Yes it has, but part of the whole point of Afghanistan outside of killing the Taliban and Al Qaeda leaders, was to make Afghanistan a nation where they would not be able to gain power and train again. <snip>
I fear your knowledge of the situation on the ground in Afghanistan is severely contorted by too much consumption of slanted reporting from the LSM. It was never our mission to do anything with Afghanistan other than to kill the Taliban and as many of UBL's people as possible, and there was never any hesitancy, much less fear, of putting our troops on the ground there. Lest you forget, we backed and supported the Mujahadeen there during their war with the Soviets, we know the area, we know the terrain, and we have no problem operating there. As far as using what you call "proxy armies", it only makes good military sense to utilize those forces that are most familiar with the area and the people so as to avoid wasting time and resources.
(BTW, UBL didn't "slip out", he's DEAD)
No I would not take over Pakistan, but I would strike hard at the border if we had good intel on where leadership was, regardless of what Pakistan thinks. They have as a "ally" given safe ground to Taliban and al Qaeda leadership to set up attacks both in Pakistan, Afghanistan, and other areas.
And by their being locked up in that one small area, they have been rendered impotent to do anything substantial, and Musharaff's forces are quite capable of dealing with any of them who stray outside their confinement. BTW, have you studied the terrain in that part of the world? The notion that we, or anyone for that matter, could just waltz in there and root them out, or that some mythical airstrike would have any effect is laughable. That's the kind of terrain that a Dahl Sheep looks at and says "are you JOKING?"
Im sorry Bin Laden is Dead? Would you please share this info you have with me , the CIA, the NSA, and others? <snip>
Have you studied those tapes? I especially liked the videos that were perported to have been "recent", except for the fact that they were voiced over tapes from back in the early to mid 90's! I about laughed my ass off when the LSM was tripping all over themselves reporting "new tapes from UBL" and remembering seeing the EXACT SAME TAPE from years earlier.
As for your rather lame attempt at a dig concerning what I know, here's a little clue for you, my job in the military was fighting terrorism, so I know exactly what UBL was, I know exactly how they think, I know exactly how they operate, and I know that the people who are running things now keep bringing out these "tapes" to scare the crap out of the uninformed sheeple, and it would appear that you're still buying it.
Really we found enough WND? Please share with the class....and by class I mean the CIA, NSA, White House, Pentagon, and everyone else on earth know knows that there was no WMD program in places.<snip>
Do your own research. Do the parts of their nuclear program that we have found buried around the country, including in one of their scientists flower garden, count as WMD's to you? What about Ricin? Anthrax? VX? Sarin? Oh, and since you've obviously never received NBC training (that's Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical), those old Mustard Gas cannisters you so conveniently dismiss, if used, even in their degraded condition, could kill or incapacitate THOUSANDS of people. The only thing that made them "non usable" was the fact that they could no longer be fired, but that does not in any way diminish the threat of the mustard gas itself.
You are a special man if you don't think a war in the middle east, in a major oil producing nation, has no effect on gas prices.
And you're a special man if you think that the emerging markets in India, China, and everywhere else around the world aren't having an exponentially greater effect on oil prices than anything going on in Iraq. FYI, by March of this year, 5 years following the invasion of Iraq, their oil production was at 2.4 million barrels per day, which is higher than any of their production levels from the beginning of Desert Storm to the beginning of OIF. So how does this little fact tie in with your scare mongering about Iraq having some effect on gas prices? On September 11, 2001 the average price for regular gasoline was $1.66 per gallon, today it's $3.97, yet Iraqs oil production is virtually the same today as it was on September 11, 2001, so please explain the discrepency between your ill researched "theory" and that REALITY.
SO what that Hamas wins? I don't know I guess maybe I thought that was a bad thing? And it was in part due to US Policy that helped them win?
Oh, you 'guess', you 'thought', 'maybe', that's a lot of conditions, but the question is do you KNOW anything. Hamas and Fatah are two sides of the same coin, and Israel will deal with them in their own way, and in their own time. As to any involvement we may, or may not have had in their victory, again, SO WHAT?
really you don't think Iran has more power? we killed its more bitter enemy, we have our military stretched so we can't lunch a effected attack against them if we wanted, <snip>
Iran CLAIMING they have 'more power' doesn't mean that they really do. Iran is a small minded, piss-ant, backwater theocracy since the Shah left power. Your assertion that our military is stretched only serves to prove that you don't know anything about the military, or how missions are planned. If you think for one moment that we can't completely decapitate, and incapacitate, Iran in one single day, your level of knowledge concerning our military is beyond hopeless.
If you think Hezbollah lost to Israel based on death count or something, then its clear you know nothing about war, or Hezbollah and middle east.
Really, and how many tours of the Mid-East have you pulled? How many months or years have you spent over there? For that matter, have you ever even BEEN to the region. Hezbollah are TERRORISTS, the entire region is wrapped up with them, and has been for centuries, and until you've BEEN to war, don't even go there with me, you're out manned, out gunned, out fought, and out thought.
While they lost 1200 vs the 158 Israeli killed, the fact is that the power nation of Israel moved in on them, and failed to stop attacks on Israel, failed to damage Hezbollah in any significant fashion, and failed all of its goals.
Oh, and what was Israels "goal"? They tore Lebanon a new asshole, from one end of the country to the other, and that WAS their goal.
Hezbollah meet most if its goals, it caused damage and panic to Israel, it showed the Muslim world that a small group of dedicated fighters could stand up to Israel, a group that has no air power, or Army ( as in tanks, Fighter jets, ect that a nation would have) and it forced Israel to have to deal with them.<snip>
That analysis is as convoluted and juvenile as saying that a child who stands up to it's parents, and gets their butts beaten, has their X-Box, computer, cell phone, and everything else impounded, and grounded for the rest of their lives, won some kind of "victory" by forcing the parents to "deal with them". I strongly suggest that you grow up and face the realities of the REAL world. The only "point" you've proven is that you have not the first clue what you're talking about.
What I am talking about is Russia became a Democracy...not it is back to state run media, KGB spying and killing its own people (under a new name) and no more Free Elections with Putin playing its new leader even when he changes his title.
Well, given that democracy is the worst possible form of government, I consider it to be a GOOD thing that they're not doing that. What Russia is trying to do is become as much of a Republic as they can, given their history and economy, as quickly as they can, but like our own history, it's going to take time, and a LOT of patience.
So you see no problem with just buying and buying and buying...and no need for the US to sell anything overseas? Not only is a a horrible Policy economically, but it also means that we are dependent on China for way to much of we need today.
No, I see no problem with buying, so long as the American people have the money to pay for what they buy. Where you're confused is in your definition of "need". We don't "need" anything that we're buying from China, we "want" what China is making, and we're willing to spend our considerable disposable income to purchase it. We're also propping them up economically so that they won't have to resort to imperialism and warfare to support their population. So you need to make up your mind, do you want to buy their trinkets, or do you want to go to war with them? The choice is yours.
And I may take Obama, but I may take McCain, I have not Decided, but at last I know both know alot more about this then you do. That makes me feel better.
No young one, you have deluded yourself into "thinking" that you know something, and that makes you either drunk, stoned, or stupid, but that's to be expected from the young. When you grow up, you'll look back at these days and say to yourself "WTF was I thinking?"