Tweet
My point was that the Taliban were on the run, they were being defeated and had control of no major regions of the country. While they still had numbers, they weren't actively making many attacks, were able to move far less freely, and had control over a meaningless amount of land. They won the battle, the reason they have been losing the war is because they declared the job done, shifted focus to Iraq and left the Taliban to regroup and reclaim power. With the media storm surrounding Iraq, even when the Taliban's renewed strength became obvious, the military continued to treat it as a second-rate threat when they shouldn't have. Probably didn't want to admit they'd said the job was done when it wasn't, to add to their already miserably tarnished record in the War On Terror.
I didn't check Wikipedia once just then, a lot of my knowledge comes from elsewhere. I'm new to this forum - you don't know me or what I know. And just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you should lower the tone and make insults - let's have a nice, friendly discussion like the mature adults I'd hope we can be, or fuck off kindly.
Hilarious :P
For the record, I wasn't stating winning the initial stages was an achievement - when America went into Afghanistan they ate the Afghan forces for breakfast without any difficulty.
My point was that Blackflag said "what did we win?" and I was explaining that the war was won - the Taliban decimated. They disappeared for two years. The fight should have continued then, to track down what was left, but really when the Taliban returned in September 2003, it was a new fight and a new war. That war, NATO lost pretty shockingly. And with the media storm having shifted to Iraq by that point, not an awful lot of people cared about Afghanistan then - it was old news, and we had a new war to pay attention to.
Replying to an argument with insults like that is fine, since you've attempted to offer a constructive discussion. Unlike BlackFlag, who in his first response to a post of mine instantly had such a feeble argument in his favour that he had to rely on petty insults to support his case. Which, when I'm a complete newcomer here, is pretty shocking. I don't meet people like that very often, I forget such lower echelons of society haven't been culled yet.
I didn't check Wikipedia once just then, a lot of my knowledge comes from elsewhere. I'm new to this forum - you don't know me or what I know. And just because I disagree with you doesn't mean you should lower the tone and make insults - let's have a nice, friendly discussion like the mature adults I'd hope we can be, or fuck off kindly.
Hilarious :P
For the record, I wasn't stating winning the initial stages was an achievement - when America went into Afghanistan they ate the Afghan forces for breakfast without any difficulty.
My point was that Blackflag said "what did we win?" and I was explaining that the war was won - the Taliban decimated. They disappeared for two years. The fight should have continued then, to track down what was left, but really when the Taliban returned in September 2003, it was a new fight and a new war. That war, NATO lost pretty shockingly. And with the media storm having shifted to Iraq by that point, not an awful lot of people cared about Afghanistan then - it was old news, and we had a new war to pay attention to.
I've describe my take several times, Blackfagitry, you're just too thick...and typically distill it down to a "black-and-white" bottom line, like most morons...
Comment