Yes.

Are we fighting to win? No.

We did not occupy Germany in 1945 and worry about whether our footprint was too big, or worry about shelling too close to civilians, or worry about causing our German allies to lose credibility.

We stomped the shit out of the country, until it could not feed itself without our utmost effort to help, and anyboy who resisted was struck down.

It is quite possible that we have not killed enough Afghans for them to despair of winning.   We almost did it in Vietnam and we ran into the same crisis of spirit.  We do not want to crush Afghanistan.  We do not want to crush Iran and Pakistan for helping the Taliban.  We are not like that anymore! We do not want to accept that allowing Afghans to rule as the Taliban means American cities are in danger.  We imagine we can invade a country and then seek terms for leaving, and not be hit again. 

The Taliban are fighting to fight.  When we leave they will still fight to control every inch of their country.  they do not want to elevate  it before they break it down further.   They understand the point of conquest and subjugation.  They would rather rule a medieval kingdom of donkeys and horses than accept helicopters and democracy and secular government.They don't mind driving another tenth or third of the country out as refugees. 

Right now, because we are there, they have allies to help kill americans.  When the Americans go, they will make allies of a different sort, helping Al Qaeda again.  Because Al Qaeda brings money and absolutely no challenge to their domestic program of civil war and sharia.

It doesn't take a trillion dollars to break that sort of power.  Sri Lanka just did it on a shoestring. It takes violence, and it takes the same sort of ruthlessness towards enemy populations.  And we'd rather lose than appear uncivilized.  For now.

TBO is pregnant too??!

is starting to doubt the blind date in the helmet was really the Stig

won a case by citing the UCC, a sermon by St. Francis and blatant flirtation

if you never heard of syfy I apologize for mentioning it

its stinky and wrecks the mood

like reading the Ring inscription out loud in Rivendell

FU syfy <<

should be their slogan

checks with his wife before kicking anybody down a well

hooray HJ

by 2020 we will have a 2nd generation pissed off at Primo

> East wrote:

> how does gay marriage/civil unions "encourage" gay lifestyle? it is what it is... it's not like it's a slippery slope where 100% of your population is going to end up gay in the long run

Actually the main issue has jack squat to do with being horny at the wrong buttocks.  Since the Founding nearly every state has had laws against homosexuality and sodomy.   1/2 our Supreme Court in its infinite wisdom hath decreed that somehow 100% of the United States has been bigoted and stupid and hasn't understood that the 9th Amendment, passed in 1787, has always guaranteed sodomy as a general liberty.  Now supposedly the 14th Amendment extends that to all the states, so since 1867 all states have been barred from constittuional exclusions of homosexuality as a protected class.  And now, possibly in 2011, they will agree with a federal judge in CA that since 1867 homosexual marriage has been a constittutional guarantee.

Of course we all know the "simplistic" answer is that the states and Congress in 1787 and 1867 did no such thing, and it's 5 judges making shit up in 2006, 2008 and 2011.  But you have to be adult enough to pretend with the rest.

When you imagine you are at liberty to ignore the decisions of 225 years of democracy and yet impose your new attitudes as the basic law of the country as misunderstood until your Revelation, then the sky's the limit.  When sodomy was decriminalized we brought up the imminence of gay marriage and polygamy under the same logic.  We were told that was the "slippery slope fallacy."  Now we've slid as far as gay marriage, and the arguments against polygamy--which is a consensual choice of citizens historically opposed on "religious morality" that is oh so verboten today-- seem clearly "unconstitutional", that is, contrary to the arbitrary whim of the guardians of the constitution.

whatever America decides will be decided by America and not by our "betters"

is known to the Arabs as Al-Pinqun

TARDIS gets by because it skips outside the space-time continuum, if it flies through space its always in trouble