McCain claims to 'know how to win wars'
By Steve Benen Wednesday Jul 16, 2008 11:00amJohn McCain hasn’t spent much time talking about Afghanistan during the presidential campaign, but now that “other” war is deteriorating, the Republican candidate has discovered his new-found interest in the conflict.
Republican John McCain said Tuesday he knows “how to win wars” and that the strategy of increasing troop levels in Iraq should also be applied to Afghanistan. […]
McCain has described Obama’s call for withdrawal from Iraq as tantamount to declaring defeat and points to the lower levels of violence in Iraq as evidence that sending additional U.S. troops there has been a successful strategy.
“Sen. Obama will tell you we can’t win in Afghanistan without losing in Iraq. In fact, he has it exactly backwards,” McCain told a town hall meeting. “It is precisely the success of the surge in Iraq that shows us the way to succeed in Afghanistan.”
In other words, McCain’s new policy on Afghanistan — I say “new” because up until now, he hasn’t actually articulated a policy on Afghanistan — can be summarized this way: “Just do what we’ve been doing in Iraq.” Seriously. That’s the policy.
This, of course, doesn’t make any sense. The wars are entirely different. The causes of violence are completely different. The competing factions are completely different. Oh, and by the way, Iraq hasn’t gone especially well.
McCain seemed particularly fond of this line from his speech: “I know how to win wars.” Now, with all due respect to the senator’s military service, what is it, exactly, that leads McCain to think he has this knowledge? McCain hasn’t, you know, actually won any wars.
My suspicion is, McCain means he endorsed the surge, the surge led to victory in Iraq, and if he can just bring more surges to more countries, American would keep winning. In other words, when McCain says he knows “how to win wars,” he means he’s concluded, “Surges = Victories.”
It simply never occurred to me that the Republican Party would nominate another presidential candidate as sophomoric and confused as George W. Bush. It just didn’t seem possible.
And yet, here we are.
McCain also argued today, “Just as we have worked over the past 18 months to stabilize Iraq by bringing together its neighbors, this kind of diplomacy is just as important for Afghanistan.”
I hope someone can help me out with this one. I like to think I keep up fairly well on current events, but I don’t quite recall the period in which we “brought together” Iraq’s neighbors. For that matter, I’m still looking for this “stabilized” Iraq.
The fall-out-of-the-chair moment, however, came when McCain insisted, Obama “has no strategy.... All he has done is say we need more troops.”
I see. So, what’s McCain’s strategy? We need more troops — and an Afghanistan czar.
There was also this gem:
“[U]nderstand this, when I am commander in chief, there will be nowhere the terrorists can run and nowhere they can hide,” he said.
Unless, of course, the terrorists hide in Pakistan. In that case, McCain even talking about possibly pursuing terrorists is reckless and irresponsible. And it’s not as if there are any terrorists hiding in the mountains of Pakistan, right?
Patrick Barry summarized the situation nicely.
John McCain fancies himself an expert on national security, but looking at his policy for Afghanistan … I just don’t understand how he can still make that claim with a straight face. It should be clear to anyone who follows this issue or cares about the threat that instability in Afghanistan poses to Americans, that John McCain’s policy is an absolute sham.
As is McCain’s reputation for competence.
Login or Register to post comments.
What experience does he have winning a war? what a crock. oh, FRIST
Win Wars? He doesn't even know how to evade capture.
Maybe we need to know which war he won. The last one he was in, he spent the whole period in a POW camp.
This, coming from a shell-of-a-man that surrendered to the enemy after bombing civilians.
So says Songbird ~ JibJab ‘Campaignin’ Video References Charges That POW ‘Songbird’ McCain Cooperated with His Captors
McEscalate
i'm sure, though, that like the deceptive claim that the "surge worked", the msm will treat this GOP talking point as inerrant.
OK, how does participating in Super-Iraq (Vietnam) and getting shot down qualify as winning wars? The guy must be senile or not know what he's saying. He wants a surge in Afghanistan, never mind that the greater part of the reason the Surge worked is paying the guys formerly shooting at us to shoot at somebody else, something not likely to work with the Taliban, and something likely to make enemies of the Afghans themselves (Afghans are typically Hanafi with a strong Sufi mystical bent, the Taliban are a different sort of Hanafi bearing Indian and Hanbali influence and strongly opposed to Sufism) if it did work with the Taliban. Either McPapen is senile or he misspoke for the hundredth time.
The man with a plan to win an un-winnable war. Do tell?
actually, it seems pretty damned amazing that there could ever BE "another presidential candidate as sophomoric and confused as George W. Bush".
The sum of John McCain's knowledge of How to Win Wars:
Or a thousand...or ten thousand. Lucky for us he doesn't know How to Win Presidential Elections.
John McCain - NOPE!
The surge is only working in and around The Green Zone. Shift them to Afghanistan and it will collapse in Iraq. Shift them back to Iraq and it will collapse in Afghanistan. Repeat, rinse...
Wesley Clark asked the same question -- after citing McCain as one of his personal heroes for his service and sacrifice: does getting shot down in combat translate to executive leadership, to command leadership? His answer: no. And the media -- stupid, mean, niggling, and dishonest -- jumped on Clark for suggesting that getting shot down doesn't necessarily qualify you to be president.
So, naturally, Obama spinelessly and cynically joined in on the attack and threw General Clark under the bus. Getting shot down does not qualify you to be president. But does sucking up to the media qualify Obama?
(Oh, I'll vote for the dude in November. But the way he tossed Clark aside just gnaws at me, and makes it really hard to be enthusiastic for a guy who claims he's going to change the way things are done.)
They haven't nominated him yet, but it won't really matter, he is just the stooge of the puppet masters.
Madison Avenue can sell anything. The Americans will sit in front of their teevees and be manipulated as they always are.
Oh yeah...I forgot. McCain won the Viet Nam War single handed (with a little lelp from Rambo)....
"I know how to win wars--by starting more of them."
Umm...he was in Vietnam
He no remember this?
http://www.pickens.k12.sc.us/dhsteachers/instructional_staff/hylkemaj/us...
Please. The only thing Jowls McCain knows how to do is crash planes and get caught.
"Fish Rots from the Head"-------------The Republican "trickle down theory"at its most corrupting.
thepoetryman @ 11:
Not necessarily, the collapse in Iraq. Iraq has an increasingly similar system of power-distribution to how Saddam kept control of it, and would likely regain more stability in that manner if we would just leave. Whereas in Afghanistan, the guys fighting us are neither speaking local languages or based on the local religion the way many Iraqi insurgents that stopped shooting were, they follow a stricter interpretation of Hanafi Islam with a strong Hanbali influence, as opposed to a more liberal interpretation with a strong Sufi influence like predominates in Afghanistan. Many of the circumstances that have led to the (even if only temporary) cessation of much violence in Iraq, and I think it was temporary and will be picking up in a bit due to insurgents refining their tactics and due eventually to lack of funds to pay the guys that were once shooting at us, don't exist at all in Afghanistan.
When did mccain start channeling Nixon?
ummm yah maybe grandpa simpson knows something all those other countries/empires didn't know that tried to conquer the afgans
“I know how to win wars,” says McClown. So why has he been keeping these fantastic war-winning skills to himself all this time?
“Just as we have worked over the past 18 months to stabilize Iraq by bringing together its neighbors...” ...like Iran, for example?
Know what is truly scary? This a** actually has a chance to be elected President of the US of A! He's made it to a place where the opportunity exists! He is influencing people who are strangely open to his insanity. How can this be? Is America completely out of it's mind? Are we all so delusional to give an iota of consideration to this fool for our President? How much evidence needs to be presented before this blowhard is exposed for what he is?
Beyond anything sane or intellectually responsible.
If this nut can possibly be elected someone needs to run a write-in election because any nutjob can be President if this buffoon can do it.
Yes, someone please tell me what experience this doddering old idiot have winning wars?
This is exactly why the right wing knuckle draggers got all pissy when General Clark called McGramps out on running on his war record. He is untried and untested. Clark should hold a press conference and say it again.
How many planes did McCain crash during non combat situations?
And much like last time when it's over we'll all be standing around wondering how a sick, senile old gop moron stole the white house again. And we'll be right back to business as usual.
McCain knows how to win them wars:
He is going to challenge those pesky terrorists to a bamboo cage match winner take all
So is McCain saying we've now won in Iraq? Does that mean all the troops can go home?
Juliana @ 17:
he was bombing civilians when he got flamed. you women and children were in his bomb sights.
i wonder what actual war it was that he won?
"It simply never occurred to me that the Republican Party would nominate another presidential candidate as sophomoric and confused as George W. Bush. It just didn’t seem possible."
C'mon, how many bad candidates and bad appointments do you need to witness to have it "occur" to you that the Republican party is ALL ABOUT bad nominations? What "doesn't seem possible" is that the Republicans will EVER nominate a person qualified for whatever post they are attempting to fill. Their quest is to make government non-functional -- and they are geniuses at that.
Any idiot - past service notwithstanding - who thinks they can field a viable force for 100+ years most clearly lacks even the rudimentary knowledge of strategy. The open-ended 'we'll stay till we win' mentality of the Bush/McCain crowd isn't even practical in terms of 'industrial war' (i.e., nation states and massive armies, such as World War II).
It doesn't matter who they nominate. They intend to cheat, that is what they do. They will steal the election, spin to cover it, and the media will spread the lies as fact.
Yeah right McCain knows how win wars. The one he was in, the USA lost.
McCain is an Idiot
We need a president who knows how to win peace...
Enough of wars and spending on wars...
The Middle East have seen war after war since end of WWII...and we have our good share of wars we got ourselves involved in too.
Besides such claim is stupid...that McCain knows how to win wars...
How can someone make such claim?!!
Nobody , even experienced military generals ,can tell you with full confidence that a war can be won as planned, and when that war will end.
Enough of this war mentality...
Our Treasury is drained because of these wars, while we need every dollar spent at home on infrastructure,education,health, science and many other beneficial projects to Americans; and here we have a candidate who tells us..that he knows how to win wars...!!!
Where did McCwar learn how to win wars....?
And if he got so much experience about winning wars..why didn't he reveal it to the military since he is friend of Bush and member of the Armed Service Committee in the Senate?!!
.
Apparently failing his mission and getting captured by the enemy in Vietnam is part of some long term war winning strategy.
Boy! Are we all going to look foolish when we finally beat charlie!
McCain has no idea what he is talking about and apparently can't count either. There simply isn't enough ground troops available to perform any meaningful "surge" in Afghanistan while maintaining the "surge" in Iraq at the same time. The only way you could pull that off is if you extend the rotations of troops while speeding up the training and reducing the down time of the troops currently back in the United States. I'm hearing that the Taliban control large portions of Afghanistan and operate at company and battalion strength now. They have the experience and numbers to force U.S. troops to withdraw from bases as we saw earlier. This is no rag-tag bunch but apparently McCain thinks they are.
Besides, if enough troops are reduced in Iraq we might see another flare up there just as we are now seeing it happen in Afghanistan.
If John Kerry had graduated at the bottom of his class and then got shot down the Swifties would be claiming he wasn't qualified to fly which is why he crashed. I won't go quite as far as the Swiftboaters but I will say I don't think graduating at the bottom of your Naval Academy class and getting shot down means you know how to win a war.
Did anyone here happen to read the report yesterday that American forces will for the first time be training for S&R missions ALONGSIDE Communist Chinese military forces? Does anyone here realize that Vietnam will in all likelihood become a new manufacturing and export hub now that it is becoming more expensive to manufacture in China? Connect the dots.
Win Wars? He doesn’t even know how to evade capture.
Or fly a plane. He crashed five of them
Surrendering to the enemy and then cooperating shows you the knowledge to win wars?
Only stupid republicans would believe that garbage.
it doesn't matter what you say as the republican nominee. you have the entire mass media at your disposal, ready to repeat whatever you say, whether it's right or wrong, to the masses. the same people who bring you the news are the same people who build the bombs. now, what do you think they're going to say?
They aren't wars. These are occupations. You cannot "win" an occupation.
Everyone knows getting your ass shot out of the sky qualifies you to be an expert on anything.
He is slick though. He's going to hold up is mil service as credentials then relax as the MSM crushes anyone who actually scrutinizes them.
if he knows how to win wars, why has he kept these secrets to himself for so long? Seems treasonous.
General_Rennenkampf @ 7:
In all seriousness I am Ignorent as to the differing religous factions. Could you give me a source to read about that?
Let's just declare victory and get the frack out of there.
I really don't think he has a chance at winning, every Republican that I know (very ignorant people my husband works with) can't even stand him. The Chelsea Clinton remark (calling her UGLY) should turn off all mothers from voting for him. Calling his wife a C*NT in front of staffers should also be observed. He butchers the english language almost as bad as Bush "Drugs Is A Big, Big problem in America" Saying that he can win a war that is unwinnable shows his ignorance. He has no experience so far in that field. This man, when you hear him speak, is like watching a really bad actor and it makes people cringe. It is really hard for him to articulate. He is just a puppet shell of a man who is trying to win the highest office in the world to allow his handlers to continue the Bush Agenda while pretending to care about important issues. His solutions to the big issues of the day don't even make any sense to the half witts.
Maybe McCain should consider that it is not only the Taliban that are U.S. enemies but former U.S. allies as well. Seeing how it is McCain though, I doubt he can keep who is who straight. Here is just another example of "blowback" that the right wing thinks is non-existent:
Afghan Warlords, Formerly Backed By the CIA, Now Turn Their Guns On U.S. Troops
They defeated the Soviets with Washington’s help, but now they attack Americans as the new occupiers
"Ironically, these two warlords—currently at the top of America's list of most wanted men in Afghanistan—were once among America's most valued allies. In the 1980s, the CIA funneled hundreds of millions of dollars in weapons and ammunition to help them battle the Soviet Army during its occupation of Afghanistan. Hekmatyar, then widely considered by Washington to be a reliable anti-Soviet rebel, was even flown to the United States by the CIA in 1985."
http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2008/07/11/afghan-warlords-formerly-back...
Town Hall meetings? These are not Town Hall meetings. They are staged infomercials, some with laugh tracks and phony applause.
Louis @ 50:
Like this? http://img367.imageshack.us/img367/5990/mccain9fcb98bmw7.jpg
Juliana @ 17:
And change his stories about the names he gave in captivity. Next he will say when pressed and tortured he gave the names of the cast members from "Guys and Dolls".
I am reminded of a Joe Rogan comedy routine in which he supposes that the republicans chose g-dub as a candidate to find out how dumb Americans are. If they vote for someone that dumb they must be really dumb. In 2004, the republicans were in disbelief, "They elected him again! Your kidding me!" and in the back there was one guy saying, "I think we can go dumber." That guy must have gotten his wish. I mean seriously. On a list of 899 possible nominees McCain should rank 894th.
I think he said the line twice because it was supposed to be the beginning of a paragraph and he didn't say it with the correct inflection the first time. Also, if he knows how to win, maybe he should tell the Shrub.
Planes and parts of planes will rain down on our enemies and victory will be ours!!
Who knew that having extensive experience crashing planes, having them blow up under you, getting shot down in them, spending years as a POW, and commanding a flight training squadron was exactly the same experience as say, oh I don't know, say Eisenhower's experience during WWII.
Afghans know how to win wars, John, and believe me, you're no Afghan.
Steve Benen,You never thought that republicains would have McCain.Try going back to Dole--He was just a patsy and so is McCain. The establishment knows that it is the other teams turn for 8 years. Both were promised a go at the next ending term--just old saps trying to pocket party donations.they know what's up and down---Obama in,McCain out!
“It is precisely the success of the surge in Iraq that shows us the way to succeed in Afghanistan.” -- John McObfuscate
what the media fails to mention (shocking, i know) is that the reason that we now need a "way to succeed in afghanistan" is b/c mccain and his merry band of wargasmic yes-men supported pulling troops out of afghanistan in the first place, creating the opening for a resurgent taliban.
despite my news-addiction, it never fails to amaze me that the media's memory only goes back about 2 weeks.
also- keep your eyes on the Central Asia Gas Pipeline (see, hamid karzai and Unocal).
Exotic Blue Lensman @ 55:
LOL
Exotic Blue Lensman @ 55:
hahhahah nice.
HMMMM - the announcement of the beginning of the withdrawal of troops from Iraq. Could it be that the Iraqi parliament, government and people are DEMANDING that we remove troops and take the green zone with us as we go? Just Asking!
The more they lie the more they have to.
moniker @ 57:
heh, good one !
McCain - old and delusional.
America: If you were to build your new home, would you give the contract to an architect who finished fifth at the bottom of his graduating class?
Now the old flopper is is at it again. He'll win the "propaganda war" with the help of the Media! His latest flip flop is that he really finished 4th in his class and Wes Clark finished last.
lj @ 65:
what's scary 25% populist believe it
lj @ 65:
Sorry 5th in his class...he's not as smart as I thought.
66 constituent Says: lj @ 65:
Now the old flopper is is at it again. He’ll win the “propaganda war” with the help of the Media! His latest flip flop is that he really finished 4th in his class and Wes Clark finished last.
what’s scary 25% populist believe it
Don'tcha mean populace?
It's mccain's flip-floppery that makes Cindy dependent on Gerardo the pool boy.
"I know how to crash airplanes" didn't poll well with the focus groups.
It just astonishes me that after so many Americans who voted for Bush and regretted it, now believe in this dunce. I would have thought that EVEN Republican supporters would want someone (anyone) who could finish better than ALMOST LAST in their West Point class (after having gotten INTO the academy only because of Daddy in the first place) before allowing them the chance to destroy, er, command ALL of our troops. ESPECIALLY after witnessing what a moron in office can do to them over the course of ONE term in office, let alone two.
It is just hard to fathom anyone would have half a notion to allow someone AS stupid to be in office again AFTER they knew the background of this guy and hearing him ramble on about not knowing much on the economic front and constantly mis-speaking about foreign matters.
I continue to watch this debacle in utter horror.
BushCo already won what he wanted: the oil contracts.
It's time to get out. Iraq is a losing issue this election for republicans.
ysbaddaden @ 68:
yeah that's it...i don't know how to win wars or spell
i have a feeling you knew what i meant.....
This does beg a lot of questions doesn't it. If he knows how to win wars then he knows how to win the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan doesn't he? If so why isn't he telling us all how to win those wars? Why is he letting all those soldiers and civilians die when he knows how to make it all stop? Is he holding their lives ransom? He won't tell us his amazing insight unless elected president? That is so crass.
And speaking of the "surge", have you heard the latest from Mitt (Pick me, Pick me) Romney? Watch this. http://www.tagg-lines.com/2008/07/amazing.html
RickMack @ 72:
annapolis probably isn't easy but 894 out of 899
i wonder if he even wanted to attend maybe he was pushed in by his father and grandfather
he may not be stupid but he is certainly over his head
he gets stuffed with info every day like a holiday turkey
even giving the "i know how to win wars speech" involved long extended looks at the teleprompter
It is time for some campaignin'.
http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=adc3MSS5Ydc
Let's home mccain doesn't volunteer to airlift our soldiers home.
Didn't realize that crashing one's own plane several times constituted "winning wars" ; perhaps wars are won and lost while being in a POW camp............?
Let's hope (not home.)
I just can't type when I'm sober.
John F A @ 2:
He sure knows how to be a "turncoat".
you tell the enemy the names of the defensive lineman of
the pittsburg steelers...that's how you win wars dammit
MCMetal @ 80:
Well, I assume that at the Hanoi Hilton they killed time playing many a game of risk and checkers, at which McCain was very good at.
Basically the McSame/ Bush etc. approach to WINNING a war is to beat the hell out the enemy. McSame, the Big Bomber, knows that's how we 1) won the Viet Nam War and 2) killed Bin Laden in the mountains of A-stan 3) surged our way through Iraq.... using this very fine strategy. They want the world to fear us, and since America is part of the world we should be scared too.
Let's assume McCain really does know "how to win wars".
At this point, I imagine his good friend George W. Bush is wondering why McCain's been withholding his fine wisdom and advice-giving talents from supplying the Bush administration with an easy, satisfying victory.
If McCain is right, then can we not thank him and lay at his feet the deaths of our 4000+ men and women serving in the Middle East?
Either he knows how to win, and has been keeping his mouth shut for far too long, or he's a complete raving lunatic who should keep his mouth shut from here on out.
Which is it, Mr. McCain?
America can start winning wars if we just stop pretending to be the good guys. I mean seriously, what does it matter that we are pretending to set up a democratic government in Iraq. If we just go in there and enslave half the populous and kill the other half then we can finally say, "mission accomplished" or some other kind of BS.
Either that or just nuke the entire mid-east until its molten glass and that should "win" our war.
Both Obama and McCain have called for more troops to Afghanistan. We're boned either way people. There is no choice. Shut America down.
...Riiiight... Just like he knows how to fly jets......JD
Well, Bush knows how to wins wars. He already won both the Iraq and Afghan wars.
Country invaded? Check!
Leader deposed? Check!
American troops on the ground as an occupying force? Check!
Obamalamadingdong could learn a few things from MEN - since is he just a BOY.
fry @ 88:
Meanwhile China is busy winning the bigger war---the economic war! They will be the leader of the world sometime and we will still be trying to force Democracy on those who aren't ready for it or who don't want it. That's another reason we can't have a President who doesn't understand economics, or war winning.
This sorry senior citizen, killed 176 sailors in the Forrestal, crashed 5 jet planes, got captured by the enemy, and now he thinks that because of this alone, he is an American hero and therefore he is entilted to become President of USA. What a fuck is he smoking?
Shot.... too...easy.....
Must resist cheap shot!
I think McC*unt was having another senior moment.
What he meant to say was, "I know how to finish at the bottom of my class...screw up my mission and get my ass shot out of the sky...cheat on my first wife....and never hold a job outside of Washington DC."
Dee @ 48:
Well-said.
What saddens me the most is the fact that McBush, like him or not, truly is a war hero. Thus, it makes no sense that his views of combat and war are as asinine and chilidish as Fuckface's. They both have this John Wayne-esque view of how things are going and how they should go, and it's a view that's vastly different from what's going on.
You're right. Bad actor. REALLY bad actor.
If McCain knows how to win wars, he wouldn't be parroting Bush's war strategies. Period.
Sick and tired of war-mongers - find us a peace-monger, PLEASE!
Didn't he really say, "I know how to win whores?"
I'm pretty sure we didn't win the only war he was ever in...
George :^) @ 58:
Might not want to be so sure... Two words - Florida, Diebold
If McDepends knows so much about "winning wars" , why hasn't he single-handedly solved the clusterfuck in Iraq ???????? Last I checked , we were still there ...........
The only presidential candidate in the last 100 years who could legitimately claim to "know how to win wars" was General Dwight D. Eisenhower.
You didn't think they'd nominate a sophomoric underperformer? Do you remember the "field" from which this doddering fool emerged?
Well McCain if you know how to win wars then speak up! What are you waiting for? Bush the Destroyer needs all the help he can get.
prunes @ 98:
Bullshit! We kicked the Kaiser's ass!
Loonie @ 22:
If he knows how to win wars, than wouldn't it be immoral for him to keep it to himself, which would result in continued unnecessary deaths, until or unless he were elected and took office?
I believe that McCain is not an experienced war figure. Being a prisoner of war does not make him a war hero. There were several others who did not receive the similar reward as that of McCain. Perhaps McCain received the award for some hidden mission that was accomplished.
In my view, Bush, McCain are not experienced in winning wars, but to create one. It is the generals that do strategize and win it. One great president was FDRoosevelt, who was in Germany at the battleground supporting the troops. It was FDR who truly won the war and later by Eisenhower.
moniker @ 57:
John F A @ 2:
These two posts will help me through the day. Thank you...every time I read these comments, I laugh my ass off!
Hmmm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/7512476.stm
Here's who we need to save the day in the Middle-East:
http://www.internationalhero.co.uk/g/groo.jpg
displssd @ 87:
This kind of tactic tells me "I give up and refuse to even try to think rationally about the problem" -- the childhood equivalent of tossing the board game in the air and declaring "I win!"
The blood of every soldier that dies now is on McCain's hands for NOT telling America how to win the Iraq War.
What's stopping him from getting in a car, driving down the White House, and telling Bush "I know how to win the war, here's how..."? He'll only tell America the secret if they elect him president in nearly a year from now?
How horrific is that?
I hear he knows how to deflect hurricanes, too.
kerry @ 46:
Google "Islamic fiqh schools" and "History of the Taliban."
You see, Afghanistan is a mostly Indo-Iranian territory, and that group of people tends towards mysticism (vis-a-vis Hinduism). The Taliban are often people strongly influenced by a different school of Halafism. Halafism is the most moderate form of Islam, like the liberal wing of Episcopalianism, the Hanbali the Muslim version of the SoBaps and Pentes. Deobandi and Wahabbi Islam are much more hardline schools of interpretation, bred by poverty and desperation, as opposed to the (prior to 1979) relatively wealthier Afghanistan region. Taliban Islam is a mixture of Deobandi and Wahhabi Islam, two of the more nasty forms of Islam. The Afghans are heavily Sufi and practice a much more moderate form of Halafi Islam than the Halafi influence on the Taliban. To get a picture of what the Taliban is like as rulers, imagine today's UK under foreign armies of SoBaps and InBaps. That's how different Taliban are from typical Afghan culture, the Afghans don't like them.
No religion is monolithic, and the sort of Islam the Taliban follow is as toxic to the Ummah as Hinduvta are to Santanata Dharma and American Fundamentalism to the Corpus Christantium.
General_Rennenkampf @ 114:
But they all try to be monolithic and the source of moral authority. Schisms are inevitable, hence the four horsemen of religion.
Peter G @ 115:
Well, yes, they all try to be monolithic and the source of moral authority. Nothing is monolithic or 100% certain. Science obeys entirely different laws than religion, yet you have 90 out of 100 scientists, I'd estimate in paleoanthropology now who believe in the Homo-Pan clade, 5 out of 100 in the Pan-Gorilla clade, and 5 out of 100 who believe in the Homo-Pongo clade. Obviously, humans cannot be more closely related to the African chimpanzee or to the Indonesian orangutan at the same time and all early modern human fossils are in today's Ethiopia, but that still hasn't stopped a determined minority from believing the Red Ape theory. I won't criticize religion under its laws for something the facts themselves don't seem to be immune to. Evidence is conclusively on the side of Homo-Pan cladistics, but scientists will still believe humans are most closely related to Orangs. In the same manner, Christianity, Hinduism, and Islam, to use the top three biggest religions can have disparate views of a very similar idea.
Note-Obviously, science and religion are entirely distinct. Regardless of basis in Abrahamicism or Dharmicism or Taoisticism, religion is based around a core sacred principle or principles, whereas science follows evidence regardless of the scientists' bias.
If that is the case mac, why did we lose Vietnam?
huh?? huh?? That is a war that we should have won, if the bunch of clowns running had known what they were doing. So why did we not win that war?
jean @ 117:
There's a number of reasons.
1) No superpower can win a war when hamstrung.
2) Supporting a corrupt regime with little support among the populace, which was mostly for the enemy.
3) Ill-trained troops with a repeated circumstance of lack of experience every year.
4) A conscript army made up mostly of the "dregs" of society, the "better" side of it having the means to stay, proving again the phrase "rich man's war, poor man's fight."
5) Lack of purpose as to what "victory" was. Would it have been propping up the South or unifying Vietnam or simply beating the Vietcong? The leaders had no answer to those questions.
6) Fighting the wrong kind of war. In a mostly agricultural society like the then-current Vietnam, all the fancy industrial gadgets won't do jack shit against a peasant who doesn't need that shit.
7) Having foreign powers following an easy way to test their new toys by a proxy conflict.
8) Ignorance of local customs and mores.
9) The war was extremely unpopular from the beginning.
10) It wasn't even our fight to start with, it was a French attempt to pretend that their humiliation at German and Japanese hands meant nothing.
11) Inexperienced troops would repeatedly face enemies hardened by decades of combat.
12) An inability to tell friend from foe.
13) Continuous deception on the part of the government from Eisenhower's time onwards.
14) A sense, erroneously gathered from Korea, that a show of force could make Asian communists stand down.
and
15) Corruption and stupidity in the civilian leadership of the army mixed in with a toxic paranoia and inability to bother to distinguish between forms of Communism and which might be more friendly to the West, and hence more vulnerable to Capitalist influence seeping in (an alternate way to have done the Cold War, a realpolitik way vs. the moralistic pseudocrusade of reality.)
Many, of not most of which also apply to both Iraq and Afghanistan, if the names change to represent the different regions and histories of both nations.
Matt in Texas @ 105:
hah!
Matt in Texas @ 105:
Bzzt...we, the Americans, did nothing but be a "rah rah" thing for the Europeans. Germany's big hope, the Michael offensive had already been stopped by the time we arrived in significant numbers. The Germans were going to lose at that point, the only question was how much damage the Entente was going to have to take before it quit.
And McPapen's not that old, and post 118 explains a lot of why Vietnam ended up the way it did.
General_Rennenkampf @ 120:
Nothing but a "rah rah" thing? He's a bit controversial amongst those who have toed the Brit's version of the war, but in his The Myth Of The Great War John Mosier makes a very good case that the Germans, in the wake of the AEF's Argonne campaign, saw their own utter destruction forthcoming, and appealed to the peacemaker in Wilson to end the war. Mosier has Wilson forcing the French and Brits to accept the armistice, the allies knowing that if Wilson accepted the truce, the stalemate would never end.
It's an interesting book, GR. Not great, but interesting.
Andy K Jong Il @ 121:
Wilson was a white-supremacist idealist. He deserves nothing good in historical memory. Considering how the US got into the war, that book's conclusions are not surprising at all.
General_Rennenkampf @ 122:
Can't disagree with you there. Mosier doesn't address Wilson's white-supremacism, but does paint Wilson as the cause for WWII, the reasoning being that had Wilson continued to persecute the war, the officer corps of the Wehrmacht would have been killed off, much like had happened to the cream of the British officer corps in 1914 and 1915.
Yea, he saw it on "the google."
So McCaine knows how to win a war, huh?
If we fight a war the way John McCaine fights a war, our entire airforce will be shot down and every pilot locked made a prisoner of war. Maybe they'll all get waterboarded, thanks to the fascists in the White House and the Repuke Party who have now opened the door for our enemies to use torture against our troops.
Login or Register to post comments.