Will americans kick Afghans?

[Fidel Castro Ruz]

there were only 25 Taliban soldiers killed during air attacks...
there are some quotes...translated by me :)
"US Soldiers are too weak for land operation in Afghanisthan"
"Soviet soldiers were real opponents,who could go through difficult Afghan conditions"
"US soldiers are childs of comfort,who won't resist with what will happen with them in Afghanisthan"

[madmax]

Only 25? Where do you get your intelligence? Where are the rest now? Hiding in mosques and behind children? Is the operation over now? Tell me about the Seals, Rangers, and Special Forces that are "childs of comfort". What do you know about them? The rhetoric about what will happen to U.S. soldiers apparently works on a few people. I think your hard Taliban soldiers might disappoint you.

[Fidel Castro Ruz]

Ok but i know that only British SAS has really good soldiers US boys can't fight they can only destroy smth and run away to their helicopter...so thats not soldiers...thats only trained cowards...
and what i can say about SAS...they are real soldiers...but not the whole army...russian officers fight 100 much better than ur great US forces...i won't compare russian and ameican privates...so if u think that US special forces do smth useful in this war,u are wrong...SAS maybe...but do u know how many casualities were when Soviet Special force "KASKAD" (now Vimpel(Âûìïåë)attacked Afghans leaders(Amir) palace with very very good defence...only 2 men...and how many boys had US army lost????

[Guest]

This is obviously based on the fact that the US is so good at losing wars. Listen buddy, there is this misconception about americans, you've heard it before, that we're a nation of playboys. Well just look what happened to all the people that have put that theory to the test. They learned to love us the hard way.

[revolutionary spirit]

i agree American soilders are very over rated,remember grenda in 1983,the seals there jumped into the sea from their helicopters for a mission on the mainland,and half of them drownded in the water,and of course not forgetting the Americans bombing a hospital.But yeah SAS are the best.My brother is in the British Army,and he has met American soilders,and SAS soilders.He said that in ur normal 2 mile run the normal American flake it as he puts it.Also he says the American special forces are usually inferior to your SAS man,and when delta force members and SAS members swap round most of the delta force men can't get through the training to get in the SAS.So to conclude matters SAS are alot better,so are the SBS,with the American soilder getting it easy and being inferior.

[AgustoSandino]

Ah gee, well I guess we americans are in trouble then, huh. Trust me, if I'm the taliban I don't want to be on the "other side" now that the US special forces, Rangers, Green Berets, Delta Force, Marine Expeditionary, SEALs, and Air Force Special Forces are on site. Like I said before, who has saved the world twice, from the fascists and the communsist

[revolutionary spirit]

would these be the same special forces that served in vietnam?u can't destroy will power.U said America saved the world from facisim,but I could swear it took an attack on Pearl Habor to get u involved,and then u helped win the war,u seem to neglect the fact that America wasn't the only country fighting.To say u saved the world from communism i'd say u deprived the world of it

[reagan lives]

"would these be the same special forces that served in vietnam?"
No.
"u can't destroy will power."
That's good, because the Taliban soldiers don't have it. They've been defecting like madmen ever since the 11th.
"U said America saved the world from facisim,but I could swear it took an attack on Pearl Habor to get u involved"
What's your point?
"and then u helped win the war,u seem to neglect the fact that America wasn't the only country fighting."
Har har.
"To say u saved the world from communism i'd say u deprived the world of it"
There's no difference.

[AgustoSandino]

Hey reagan, did I ever say that you humbled me. I mean its not often I meet a "piece of filth" who can carry on arguments like you do.

[Fantomas]

Agusto Sandino, tell it like it is. These Marxists are "null and void". They still can't come to grips with the fact that
Marxism / Communism is a failure. Very few people in Western Society will vote for an open Marxist to run thei country. Face it you failed Commies, your ideology is dead, just like Marx and that pseudo hero of yours---Che.

[Nazreen]

I don't think US can beat Afghan's because they got their own spirit. Can you give me what war us win, they always lose, US can't fight one by one they need support with other country. US like a dog and shadow they afraid with their self.
Do you think US can got Osama!!!
I don't think so

[AgustoSandino]

hey Nazreen, get a history book.

[gooddoctor]

take your own advice.

[socialistscumbag666]

The war is stupid. All it's doing is killing innocent people, which makes us as bad as Bin Laden and co.

This wouldn't be happening if we were all socialists.

[reagan lives]

Yeah, because we'd all have died a long fucking time ago.

[pce]

ha ha

(say like that kid from the simpsons)

[gooddoctor]

socialists don't wage war on people because they are the people. they try to cooperate with other countries in the people's own interests. war only serves the agendas of the capitalist-imperialists.
and reagan, you sad little gimp, back up that statement or fuck off! reagan was a fascist and actor and so is his reincarnation. their words are meaningless and sentimental, designed to manipulate people. that's what phony actors do.

[AgustoSandino]

Well maybe not died, heh reagan? But at brink of death by starvation by now. Back up the statement, do we always have to remind you of how socialist economic experiments have wrought nothing but disaster?

[Fidel Castro Ruz]

Like I said before, who has saved the world twice, from the fascists and the communsist

what does this crap mean???americans are cowards...otherwise they wouldn't bomb Japan with NUKE
and if u think that i'm child of soviet propaganda...i say NO...i loved USA and UK when i was stupid and after i understood that Russia is the greatest country...not like fuckin' USA...pseudoGREAT And pseudoPOWERFUL...
what i think of russian FREE television...this sucks coz they only say how great USA is that us weaps are better...that americans saved the world of fascism...they lie us...i believe only myself...so i think that u,agusto is child of more powerful american propaganda...why i say so,coz american propaganda made all us nation stupid and rotten...so now they are fat and their presidents IQ is lower than middleamerican has...augusto u are stupid fucker
for those who don't know i'll say that WW2 was won by Red Army with help of partisans in almost all european countries...
NO USA NO USA NO USA!!!

[Fidel Castro Ruz]

Narzeen u are right
huh americans had won only one war...civilian war in USA...but they won it(North) with help of Blacks(i'm sorry but i always call them negros)so americans are suckers that they live in other continent and say that they are best...come here all and fight u american cowards!
about powerful americans...they haven't even beat cubans in 1961 haha...the best army hahaha
VIVA CUBA!

[reagan lives]

"they haven't even beat cubans in 1961 haha"
The US military didn't fight the Cubans in 1961, dumbass.

[gooddoctor]

agusto, how many times have we discussed the economic miracle that is the socialist economy. russia: from agrarian, wartorn, tsarist regime to world superpower. china, from agrarian, wartorn, imperialist regime to world's fastestt growing economy. you simply can't argue with that. the only arguements you have against socialism are their humanitarian and political failures, and i won't try to counter them. but there is a difference between the national socialism of these two countries and the socialism i am fighting for today. not in terms of economics, because the socialist economy is the undisputed champion, but the political nature of the revolution.

(Edited by gooddoctor at 7:39 pm on Oct. 29, 2001)

[AgustoSandino]

russian growth was due to capital accumulation, this means that yes russia was on the surface a rich nation, but its people had shit, there were no consumer goods and believe it or not that means that there was no progress. China has indeed become the worlds fastest growing economy, you know why, because in 1980 deng xaioping begun the first capitalist reforms. Today china is a capitalist nation, save the repression which doesn't exist in capitalist nations, and the few government (or PLA) owned enterprises which are being privatized. Show how communism has improved the lives of people. the majority of people in the USSR went from being peasants to being peasants, there was an aristocracy under the tsar, this was just replaced by another aristocracy created by the CP. In china it is capitalism that has improved the lives of people, explain how that is not the case.

[Fidel Castro Ruz]

reagan lives!!!
i know that US regulars wasn't attackin' Cuba...but who organized this operation???i don't think it was excubans

Agusto...now in Russia all "aristocrats" (called deputies,senators etc)steal money...in capitalistic society everything is for money...so noone cares of ur health if u have no money to private hospital.Noone cares if u have no money to pay for ur house...etc

[Drifter]

i'm a socialist, but a machiavellian,
i belive that there will always be war

[CommieBastard]

Ok, here are some facts:

Since China began it's capitalist reforms, unemployment has gone from virtually zero to several million.

If cuba was a capitalist nation and had it's current levels of resources (as produced by the trade embargo) then it has been calculated that almost half of the population would currently be starving. Guess what.... they arent.

[socialistscumbag666]

america organised it, the cuban rejects carried it out. and got totally slaughtered of course.

[reagan lives]

Which doesn't constitute a defeat of the American military.

[gooddoctor]

the following link is to an article written by northern alliance leader abdul haq days before he was executed. in it he calls for and end to the american terrorist attacks on afghanistan because it is making the civil war harder for the alliance. this particular edit is from the guardian and is titled "us bombs are boosting the taliban":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/...4290349,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4290349,00.html)

this article is about foremost british military historian sir michael howard's scathing criticism of american tactics:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/...4288508,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4288508,00.html)

this article is about the incompetence of our intelligence services in afghanistan and at home:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/...4291972,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4291972,00.html)

this article is written by an afghani expert and is called "why the war will not work":

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/...4281682,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4281682,00.html)

this article asks the question of where the war is going:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/...4291306,00.html (http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4291306,00.html)

our mlitary is unprepared to fight a war in afghanistan. i know that one of the sas officers responsible for training the mujahideen has said that they will be impossible to beat them on their home turf. one of the foremost military advisors in america has reported on how the us army is not well-trained enough to win a war in afghanistan. he basically said they're soft. unfortunately, this war will not be won by bombs alone. on the other hand, the taliban is battle-hardened and used to the terrain. they know their own country and war is their life - they have been fighting a civil war for the past twenty years ever since the yanks and limeys created the mujahideen. when the ground invasion starts there is going to be wholesale slaughter, and the taliban won't take any prisoners. we must stop the war before the body bags begin pilling up on our doorsteps. what will our boys have died for?

(Edited by gooddoctor at 5:18 pm on Nov. 6, 2001)

[Guest]

What i think is going to happen is that the war in afganistan will end up like another vietnam war.
The reason i say this is because the US is going by this completely the wrong way.
It seems to me that the taliban has read Sun Tsu's "The art of war" while it seems apparently the US hasnt.
Here are some points from the book:
"All war is based on Deception."
Therefore in order to win a war you must act as though you are incapable of winning, even though you are very capable.
We here in the United States have failed there. We act like we are the mean dogs at the fence and we bark loudly and bite hard as well.
So are we showing that we are strong, even though deep down we have been wounded?
We as Americans assume that our Enemy is weaker than we are. They wait, they are patient and they will attack again when you least expect it. Which of course is covered by Tzu when he says "Attack where he is unprepared sally out when he does not expect you."
And most importantly:
"in order to win a war you must pretend to be inferior. The arrogance of your enemy will be his undoing."
and
"in order to win a war you must put your enemy under strain. The object is wear your enemy down, and use whatever means necessary to cause stress and strain in his life."
Apply this to the current situation in afganistan and try to see the probable victor.
And of source the probable outcome of the war on terrorism:
"Victory is the main object in war. If it is long delayed, weapons are blunted and morale depressed. When troops attack cities, their strength will be depressed. When your weapons are dulled and your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and treasure spent, neighboring rulers will take advantage of your distress to act. And even though you have wise councilors, none will be able to lay good plans for the future. Thus while we have heard of blunt swiftness in war we have not seen a clever operation that is prolonged. For there has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefitted."-Sun Tzu
From history, the last person to actually successfully invade and occupy afganistan was Alexander the Great.
Ever since then afgans repelled many world powers including the british and the soviets and it seems most likely the US as well.

[Guest]

Quote: from Guest on 7:32 pm on Nov. 6, 2001
What i think is going to happen is that the war in afganistan will end up like another vietnam war.
The reason i say this is because the US is going by this completely the wrong way.
It seems to me that the taliban has read Sun Tsu's "The art of war" while it seems apparently the US hasnt.
Here are some points from the book:
"All war is based on Deception."
Therefore in order to win a war you must act as though you are incapable of winning, even though you are very capable.
We here in the United States have failed there. We act like we are the mean dogs at the fence and we bark loudly and bite hard as well.
So are we showing that we are strong, even though deep down we have been wounded?
We as Americans assume that our Enemy is weaker than we are. They wait, they are patient and they will attack again when you least expect it. Which of course is covered by Tzu when he says "Attack where he is unprepared sally out when he does not expect you."
And most importantly:
"in order to win a war you must pretend to be inferior. The arrogance of your enemy will be his undoing."
and
"in order to win a war you must put your enemy under strain. The object is wear your enemy down, and use whatever means necessary to cause stress and strain in his life."
Apply this to the current situation in afganistan and try to see the probable victor.
And of source the probable outcome of the war on terrorism:
"Victory is the main object in war. If it is long delayed, weapons are blunted and morale depressed. When troops attack cities, their strength will be depressed. When your weapons are dulled and your ardor dampened, your strength exhausted and treasure spent, neighboring rulers will take advantage of your distress to act. And even though you have wise councilors, none will be able to lay good plans for the future. Thus while we have heard of blunt swiftness in war we have not seen a clever operation that is prolonged. For there has never been a protracted war from which a country has benefitted."-Sun Tzu
From history, the last person to actually successfully invade and occupy afganistan was Alexander the Great.
Ever since then afgans repelled many world powers including the british and the soviets and it seems most likely the US as well.

[Freiheit]

Quote: from Drifter on 11:15 am on Oct. 30, 2001
i'm a socialist, but a machiavellian,
i belive that there will always be war


youre an machiavellian.
i havent read to much about him, just the most important stuff.
so you prefer monarchy?
and you believe in the cyrcle:
leadership then monarchy
then oligarchy then democracy
then anarchy then leadership
...

whats your meaning to be an machiavellian?
whats different?

im really interested, please tell me.

[El Commandante]

I don't think you'll get any response, Drifter hasn't made a post for a few weeks now. Maybe he'll come back and you'll get a response but don't get your hopes up.

[Freiheit]

do think it is a good idea to write him a message?