. There are times when action must be undertaken in order to prevent an even larger catastrophe. Passive behavior of the international community had embolden the Serbs and Saddam as well who then went on to commit their atrocities that killed thousands as the world sat back and watched before we were eventually forced to take action, which, unfortunately, was too late for the thousands of innocent people who were killed as the world sat back and watched.

Britain and France didn't go for taking action against Hitler either despite the numerous warnings, which later resulted in war in Europe. How many paid with their lives because the world continued to overlook Hitler's violations? You either learn from history or you don't.


History has a lesson for us all and Trump had better learn from that history when dealing with the Russians, particularly, Putin.
.
If Britain and France had gone to war in 1938 Britain would have lost the war.
With what? You don't sufficiently appreciate the practical difficulties. Canada, Australia, New Zealand , South Africa and Rhodesia were opposed to war in 1938. There was deafening silence from America.

Chamberlain knew war was inevitable but it was a question of timing. I remember seeing some American goon on TV once saying that Britain should have taken military action when Hitler invaded the Ruhr (Rhineland), I think in about 1936,in contravention of the Treaty of Versailles. There was no public support in Britain and France for war at that time and politicians need public support.

There are people on the internet who say Churchill started the war, which is a bit unfair. At least nobody can say that Chamberlain started the war.

Last edited by Henri McPhee; 21st April 2017 at 02:16 AM.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 02:36 AM   #562
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 60,839
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
Has the USA invaded Syria, then?
Are they there on request from the state?

Quote:
Great get-out clause you've got there!
What are you babbling about?

Quote:
I haven't said anything pro-Putin in this thread.
Great get-out clause you've got there!

Quote:
You have misrepresented regurgitated speculation as concrete evidence.
Again, what are you talking about? You're not even making arguments, here.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 03:56 AM   #563
JihadJane
Penultimate Satisfaction
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 59,472
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
Are they there on request from the state?
Crimeans voted to join the Russian Federation.

Are you saying that the USA has invaded Syria?

Quote:
What are you babbling about?
Your plucked-out-of-thin-air,"it's ideological" catch phrase.

Quote:
Great get-out clause you've got there!
You're welcome to point out where I have said anything pro-Putin.

Quote:
Again, what are you talking about? You're not even making arguments, here.
I am talking about the "evidence" you posted. It contains no concrete evidence to suggest that the popular 'Putin hacked the election' meme is anything more than a conspiracy theory.
__________________
Children waiting for the day they feel good
Happy birthday, happy birthday
JihadJane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 04:53 AM   #564
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 60,839
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
Crimeans voted to join the Russian Federation.
After the invasion, yes. And this is relevant how?

Quote:
Are you saying that the USA has invaded Syria?
I asked you a question in order to find the answer, but you surprisingly didn't answer it.

Quote:
Your plucked-out-of-thin-air,"it's ideological" catch phrase.
No, I plucked it out of my experience with your posts.

Quote:
I am talking about the "evidence" you posted. It contains no concrete evidence to suggest that the popular 'Putin hacked the election' meme is anything more than a conspiracy theory.
Except for all the circumstantial evidence we DO have, and the evidence that has led the CIA and NSA to claim that something DID happen. Why do you ignore all that, I wonder?
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 09:28 AM   #565
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 21,715
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
It didn't in this case because it served to embolden a dangerous dictator and it didn't take long before the fireworks were lit.
The alternative was war, which might well have been won, but with what consequences? The Great War was "won" : WW2 was one of the consequences. Had Britain and France attacked and occupied Germany to enforce the Versailles Treaty it would only have confirmed the Nazis' claims and prepared yet another conflict. It would also have fed the Communist and Socialist narrative that capitalism thrives on warfare, with who knows what consequences.

In the event, war was a late resort, and Hitler's war-hunger was laid bare. You know the result, and are convinced that your way would have had a better result - but you can't know that.

Quote:
What happened to him afterward should serve as a warning to those who plan to use the tool of appeasement when dealing with leaders such as Putin.
So it should have been war over Crimea, as it should have been over Czechoslovakia?

Quote:
Putin is testing Trump to see how far he is willing to go and appeasement will only make things worst especially when dealing with him.
So war it is then.

Quote:
Putin has been testing us with his bombers near Alaska lately and it's time to play hardball.
The case for war is clearly overwhelming.

Quote:
Just another way he provides us with real-time hands-on training, but Putin must also be challenged and made accountable for his actions.
I don't think you'd find the war as satisfying as you imagine, nor its consequences.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 09:51 AM   #566
pgwenthold
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 16,096
Exxon has asked for an exemption from the economic sanctions to do business in Russia.

Will the Trump administration allow it? Just what they need to do, right? Give Russia some favorable treatment in exchange for all Russia has done for them....
__________________
I have a permanent room at the Home for the Chronically Groovy - Floyd from the Muppets
pgwenthold is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 11:05 AM   #567
Stacko
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 6,728
Originally Posted by pgwenthold View Post
Exxon has asked for an exemption from the economic sanctions to do business in Russia.

Will the Trump administration allow it? Just what they need to do, right? Give Russia some favorable treatment in exchange for all Russia has done for them....
It's been denied.
Stacko is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 11:13 AM   #568
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 60,839
It's just been revoked!
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 07:11 PM   #569
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,161
Citgo: look at who owns the debt on it and what country owns most of the shares, and who looks to be in default. Then look at how much oil/petrol infrastructure in the US has Citgo's hands on it.

Curiouser and Curiouser, said Alice.

The attached link is not the kind of in depth reporting I prefer, but a few of my friends who work at Citgo are concerned.
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis

Last edited by Darth Rotor; 21st April 2017 at 07:13 PM.
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 10:39 PM   #570
skyeagle409
Graduate Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,383
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
If Britain and France had gone to war in 1938 Britain would have lost the war.
Why would Britain and France have lost the war in 1938? Could it have been that Britain and France had failed to take care of business in 1933 when Germany began remilitarization, which was in violation of the Versailles Treaty? They let the fox continue to feed unimpeded at the chicken coop until the fox became too strong for both countries to handle. In other words, it was too late. To sum that up, you don't wait to have an accident before you buy insurance.

So, once again, appeasement serves to embolden the bad guys as it did Hitler and now, Putin. Either confront the bad guys in the present, or face the consequences in the future. Putin continues to send his aircraft toward Alaska and the Russians are not flying near Alaska to scout for new fishing grounds.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 21st April 2017 at 10:41 PM.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 21st April 2017, 11:05 PM   #571
skyeagle409
Graduate Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,383
Originally Posted by CapelDodger View Post
The alternative was war, which might well have been won, but with what consequences? The Great War was "won" : WW2 was one of the consequences. Had Britain and France attacked and occupied Germany to enforce the Versailles Treaty it would only have confirmed the Nazis' claims and prepared yet another conflict. It would also have fed the Communist and Socialist narrative that capitalism thrives on warfare, with who knows what consequences.
.

Yet, Britain and France did not take care of business and as a result, the war in Europe began and 6 million Jews and millions of others were killed and millions more were wounded. That was the result of appeasement. Dictators like to test waters before they act, and if no one objects, the bad guy will jump right on in and make a big splash that will no doubt, be noticed by all near the 'pool of conflict.' Another example occurred in the Balkans where the Serbs made the UN peacekeepers look inept and weak, which they were, so the Serbs tied some of them to fences as they continued to slaughter thousands of innocent people until military action was called upon to stop the carnage.

Simply doing nothing can have dire consequences. Putin is testing Trump's waters and only time will tell to see how far Putin is willing to go and how far Trump is willing to let him.
.

Last edited by skyeagle409; 21st April 2017 at 11:11 PM.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:12 AM   #572
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 13,952
Originally Posted by Darth Rotor View Post
Citgo: look at who owns the debt on it and what country owns most of the shares, and who looks to be in default. Then look at how much oil/petrol infrastructure in the US has Citgo's hands on it.

Curiouser and Curiouser, said Alice.

The attached link is not the kind of in depth reporting I prefer, but a few of my friends who work at Citgo are concerned.
Related but different: From badscience:
( Link is gruniad)
Originally Posted by EACLucifer
More Rosneft, with added Venezuala

Quote:
A Venezuelan state-owned oil company, heavily indebted to the Russian oil giant Rosneft, made a $500,000 donation to Donald Trump’s inauguration festivities, it has emerged.

Foreign donations are banned under US law, but the Venezuelan company, PdVSA, made the donation through a US affiliate, Citgo Petrol, soon after offering a nearly 50% stake in Citgo to Rosneft as collateral for a $1.5bn loan.

These transactions come at a time when PdVSA and the Venezuelan government of Nicolas Maduro is desperate for cash as oil revenues shrink and civil unrest grows. The influx of money from Rosneft is helping keep PdVSA and Maduro afloat.
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:31 AM   #573
JihadJane
Penultimate Satisfaction
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 59,472
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
.

Yet, Britain and France did not take care of business and as a result, the war in Europe began and 6 million Jews and millions of others were killed and millions more were wounded. That was the result of appeasement. Dictators like to test waters before they act, and if no one objects, the bad guy will jump right on in and make a big splash that will no doubt, be noticed by all near the 'pool of conflict.' Another example occurred in the Balkans where the Serbs made the UN peacekeepers look inept and weak, which they were, so the Serbs tied some of them to fences as they continued to slaughter thousands of innocent people until military action was called upon to stop the carnage.

Simply doing nothing can have dire consequences. Putin is testing Trump's waters and only time will tell to see how far Putin is willing to go and how far Trump is willing to let him.
.
"Military action" in the Balkans is what triggered the mass slaughter.
__________________
Children waiting for the day they feel good
Happy birthday, happy birthday
JihadJane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:38 AM   #574
JihadJane
Penultimate Satisfaction
 
JihadJane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 59,472
Originally Posted by Argumemnon View Post
After the invasion, yes. And this is relevant how?
I wanted to understand what your definition of what an invasion is. Seems you are confusing incursions with invasion.



Quote:
I asked you a question in order to find the answer, but you surprisingly didn't answer it.





No, I plucked it out of my experience with your posts.



Except for all the circumstantial evidence we DO have, and the evidence that has led the CIA and NSA to claim that something DID happen. Why do you ignore all that, I wonder?

Because one of the intelligence agencies' primary function is to propagandise for the Deep State. The CIA and NSA have not claimed that something DID happen. They have expressed "high confidence" that it could have happened.
__________________
Children waiting for the day they feel good
Happy birthday, happy birthday
JihadJane is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 03:39 AM   #575
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 13,952
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
"Military action" in the Balkans is what triggered the mass slaughter.
Military action by the Serbs in 1992
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 05:40 AM   #576
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 60,839
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
I wanted to understand what your definition of what an invasion is. Seems you are confusing incursions with invasion.
They sent military personel to establish a military presence in a foreign country and wrest control of a territory from them.

I'd call that more than an incursion. But keep playing with words, sure.

Quote:
Because one of the intelligence agencies' primary function is to propagandise for the Deep State.
I didn't ask you to make stuff up. I asked you for exactly the standard of evidence you were asking for. Now you're down to making wild claims and expecting me to take you on your word when you would not do the same for professional organisations.

I'll remind you that the CIA is not at the beck and call of the President, for instance. You seem to be under the impression that government is a monolithic organisation composed of robots.

Quote:
The CIA and NSA have not claimed that something DID happen. They have expressed "high confidence" that it could have happened.
Playing with words, again.
__________________
"What is best in life?"
Argumemnon is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:25 AM   #577
Cl1mh4224rd
Philosopher
 
Cl1mh4224rd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 8,992
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
The CIA and NSA have not claimed that something DID happen. They have expressed "high confidence" that it could have happened.

This is the sort of bizarre attitude that would allow someone to claim that the remaining 5% of a claim with "95% confidence" means that the entire claim can be dismissed without effort.

I'm not pretending that the CIA's and FBI's confidence is that high, of course, but you're playing extremely loose with their words.

Last edited by Cl1mh4224rd; Yesterday at 08:26 AM.
Cl1mh4224rd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 09:49 AM   #578
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 13,952
Originally Posted by Cl1mh4224rd View Post
This is the sort of bizarre attitude that would allow someone to claim that the remaining 5% of a claim with "95% confidence" means that the entire claim can be dismissed without effort.

I'm not pretending that the CIA's and FBI's confidence is that high, of course, but you're playing extremely loose with their words.
But this is someone who claims that Russia didn't invade the Crimea
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Expenditure on healthcare
http://www.oecd.org/els/health-systems/health-data.htm
link is 2015 data (2013 Data below):
UK 8.5% of GDP of which 83.3% is public expenditure - 7.1% of GDP is public spending
US 16.4% of GDP of which 48.2% is public expenditure - 7.9% of GDP is public spending
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:00 PM   #579
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 21,715
Originally Posted by skyeagle409 View Post
.

Yet, Britain and France did not take care of business and as a result, the war in Europe began and 6 million Jews and millions of others were killed and millions more were wounded. That was the result of appeasement.
What do you imagine would have happened if Britain and France had overturned the German government in 1933, by some combination of blockade and invasion, and replaced it with one more to their liking?

You seem to think that the German people would be cowed, accept that they cannot escape the Versailles Treaty, embrace their new government, blame the nationalists for getting them into the situation, and nobody but nobody would ever suggest that The Jews were behind it. On the back of this history which didn't happen (and lets face it was never going to) you suggest that Putin should be faced down in some indeterminate way, cowing the Russian people, and not in any way storing up problems for the future.

Can you not hear the same fatuous rhetoric in "taking care of business" and "mission accomplished"?
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 04:03 PM   #580
CapelDodger
Penultimate Amazing
 
CapelDodger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: Cardiff, South Wales
Posts: 21,715
Originally Posted by Henri McPhee View Post
Chamberlain knew war was inevitable but it was a question of timing.
Chamberlain was not convinced that war was inevitable, and of course nobody knew what the future held.
__________________
It's a poor sort of memory that only works backward - Lewis Carroll (1832-1898)

God can make a cow out of a tree, but has He ever done so? Therefore show some reason why a thing is so, or cease to hold that it is so - William of Conches, c1150
CapelDodger is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 07:52 PM   #581
skyeagle409
Graduate Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,383
Originally Posted by JihadJane View Post
"Military action" in the Balkans is what triggered the mass slaughter.

What did the UN do to prevent military action? Serbs were slaughtering innocent people while the rest of the world sat back and watched and that was before NATO became involved, which ended the carnage with its own military action that should never have happened if someone had taken care of business in the first place before things got out of hand.

Last edited by skyeagle409; Yesterday at 07:59 PM.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Yesterday, 08:30 PM   #582
skyeagle409
Graduate Poster
 
skyeagle409's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Posts: 1,383
Originally Posted by CapelDodger View Post
What do you imagine would have happened if Britain and France had overturned the German government in 1933, by some combination of blockade and invasion, and replaced it with one more to their liking?

As history has shown, that didn't happened and as a result, millions upon millions of people would eventually lose their lives in the coming years because no real action was undertaken to confront Germany when it would have made a difference.

Putin is testing the rest of the international community to see how much he can get away with.
skyeagle409 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:30 AM   #583
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,388
Originally Posted by CapelDodger View Post
Chamberlain was not convinced that war was inevitable, and of course nobody knew what the future held.
I agree with JihadJane.

This website is closer to the truth about Chamberlain. He used cunning and subtlety, unlike the average Joe in America who tend to be a lot of armchair admirals. From:

www.politicalbistro.com/neville-chamberlain

Quote:
The other alternative worth noting, and the only one that brings honor to Chamberlain, is rather simple.* That is that Chamberlain was fully aware of the inevitability of war with Germany but also knew that the British could never defeat the ever-increasing power of the German forces, especially their Luftwaffe or air force, which was truly the envy of much of the world for its skilled abilities.* This possibility is altogether probable for the British air forces were particularly weak during this time, numbering a mere 135 squadrons even come the beginning of 1939 (www.raf.mod.uk/history), production lagging and, most importantly, skilled pilots hard to come by.* As it was, once production was begun on Hurricane’s and Spitfires, two fighters that would ultimately prove invaluable in the Battle of Britain and beyond, delivery of a sufficient number came only a scant 10 days before the first attack.
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old Today, 02:48 AM   #584
Henri McPhee
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,388
There seems to have been a lack of strategy and strategic vision and war plan in Afghanistan, apart from having a proxy war with Russia and that drunken peasant Yeltsin, if not Putin. This is an interesting opinion on this website. This is part of it. I don't know if Trump will seize the situation like a man:

www.csis.org/analysis/Afghanistan-death-strategy

Quote:
The Assumptions behind a Strategy that Has Been a Long Time Dying

The reality, however, is that the strategy developed under General Stanley McCrystal has been dying for a long time and for many more reasons than the growing distrust between U.S. and ISAF personnel and the Afghans. It was already clear in 2009 that the odds of success were no better than 50 percent.
The key reasons shaping uncertainty as to whether the mission could be accomplished—whether it would be possible to create an Afghanistan that could largely stand on its own and be free of any major enclaves of terrorists or violent extremists—went far beyond the problems created by the insurgents.
It was clear that there were four roughly equal threats to success, of which the Afghan Taliban, Haqqani, and Hekmatyar were only the first. The second was the corruption and incompetence of the Afghan government. The third was the role of Pakistan and its tolerance and support of insurgent sanctuaries. The fourth was the United States and its allies.

This fourth threat was compounded by years of failing to focus on Afghanistan while the United States focused on Iraq. It was compounded by the weak, underfunded, and grossly undermanned effort to build Afghan forces, by the corrupting flood of unmanaged and unaudited military spending and aid, and by the lack of effective civilian aid workers and well-managed and coordinated efforts.

The response was to hope that the problems in the administration of President Hamid Karzai, and throughout the Afghan government, could be corrected after what was assumed to be an Afghan presidential election where Karzai would glide to power without major incidents. It was also assumed that aid and training to the Pakistani forces, and the growing internal threat they faced from the Pakistani Taliban, would lead Pakistan to clear the sanctuaries held by Afghan insurgents, as much out of their own interest as a result of U.S. and allied prodding.

It was to build up enough U.S. forces to clear and hold the critical populated areas and districts in the south and east, while keeping allied forces at least at their existing level. It was to rush in trainers and advisers in sufficient numbers to build an effective mix of Afghan security forces. It was to reform the aid and spending process to create integrated civil-military efforts and to deploy enough new aid workers to allow the Afghan government to hold and build in the same the critical populated areas and districts that were the focus of the military campaign.

The critical underpinning assumption behind all of these efforts was that they would be properly resourced for as long as it took to determine whether the new strategy could work. It was that the timing of U.S. and allied efforts would be “conditions based” and not subject to some arbitrary deadline.

The Reasons for a Slow Death......
Henri McPhee is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » USA Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:49 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.