Moderator: Community Team
Dukasaur wrote:Numerous puppet regimes propped up by the American military have collapsed as soon as you stopped propping them up.
The corrupt kleptocracy of South Vietnam.
The corrupt kleptocracy of Iran under the puppet Shah.
The corrupt kleptocracy of the Batista government in Cuba.
The corrupt kleptocracy of the Lucas Garcia regime in Guatemala.
The list just goes on and on. How long am I willing to keep typing? Suharto, Somosa, Mobutu, it's such a long and tiresome list.
Now the corrupt kleptocracy of Afghanistan can be added to the list. It collapsed maybe slightly faster than some of the others, and given that it happened during the age of social media, it's been a little more public. But it's ultimately the same old story. You install a corrupt puppet state. It's leaders rob their own people blind and become more and more unpopular. Once you stop wasting time and lives propping it up, it falls. This is not a military defeat! This is a failure of policy. You cannot indefinitely keep a nation chained to a thieving kleptocrat. As his crimes accumulate, what little popular support he once had falls away, and in the end he can only be propped up by sheer naked force. The lesson is simple: STOP INSTALLING WORTHLESS PUPPET STATES!!! It isn't rocket science, it really isn't.
To borrow the immortal words of Neil Young: "Why? How many more? Why? How many more? Why? How many more?"
riskllama wrote:*whoosh*
Symmetry wrote:The ram wrote:Symmetry wrote:Ok, so some stuff goes over your head?
No not here anyway. He never said they were forced.
Whoosh
riskllama wrote:why not have him start with basic grammar like spelling, punctuation & sentence structure? aren't you supposed to be a teacher or something???
riskllama wrote:Koolbak wins this thread.
riskllama wrote:why not have him start with basic grammar like spelling, punctuation & sentence structure? aren't you supposed to be a teacher or something???
Symmetry wrote:The ram wrote:Symmetry wrote:Ok, so some stuff goes over your head?
No not here anyway. He never said they were forced.
Whoosh
HitRed wrote:https://www.foxnews.com/world/north-korea-appears-to-have-restarted-key-nuclear-reactor-un-watchdog
Thanks Biden
CNN wrote:This picture taken on September 3, 2017 and released by North Korea's official Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on September 4, 2017 shows North Korean leader Kim Jong-Un attending a meeting with a committee of the Workers' Party of Korea about the test of a hydrogen bomb, at an unknown location. (STR/AFP via Getty Images) (STR/AFP via Getty Images)
Symmetry wrote:The ram wrote:Symmetry wrote:Ok, so some stuff goes over your head?
No not here anyway. He never said they were forced.
Whoosh
I have always regretted that the last assault at Cold Harbor was ever made. I might say the same thing of the assault of the 22d of May, 1863, at Vicksburg.
The Battle of Cold Harbor was fought during the American Civil War near Mechanicsville, Virginia, from May 31 to June 12, 1864, with the most significant fighting occurring on June 3. It was one of the final battles of Union Lt. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant's Overland Campaign, and is remembered as one of American history's bloodiest, most lopsided battles. Thousands of Union soldiers were killed or wounded in a hopeless frontal assault against the fortified positions of Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee's army.
Some authors (Catton, Esposito, Foote, McPherson, Grimsley) estimate the casualties for the major assault on June 3 and all agree on approximately 7,000 total Union casualties, 1,500 Confederate. Gordon Rhea, considered the preeminent modern historian of Grant's Overland Campaign, has examined casualty lists in detail and has published a contrarian view in his 2002 book, Cold Harbor. For the morning assault on June 3, he can account for only 3,500 to 4,000 Union killed, wounded, and missing, and estimates that for the entire day the Union suffered about 6,000 casualties, compared to Lee's 1,000 to 1,500. Rhea noted that although this was a horrific loss, Grant's main attack on June 3 was dwarfed by Lee's daily losses at Antietam, Chancellorsville, and Pickett's Charge, and is comparable to Malvern Hill.[64]
As of July 27, 2018, there have been 2,372 U.S. military deaths and 4 Department of Defense civilian deaths in the War in Afghanistan. 1,856 of these deaths have been the result of hostile action. 320 American servicemembers have also been wounded in action during the war.[1] In addition, there were 1,720 U.S. civilian contractor fatalities, for a total of 4,096 Americans killed during the war.
Running Total: 2,361
U.S. all fatalities in Afghanistan only (including civilians),
Source
Note: Table omits the deaths of service members killed in support of operations in Afghanistan in other countries along with those who died in other countries as a result of wounds sustained in Afghanistan .
Casualties here meaning deaths rather than wounded.
58,220
Pickett's Charge (July 3, 1863), also known as the Pickett–Pettigrew–Trimble Charge, was an infantry assault ordered by Confederate Gen. Robert E. Lee against Maj. Gen. George G. Meade's Union positions on the last day of the Battle of Gettysburg in the state of Pennsylvania during the Civil War.
Its futility was predicted by the charge's commander, Lt. Gen. James Longstreet, and it was arguably an avoidable mistake from which the Southern war effort never fully recovered militarily or psychologically. The farthest point reached by the attack has been referred to as the high-water mark of the Confederacy. The charge is named after Maj. Gen. George Pickett, one of three Confederate generals who led the assault under Longstreet.
Symmetry wrote:The ram wrote:Symmetry wrote:Ok, so some stuff goes over your head?
No not here anyway. He never said they were forced.
Whoosh
DirtyDishSoap wrote:Wasn't even a war. It was an occupation.
Know what we're good at? Obliterating anything that looks at us cross.
We can't win the political war.
Nam proved this. Iraq proved this, and now Afghanistan.
British Colonel Arthur Fremantle, an observer at Gettysburg and elsewhere, advised Lee concerning the flaws of Lee’s aggressiveness: “Don’t you see your system feeds upon itself? You cannot fill the places of these men. Your troops do wonders, but every time at a cost you cannot afford.” Later, Lee’s own General D. H. Hill described the folly of the Army of Northern Virginia’s penchant for the tactical offensive:
We were very lavish of blood in those days, and it was thought to be a very great thing to charge a battery of artillery or an earth-work lined with infantry. . . . The attacks on the Beaver Dam intrenchments, on the heights of Malvern Hill, at Gettysburg, etc., were all grand, but of exactly the kind of grandeur which the South could not afford.
All of the attacks mentioned by Hill had been personally ordered by Lee.
Return to Practical Explanation about Next Life,
Users browsing this forum: No registered users