'The Soviet Union is entitled to the Vietnam of its choice'

[happyheathen]

just thought I'd throw this into the mix -

this is a quote from a v. high-ranking US official (don't remember) from either the dept of State or Defense (don't remember) in reference to the soviet's invasion of Afghanistan.

still think this is going to be fun?

[Psycho Fox]

No but it is needed. Plus I think we do an allied attack we would fair better then the Soviets did.

[BourgeoisBuffoon]

Yeah, and Russia still wants to beat up the Afghans even more so since they lost that war.

And don't forget that if we happen to have a war we have a coalition, as P. Fox said, and we have more updated forces and not just one power fighting.

Still, I have a bad feeling with the terrain...and why the heck do you say we think this is going to be fun?:confused: :mad:

[Maxie Zeus]

We need to go into this with our eyes open. But a few relevant differences from the Soviet experience:

1. The Taliban and the terrorists are not and will not be backed by a hostile power.

2. American/allied forces are not attempting to permanently occupy or pacify the countryside, but will likely concentrate on conducting a thorough sweep to capture/destroy infrastructure and "hostile" forces.

3. The Soviets wished to establish a particular kind of government; the allied forces will want to see a particular kind eliminated and a particular kind NOT go in as a replacement (they can afford not to be choosy).

4. The Taliban is not popular in Afghanistan; there is a good chance that, if handled right, a new friendly govt, if given sufficient foreign aid, could stabilize the internal situation and be strong enough to keep bin-Laden types out while enjoying popular support.

The tricky country is Pakistan, which, besides being aligned with China against India, has a military that is pretty strong and very sympathetic to the Taliban. If any country has the potential to play "Serbia" in a repeat of the 1914 crisis, it is that nation.