VICTORY OVER DEFEATISM...
Tuesday, October 7, 2008 at 09:06AM 
I'm with the view of US Defense Secretary Robert Gates when he states that Britain's military commander and ambassador in Afghanistan are being
"defeatist" by thinking the war cannot be won.
The comments by the officials from Britain, a key ally to the United States in Afghanistan and Iraq, were echoed by the top United Nations official in Kabul, who said success was only possible through dialogue and other political efforts. After the invasion of Afghanistan on October 7, 2001 to oust the fundamentalist Taliban government in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the United States, security has deteriorated markedly over the past two years. "While we face significant challenges in Afghanistan, there certainly is no reason to be defeatist or to underestimate the opportunities to be successful in the long run," Gates said on Monday on his way to Europe to meet defense ministers.
But the soft power mentality of the UN rejects the concept of military based victory. It believes that dialogue is the ONLY way to achieve peace and as we see in places like Sudan and Rwanda, that really works, right? The British military at senior level have also been infected by this defeatist contagion, which plays well in the spineless UK media. (The same media which many decades ago urged peace talks with Mr Hitler)
Of course not all British leaders have been so gutless as the current bunch and so I offer you the words of a man who is looked upon by many as THE greatest ever Briton....Sir Winston Churchill on war....
"You ask, what is our policy? I can say: It is to wage war, by sea, land and air, with all our might and with all the strength that God can give us; to wage war against a monstrous tyranny, never surpassed in the dark, lamentable catalogue of human crime. That is our policy. You ask, what is our aim? I can answer in one word: It is victory, victory at all costs, victory in spite of all terror, victory, however long and hard the road may be; for without victory, there is no survival."
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (28)
No country has ever subdued Afghanistan and the bulk of the populace support the Taliban. That is two reasons why the war will never be won but there is a bigger one. The voters of the UK and some even in the US want this war and the one in Iraq to stop. They never wanted the invasions in the first place, do not want to endanger their troops in unwinnable and/or illegal wars and resent having to pay through the nose in taxes as a result.
The world is in recession and the wars have been a major factor in this. Hundreds of billions of taxpayers money wasted and the voters now being shafted by higher food, fuel and general living costs.
Britain's military commanders and diplomats are correct. They will never win the war because the people who are paying for it want them out.
A September 10th person speaks. Churchill was a September 11th person. The world is split in two.
Then Churchill would have used his resources to find Bin Laden who carried out the attacks and not have sent the majority of his troops to Iraq. He would have attacked the Taleban and it's leadership rather than hang Saddam Hussain and blanket bomb civilians.
Seven years on from September 11 the vast majority of the Taleban including the leader Mullah Omar and the bulk of his ministers are at large in addition to Bin Laden. The British may admit that they cannot win the war in Afghanistan but the Americans have already lost it.
"No country has ever subdued Afghanistan and the bulk of the populace support the Taliban. "
There have been numerous surveys of the Afghan people in recent years and it is unambiguously the case that they oppose the Taliban and support the coalition forces.
"There have been numerous surveys of the Afghan people in recent years and it is unambiguously the case that they oppose the Taliban and support the coalition forces."
Ross, not in the regions that the Taliban currently are. In the mountains of South Eastern Afghanistan, and along the Pakistani border, the Taliban are supported.
"A September 10th person speaks. Churchill was a September 11th person. The world is split in two."
Churchill came good because the British finally faced an opponent were negotiation was no longer an option. In most wars it is an option. Churchill was in the right place at the right time. He was always a Gung Ho Imperialist and got lucky with the Second World War.
Also, as Michael pointed out, if the current Coalition are simply behaving as Churchill would have done then surely Churchill, instead of going after the real problem in Germany, would have instead attacked somewhere random, like Ireland, just to settle an old grudge that his daddy couldn't sort out.
The world is not split into two following September 11th. September 11th was a terrible event but it didn't or shouldn't have changed the world. Worse things have happened. America have committed worse things since. September 11th was nothing more than a wake up call to the continental United States that they can be attacked. Nothing bigger than that.
David
You need to read the article properly before rushing to post up something that ostensibly circles around the British command always being stupid and the American command always being right simply because they can get out the usual soundbites that sound 'right' in that respect.
Gates said part of the solution in Afghanistan would be negotiating with members of the Taliban willing to work with the government in Kabul.
A few weeks ago you suggested that idea was abhorrent and defeatist.
The British command wants to reduce the Taliban to a manageable size for the Afghan army which is entirely sensible so nnone is being 'defeatist'.
Both British and Americans want to negotiate with them and stick them in power. The Americans voicing this as the overall preference.
It needs an economical solution.
The local people only support the Talis when they are up against it economically. With the Saudis Iran and the Pakis driving in the cash. The majority want them out and the British hearts and minds op and superb military successes have been fundamental in maintaining that perspective with these people.
Credit where it's due please Mr Gates.
The defeatist attitude is more relevant to the rest of Nato virtually pulling their troops out.
More pressure needs to soon be brought to bear on the Afghan leader who so far has had a comfortable ride in power with us Brits doing the heavy lifting.
It cannot and must not go on forever but we have committed to the long haul.
This kind of basic US jingoism is dangerous and misleading.
I suggest the Brits and the Americans get their acts together on a strategy and stop doing it through the media.
Ross, not in the regions that the Taliban currently are. In the mountains of South Eastern Afghanistan, and along the Pakistani border, the Taliban are supported."
You may be accurate SEAMUS>
Given that you are correct I do believe it's time to take up the ideals of Air Marshall Arthur 'Bomber' Harris and General Curtis "Bombs Away" LeMay.
A series of rolling tactical nuclear strikes on those regions would certainly go a long way in stablizing Afghanistan.
Unfortunately, we can't bomb them back into the stone age because they've never left. But we can make the humble existence of those who are left alive so untenable they'll be of no consequence.
I'm a post 9/11 dude and I want a 10,000-fold payback for those 3,000 innocent folks in New York, Washington D.C. and Pennsylvania who were the victims of an evil, malignant, putrid religion!
So you want revenge for the killing of innocent people in America by killing innocent people in Afghanistan. If that is your position then you are as bad as Al Qaeda.
Also, Strategic Bombing raids as devised by Arthur Harris and Curtis LeMay are War Crimes.
"This kind of basic US jingoism is dangerous and misleading."
ALISON With all due respect, your sheepish attitude towards those committed to the annihilation of ALL non-Islamic people goes beyond naive. Frankly, it's disgraceful pandering to lethal bullying.
It's time to shelve morality and adapt to the reality of survival of the fittest. It's them or us. And I, personally, am not gong to lay down because some people think if we talk nice-nice to those barbarians peace will ensue.
I say kill them all and let Allah sort them out!
Eddie, what makes them different from us? Should we become unfree to bring Freedom to the Middle East? Should we be barbaric to civilise the Barbarians?
"Also, Strategic Bombing raids as devised by Arthur Harris and Curtis LeMay are War Crimes."
Alas SEAMUS you naive pacifist. I guess you are entitled to your opinion
HOWEVER,
Strategic Bombing raids worked. We won the war remember. And those tactics saved the lives of countless allied troops, who would have been killed invading a hostile Japan.
You want to discuss war crimes SEAMUS?
Let's discuss The Rape of Nanking or the Battan death march. Let's talk Buchenwald and Auschwitz. Let's analyze the slaughter of the Armenians by the Turks.
Hate, death and killing is part of the collective human psyche. Accept that premise and all the events of history will clearly point to the fact that humans kill other humans to dominate. That's the way it has been and that's the way it shall always be. AMEN!
"Should we be barbaric to civilise the Barbarians?"
SEAMUS lad. You don't get my point.
We should become barbaric to EXTERMINATE the so-called barbarians.
Barbarians are to society as cancer is to the body.
Anyone who has the will to live realizes you must kill/destroy each and every cancer cell to have any hope of survival. Negotiating with barbarians, the cancer of civilization, is not an option.
Eddie
Eh? Oh you were joking. Ha ha.
Personally I would like the whole lot to be grouped in one area and a large bomb dropped on the lot of their mysoginist backwards moronic religious arses. I would chuck your home grown Army of God in there for good measure too and take pleasure in torturing them all beforehand with endless tapes of Gloria Steinham and an electric cattleprod.
Who the hell is Robert Gates to be lecturing anyone when he wants the Talib in government. You like that idea Eddie?
Is everyone set to crazy today or what. Keep on chucking good western man at the situation then according to the US stick those same enemies right slap bang in government.
I wonder if the Romans had as much trouble hauling our arses into modernity as we are having with this lot.
Roman civilisation fell into decay when it failed knowing how and why to defend itself. The Vandals prevailed.
But who decides what peoples are Barbarians and who are civilised? Your point of view justifies the Holocaust, this whole survival of the fittest idea, justifies September 11th etc etc
"Strategic Bombing raids worked. We won the war remember. And those tactics saved the lives of countless allied troops, who would have been killed invading a hostile Japan."
But at what cost? Those actions, the Carpet Bombing raids of Tokyo, Dresden and the nuking of Hiroshima and Nagasaki brought the Britsh and the Americans down to the level of their enemy. They became as bad as them. They were the good guys in that war until those acts. They became the lesser of two evils because of those acts, rather than staying as the good guys.
Strategic bombing raids hardly worked as the bulk of those killed were women and children. Hitler's decision to open up a front against Russia and the Russian response to that act of aggression brought about militarily the end of the Second World War. Slaughtering innocent civilians as the US is doing with their bombing attacks in Afghanistan and Pakistan only prolongs the war and creates more enemies.
'Hate, death and killing is part of the collective human psyche. Accept that premise and all the events of history will clearly point to the fact that humans kill other humans to dominate. That's the way it has been and that's the way it shall always be. AMEN!'
Eddie. Are you justifying the Sept 11 attacks?
"Roman civilisation fell into decay when it failed knowing how and why to defend itself. The Vandals prevailed."
It was mostly the Goths, not the Vandals who led to the fall of the Roman Empire. The Vandals only existed really in the ruins of Carthage, in modern Tunisia and in Corsica and Sardinia, while the Goths conqured most of Spain, Southern France and Italy.
Rome fell for a huge number of reasons, mostly political and economic ones rather than military.
David you need to read what Gates actually said. Shoving the Tali into government is not defeatist?
"Rome fell for a huge number of reasons, mostly political and economic ones rather than military"
Oh well then in the present climate and thanks to unfettered trading and greed - all very telling no?
Seamus you talk such a load of balls I wonder if even you believe it, but they do say if you say a lie often enough ...etc.
Germany jackboots would have marched over Eire even though you were a semi ally. If you want evidence of just how low the Irish can get witness their latest ploy...come to us guys we will look after your money 100%.
I diverse, Alison is right and I have said it often enough..get rid of the Taliban by violence, lots of violence which does not involve the continued massacre of coalition and the Americans soldiers.
So Maggie.Nuke anyone who you do not agree with. Nuke Iran and Venezuala too. Don't worry about about the innocent women and children because they are only Muslims, Arabs or Commies.
But I digress. America cannot defeat the Taleban militarily even if it had will because it still has most of it's forces fighting an illegal war in a country that had NOTHING TO DO WITH SEPTEMBER 11th. And, in Afghanistan the main massacres being carried out are by American forces dropping bombs on wedding parties and funerals.
At least al-Qaeda refers to all Westerners as enemies and attempts to justify atrocities like the Twin Towers. America acts exactly the same way but tries to claim moral high ground. Well they are both using the same methods and are therefore both terrorist organisations.
Michael
I hope you at least had the pleasure of getting drunk before writing such buffoonish and sophomoric comments
Terrible mistakes have been made by US forces in Afghanistan, despite efforts to avoid any such incidents.
The September 11 murders were not a mistake. The only regret Al Queda expressed is that there were not more civilians killed. This was an effort to kill civilians, and only civilians, and in the greatest possible numbers.
To compare that with an accident in war is silly beyond words.
Darned Americans, get out of our state. Todd and Sarah are correct, we need our independence from the Imperialist United States.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vmYqRfp6-x8
Doggone it! The fires of hell, I tell you.
Yeah in one fell swoop Maggie but that ain't gonna happen. Meanwhile the Americans want to spearhead a sort of Good Friday agreement on Afghanistan once the Brits have the Tali largely under control. So what the hell was the point in our boys dying for any of it in the first place then? Anyone?
Reverend Wright.
I do not subscribe to indiscriminate attacks on civilians as espoused by others on this forum. The US refers to 'targeted attacks' when they drop huge bombs onto villages and schools and either know the collateral damage that will be caused, they do not care or they are incompetent. Which one is it?
These attacks cement hatred against the US just as Sept 11 caused hatred against Muslims in America leading to vigilantism and discrimination against any Muslim. The end result is more hatred and discriptions of Islam as an 'evil, malignant, putrid religion' Not all Muslims nor Americans are fanatics and terrorists but each side has their fair share.
'Roman civilisation fell into decay when it failed knowing how and why to defend itself. The Vandals prevailed.'
Eh David, the Roman empire was predicated upon the subjugation of people who had no wish to be part of said empire. But I suppose as a unionist ytour all for empires, and yet again it seems we have people willing to demand alot of those who have the balls to serve whilst they themselves are tucked up nicely at home.
Churchill was right however....about Micheal Collins.
"He was an Irish patriot, true and fearless. When in future times the Irish Free State is not only prosperous and happy, but an active and annealing force... regard will be paid by widening circles to his life and to his death".