Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

End of Afghanistan war

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    jmreire
    Registered Users Posts: 8,538 ✭✭✭jmreire


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    Not really because the same mistakes were being made in Vietnam were being made in Iraq/Somalia, following insurgents into the jungle/ down narrow streets where top cover/air support couldnt see who they were firing. Helicopters cannot fly safely into narrow canyons/valleys. The cost of fighting a war over a great distance wasnt taken into account.

    Britian was really caught out by the Argentinians when they invaded the Falklands, they had sold off part of their aging fleet and were down sizing. The Argentians totally caught them off guard and the British were within two weeks of calling a ceasefire when they won. It was probably down to the leadership of a few men like Michael Rose that panicked the Argentinians ground troops.

    The Argentinian Army was largely a conscripted force, and it was never thought that Britain would ever actually invade. But they forgot to take into account that an election was in the offing in the UK, and Maggie Thatcher was up for re election, and it was thought that she would lose it. But then a life saver arrived on the horizon in the form of the Falklands being "invaded" by Argentina, so off to war Maggie went, and the election was sidelined in the public mind. The rest is history, she won the election. Had it not been an election year, or if Maggie was guaranteed to win, then I'm pretty sure that the Falklands crisis would have been sorted diplomatically.


  • Options
    #63
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »
    This is Trumps vietnam

    Actually this is a very popular decision in America, anyone who thought going into Afghanistan needed their head checked as they never read a history book. Trump is going to have a hop, skip and jump to re-election.


  • Options
    #64
    Varik
    Registered Users Posts: 12,542 ✭✭✭✭Varik


    skooterblue2 wrote: »
    Actually this is a very popular decision in America, anyone who thought going into Afghanistan needed their head checked as they never read a history book. Trump is going to have a hop, skip and jump to re-election.

    I don't think they're serious, people just say it was "names" "previous persons ****up".

    obama's katrina and so forth,


  • Options
    #65
    Cody montana
    Registered Users Posts: 5,328 ✭✭✭Cody montana


    #BREAKING Taliban ends partial truce, to resume Afghan 'operations': spokesman


  • Options
    #66
    Gatling
    Registered Users Posts: 40,291 ✭✭✭✭Gatling


    Cody montana wrote: »
    #BREAKING Taliban ends partial truce, to resume Afghan 'operations': spokesman

    Seen that either and America can't interfere .

    It's almost comical really - till you realise whats going to happen to the ordinary Joe Afghans
    360_F_102352090_ie3kLjDIvgrT1sxVDknWCUh8PxgMYzM7.jpg




  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    jmreire
    Registered Users Posts: 8,538 ✭✭✭jmreire


    Gatling wrote: »
    Seen that either and America can't interfere .

    It's almost comical really - till you realise whats going to happen to the ordinary Joe Afghans

    Pretty much what happened him ( and even worse Her ) before, unless the Taliban have radically changed their modality.....
    Had Sept 11th. never happened, I think that there would not be any Taliban by now....the Afghan People were heartily sick of them. And there were cracks already appearing in their control. When the US invaded, the roads were littered with burned out Taliban 4 x 4's, and it was not the US who had burned them out. I remember when Ismail Khan was released from Kandahar prison, and returned to Herat, for sure there were not any Taliban on the welcome home committee. The word "Taliban" was a dirty word back then. But now????


  • Options
    #68
    skooterblue2
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,816 ✭✭✭skooterblue2


    jmreire wrote: »
    The Argentinian Army was largely a conscripted force, and it was never thought that Britain would ever actually invade. But they forgot to take into account that an election was in the offing in the UK, and Maggie Thatcher was up for re election, and it was thought that she would lose it. But then a life saver arrived on the horizon in the form of the Falklands being "invaded" by Argentina, so off to war Maggie went, and the election was sidelined in the public mind. The rest is history, she won the election. Had it not been an election year, or if Maggie was guaranteed to win, then I'm pretty sure that the Falklands crisis would have been sorted diplomatically.

    On reflection, they were fairly evenly balanced. The British army was on its chin strap and about to modernise , the Royal Navy was turning over craft. The British lost a lot of equipment on the Atlantic Conveyer including Lynx medium lift Helicopters and Chinooks heavy lift Helicopters. There was also a lot of undeclared equipment lost. I am guessing Land rovers with MILAN capabilities for busting bunkers. Laser range finders would have been useful for Goose Green. The Argentine's had the Territory, the british were travelling and flying from Assention Island. The Argentinians had Submarines as well. The Mirages were a good match for the Harriers. The French had exocets. Now if the Hermes or Royal Ark got hit it was game over and the british would have to pack up and go home.


Advertisement