The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I think Afghanistan was a good example of when full scale boots on the ground can be warranted.

1) Adequate provocation (9/11)
2) Strong likelihood of future danger (more 9/11s)
3) Workable military goal (behead AQ)
4) Defensible political goal (remove the Taliban, who hosted AQ)

Some of the things mentioned in your post -- take out a terrorist leader, rescue a hostage -- can be accomplished with special ops.

The military is a savings account. It's vital to have it for emergencies, but just because you do doesn't mean you are now free to spend money everywhere. Too many people see the military as a checking account -- want something? No problem, dip into savings.

Afghanistan is a tough one, as we had good reason to go in, but the place has a lot of issues, as the last dozen years have demonstrated, with turning the place into a country where terrorists won't find a haven again. From terrain, to Mulsim fundamentalism, to surrounding nations and their interests, to varying ethnic/regional differences, to it's history, making something of Afghanistan, for us or the natives or anyone is a tall order. I'm not sure it can be done. Part of me thinks we just have a standing threat that we blast anyone who turns Afghanistan into a terrorist haven, but we let it go its own way other than that.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I posted an article awhile back that the Turkish-Kurdish relationship seems to be changing (remember Kepler?) in a positive way with some real opportunities for better relations with the Kurds, though that's still got a ways to go and could derail.

I do remember this. I'm hopeful but it struck me as "you are still my enemy but we've got a bigger problem now."

OTOH, the Brits and French finally made peace because they were scared of the Germans, and then the French and the Germans made peace because they were scared of the Russians. Maybe someday we'll bring about world peace because everybody else will be scared of us.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I generally agree.

Which puts forth an interesting question of what, if any circumstances are there when boots on the ground (recognizing that boots on the ground can range from a quick strike to a long term commitment of many thousands) are warranted. I think there is value in not formally saying we'll never do it so there is at least a small threat in in the back of bad guys' minds that it could happen and at least occasionally doing a quick strike kind of thing to take out a terrorist leader, rescue a hostage or certain other limited circumstances. It's the big occupy a country that hates us stuff that really gets messy and costly.

I think Afghanistan was a good example of when full scale boots on the ground can be warranted.

1) Adequate provocation (9/11)
2) Strong likelihood of future danger (more 9/11s)
3) Workable military goal (behead AQ)
4) Defensible political goal (remove the Taliban, who hosted AQ)

Some of the things mentioned in your post -- take out a terrorist leader, rescue a hostage -- can be accomplished with special ops.

The military is a savings account. It's vital to have it for emergencies, but just because you do doesn't mean you are now free to spend money everywhere. Too many people see the military as a checking account -- want something? No problem, dip into savings.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I think we Americans also tend to forget how complicated internal politics can be for leaders of countries with many conflicting tribal interests. They often represent one thing to the outside world to serve their domestic political needs while also working with western governments such as ours covertly or through third parties and back-door channels. Turkey, for instance, is in a sensitive position with regard to ISIS' attack on Kobani. The Turks generally see Syrians as terrorists and are willing to fight ISIS, but they have long-standing conflicts with some, but not all, Kurdish groups. The Kurdish army defending Kobani (YPG, I think) is one that Turkey has been butting heads with, and many think that is why ISIS has chosen to invade this city, which is not that strategically important. Somepeoplealsoforgetthatthegopherssuck.

Yes, it's certainly true that leaders in these countries are often balancing major conflicting interests that often do not get along well and that plays into how they go about things. The entire region is a massive hodgepodge of religious, ethnic, etc. groups that more often than not have long and disagreeable histories with one another. And the historical way of solving things is force.

I posted an article awhile back that the Turkish-Kurdish relationship seems to be changing (remember Kepler?) in a positive way with some real opportunities for better relations with the Kurds, though that's still got a ways to go and could derail.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Thank you. If I had a quote in my sig this would be it. I would expand this, however, to the entire Middle East from Egypt to Iran and from Turkey to Yemen.

I generally agree.

Which puts forth an interesting question of what, if any circumstances are there when boots on the ground (recognizing that boots on the ground can range from a quick strike to a long term commitment of many thousands) are warranted. I think there is value in not formally saying we'll never do it so there is at least a small threat in in the back of bad guys' minds that it could happen and at least occasionally doing a quick strike kind of thing to take out a terrorist leader, rescue a hostage or certain other limited circumstances. It's the big occupy a country that hates us stuff that really gets messy and costly.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Boots on the ground make no sense in a place like Iraq where basically everyone hates us and always likely will regardless of what we do.

Thank you. If I had a quote in my sig this would be it. I would expand this, however, to the entire Middle East from Egypt to Iran and from Turkey to Yemen.

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Unfortunately you have a habit of coming into threads and supporting folks, at least tacitly, when they are trying to bait me.

Well, that is not my intention. As I've mentioned many times, I would much rather debate issues with you, since you are sane and sincerely trying (albeit mistaken ) , than with most of the folks on your side, who are either crazy or just cravenly spouting whatever WSJ said that morning.

[burd]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

How quickly you forget that I've said over and over again that Iraq was a mistake and I'm not big on these military adventures. But there are many ways to work with folks in the region, including our long time allies, to try to address regional issues without putting boots on the ground. Boots on the ground make no sense in a place like Iraq where basically everyone hates us and always likely will regardless of what we do.

Absolutely. I agree 100%. Except every one of our allies isn't really an ally all the time. See Turkey, and their in NATO for cripes sake.

I think we Americans also tend to forget how complicated internal politics can be for leaders of countries with many conflicting tribal interests. They often represent one thing to the outside world to serve their domestic political needs while also working with western governments such as ours covertly or through third parties and back-door channels. Turkey, for instance, is in a sensitive position with regard to ISIS' attack on Kobani. The Turks generally see Syrians as terrorists and are willing to fight ISIS, but they have long-standing conflicts with some, but not all, Kurdish groups. The Kurdish army defending Kobani (YPG, I think) is one that Turkey has been butting heads with, and many think that is why ISIS has chosen to invade this city, which is not that strategically important. Somepeoplealsoforgetthatthegopherssuck.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Absolutely. I agree 100%. Except every one of our allies isn't really an ally all the time. See Turkey, and their in NATO for cripes sake.

No ally is perfect, and countries like Saudi and Turkey are particularly blemished by some of their behavior. There are of course levels of engagement and I think we need to have some level of engagement with countries like this, while being wary of them using us to forward some of their less savory behaviors. It's easy to say we should just not have anything to do with the entire region, but we can do some good in the region while avoiding putting our soldiers' lives at risk as has happened all to often lately. Anyone trying to paint me as an interventionist hawk is sadly off-base.

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

How quickly you forget that I've said over and over again that Iraq was a mistake and I'm not big on these military adventures. But there are many ways to work with folks in the region, including our long time allies, to try to address regional issues without putting boots on the ground. Boots on the ground make no sense in a place like Iraq where basically everyone hates us and always likely will regardless of what we do.

Absolutely. I agree 100%. Except every one of our allies isn't really an ally all the time. See Turkey, and they're in NATO for cripes sake.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Fair enough.

I don't believe for a minute it would be any better if we followed what you or any right wing pundit is saying. The place is a cesspool and will always be a cesspool. You want to stay clean, stay out of the pool.

How quickly you forget that I've said over and over again that Iraq was a mistake and I'm not big on these military adventures. But there are many ways to work with folks in the region, including our long time allies, to try to address regional issues without putting boots on the ground. Boots on the ground make no sense in a place like Iraq where basically everyone hates us and always likely will regardless of what we do.

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Yeah that sounds so like me...

Unfortunately you have a habit of coming into threads and supporting folks, at least tacitly, when they are trying to bait me.

[MattS]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

I think we've now got Far Left, Center-Left, Center, Center-Right. Far Right, anyone? Pio? Bob? (Bob is somewhere between Center-Right and Far Right but I guess he counts.)

I consider myself a libertarian socialist. I want you to make sure you placed me in the correct part of the spectrum!

[joecct]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

WONTSOMEONETHINKOFTHECHILDREN! is an equal opportunity gambit. RWNJ is no stranger to it when it comes to sex or gays or whatever else bothers his Celestial Santa Claus. And good god don't get him started on WONTSOMEONETHINKOFTHETROOPS!, which rakes in 100x as much grift as WSTOTC.

Touche!

[Kepler]

Re: The Global War on Terror 5.0: Putin on the Risk

Repeating from an earlier post:

LWNJ: BUTITSFORTHECHLDREN!!!!!!

WONTSOMEONETHINKOFTHECHILDREN! is an equal opportunity gambit. RWNJ is no stranger to it when it comes to sex or gays or whatever else bothers his Celestial Santa Claus. And good god don't get him started on WONTSOMEONETHINKOFTHETROOPS!, which rakes in 100x as much grift as WSTOTC.