Oh, now I see it. Off course they can see that when someone reaches a hand into his pocket, he just want a new stick of gum and not a gun, Or if he really is a terrorist, then they see he is reaching for his gun and not his gum. Yes, it all makes sense now, thank you so much for explaining it
Regardless of who is President, if they send troops anywhere but don't let them do the job they're sent to do, they'll fail. Likewise, being able to do the job they're sent to do, will be a win.
I have very strong ideals on how to deal with those who call us an enemy.
Well when we had 100,000 troops there we couldn't win Rose. Currently we have about 8500 there and the figure I heard is that Trump will send in 4000 more though he refused to commit to an exact number. Say we get up to 20,000 troops there. What makes us think we can win with 1/5 the number of troops we had before when we couldn't win? It makes no sense. Plus for years Trump has been badmouthing Obama for not getting out of Afghanistan. The Generals convinced the Doofus to enlarge the war. They flipped him. What else would they do when they earn their living because of war. More war is what they want. Thank you for your reply and Happy Wednesday m'dear! :)
When we had 10,000 troops there, they weren't allowed to do their job. Arresting US soldiers for defending a boy who was being repeatedly raped by an Afghan chieftain is not the way to win wars.
Others have said a war in Afghanistan is unwinnable. Many others have tried and failed. So we are there now almost 17 years and counting. Why not send in 200,000 troops and win it and be done with it? War is he**. I don't know how many wars we shall be able to fight simultaneously. SIGH. Thank you for your reply RoseS and Happy Tuesday! :)
We couldn't win when we had 100,000 troops there and we surely won't win with 20,000 or 12,000. It makes no sense at all. Thank you for your reply D&D and Happy Wednesday to thee! :)
my2cents 