Just waiting for the French to complain bitterly that they're being excluded from the table if the situation on the ground turns around.

People wonder why I have such disdain for the EU governments' ability to react to international crisis, and this is part of the reason. Between NATO signatories pretty much sending token forces, to UN resolutions that wind up being nothing more than strongly worded letters, and then demanding to be cut in for contracts after the dust settles and critical of every juncture, but unwilling to commit anything themselves, there's not a lot to be impressed by.

Plenty of folks want to point fingers, but when it comes down to putting boots on the ground, few nations are willing to do more than cluck their tongues and make noises about sanctions that don't really do much. Which is part of the point. Plenty of European companies make tidy profits from the status quo, and if their governments DID something, it would upset the applecart.

hubiestubert: Just waiting for the French to complain bitterly that they're being excluded from the table if the situation on the ground turns around.

People wonder why I have such disdain for the EU governments' ability to react to international crisis, and this is part of the reason. Between NATO signatories pretty much sending token forces, to UN resolutions that wind up being nothing more than strongly worded letters, and then demanding to be cut in for contracts after the dust settles and critical of every juncture, but unwilling to commit anything themselves, there's not a lot to be impressed by.

Plenty of folks want to point fingers, but when it comes down to putting boots on the ground, few nations are willing to do more than cluck their tongues and make noises about sanctions that don't really do much. Which is part of the point. Plenty of European companies make tidy profits from the status quo, and if their governments DID something, it would upset the applecart.

the US's attitude of "you guys are useless, we'll do it" doesn't help either. neither does our refusal to submit to international courts.

A lot of Canadian troops have made anonymous comments that the US Special Forces are as much a barrier to peace in the area as the Taleban. Something about blowing up a building in the middle of a crowded village with a thousand pound bomb souring relations with the locals.

Man On Fire: the US's attitude of "you guys are useless, we'll do it" doesn't help either.

Well if it's true, it's true

Man On Fire: neither does our refusal to submit to international courts.

Nooo way.

Nuke em.

Fin

Compared to the rest of the interventions the US has made, Afghanistan is one of the few places that wasn't seriously farked up by Europe. Pretty sure it's cool for NATO nations to bail out from Afghanistan at this point.

On the other hand, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, India/Pakistan and most of Africa along with Vietnam were all situations created by European powers who then ditched their responsibilities to solve the mess. Then they whine when the US acts as the world police coming through and clean up all the shiat left behind. So they kinda owe us.

I, for one, am shocked to discover that the Bush strategy of taking a soft steaming dump on our friends and allies may not have worked well.

*long exasperated sigh*

Is anyone actually surprised?

Uh, subby, i don't know what you've been reading, but europe loved baywatch, for a different reason than you might think...

Bring all our troops home from everywhere in the world. Then concentrate on a great defence.

Fruitcakes.

/I read the headline; I've heard all I need to hear.

Man On Fire: hubiestubert: Just waiting for the French to complain bitterly that they're being excluded from the table if the situation on the ground turns around.

People wonder why I have such disdain for the EU governments' ability to react to international crisis, and this is part of the reason. Between NATO signatories pretty much sending token forces, to UN resolutions that wind up being nothing more than strongly worded letters, and then demanding to be cut in for contracts after the dust settles and critical of every juncture, but unwilling to commit anything themselves, there's not a lot to be impressed by.

Plenty of folks want to point fingers, but when it comes down to putting boots on the ground, few nations are willing to do more than cluck their tongues and make noises about sanctions that don't really do much. Which is part of the point. Plenty of European companies make tidy profits from the status quo, and if their governments DID something, it would upset the applecart.

the US's attitude of "you guys are useless, we'll do it" doesn't help either. neither does our refusal to submit to international courts.

Considering that, of the NATO countries obligated to help, only the Americans, Brits and Canadians actually have rules of engagement that allow combat, I think its justified to call the non-fighting armies useless here.

But I though Obama will help the EU un-clench their fist, and use his popularity to increase EU support for Afghanistan.


Bored Horde: A lot of Canadian troops have made anonymous comments that the US Special Forces are as much a barrier to peace in the area as the Taleban. Something about blowing up a building in the middle of a crowded village with a thousand pound bomb souring relations with the locals.

I have heard anonymous comments that Canadian forces refuse to engage the enemy and as long a snot directly confronted that they will do nothing. Same with German and french forces.

I have heard from anonymous comments that your mother is a whore.

What is your point?

Everyone over there in the military, regardless of their country has a tough job, and they are bound to biatch. However unless there is an official complaint or traceable facts, I don;t care what anonymous commenters have to say.

In about a month we're going to start seeing republicans suddnely becoming peaceniks and screaming "WAG THE DOG!".

Germans love the Hoff.

Cyborg77: Germans love the Hoff.

I SOOOOO beat you.

Considering that, of the NATO countries obligated to help, only the Americans, Brits and Canadians actually have rules of engagement that allow combat, I think its justified to call the non-fighting armies useless here.

Denmark and Holland have troops in the southern parts of Afghanistan too, and go out on combat patrols/hearts and minds missions. In fact we've been in that area since the war started. I know most Americans don't really give a fark, but that's how it is.
Feel free to mock the French for being pussies tho

Man On Fire: the US's attitude of "you guys are useless, we'll do it" doesn't help either. neither does our refusal to submit to international courts.

The US has been doing the heavy lifting in damn near every international crisis--with few exceptions. Angola was one such, and it was frippin' Cuba that stepped up the plate there.

Roll that around a bit. Cuba.

In the case of Georgia, it took the Russians to stop a full scale ethnic cleansing while NATO and the UN dithered back in the '90s.

In part, that's the problem that I see with EU involvement, it's is a history of watching bad things happen, and then looking to either send aid after the fact, or simply hold onto airports or key pieces of infrastructure, and hope that people can make it to them. Otherwise, good luck.

Without the US involvement--diplomatically and with military aid--the Bosnian conflict would have continued for how long, while Europe wrung its hands and sighed.

Bored Horde: A lot of Canadian troops have made anonymous comments that the US Special Forces are as much a barrier to peace in the area as the Taleban. Something about blowing up a building in the middle of a crowded village with a thousand pound bomb souring relations with the locals.

canada has had their own PR problems with the locals.

Link (new window)
Link (new window)
Link (new window)

Subby is right. NATO "allies" have been letting Canada and the US do all the heavy lifting.

The OBVIOUS tag must be on patrol.

somedane: Considering that, of the NATO countries obligated to help, only the Americans, Brits and Canadians actually have rules of engagement that allow combat, I think its justified to call the non-fighting armies useless here.

Denmark and Holland have troops in the southern parts of Afghanistan too, and go out on combat patrols/hearts and minds missions. In fact we've been in that area since the war started. I know most Americans don't really give a fark, but that's how it is.
Feel free to mock the French for being pussies tho

Crap, sorry about that; I was mainly thinking of the french and the germans.

Looks like they don't want to fight Obama's war either. But they will take hundreds of billions of dollars through the AIG European Funding Department.

The best defense is a good defense.

TFA: the U.S. administration has asked the allies to tell it what more they can contribute in terms of financing, training for Afghan forces, and civilian experts in every sector, from agriculture to governance -- "essentially whatever you can give us to free up an American to do something else actually fight," the former official said.

I understand EU partners wanting to get out of the mess that is Iraq -- I never wanted us over there in the first place. We all went into Afghanistan together, though. If you can't live up to the commitment you made when you entered into the treaty, don't expect us to do so, either.

Land wars in Asia and all that.

GaryPDX: Looks like they don't want to fight Obama's war either. But they will take hundreds of billions of dollars through the AIG European Funding Department.

go away

Bored Horde: A lot of Canadian troops have made anonymous comments that the US Special Forces are as much a barrier to peace in the area as the Taleban. Something about blowing up a building in the middle of a crowded village with a thousand pound bomb souring relations with the locals.

If the bad guys would stop hiding in the villages, these things wouldn't happen.

Oh, right, the Taliban aren't bad guys, they're freedom fighters. More than that, they are religious refugees fleeing persecution, right?

somedane: Considering that, of the NATO countries obligated to help, only the Americans, Brits and Canadians actually have rules of engagement that allow combat, I think its justified to call the non-fighting armies useless here.

Denmark and Holland have troops in the southern parts of Afghanistan too, and go out on combat patrols/hearts and minds missions. In fact we've been in that area since the war started. I know most Americans don't really give a fark, but that's how it is.
Feel free to mock the French for being pussies tho

You're just as guilty of stereotyping. Read your post again.

GaryPDX: Looks like they don't want to fight Obama's war either.

wait wait wait, back the truck up.

"Obama's War?"

bush started the war there, and the situation is destabilizing.

he doesn't want to start ANYTHING, he wants to farking finish it.

that being said, i know you're the famous garypdx, and you're a tooroll

/thats tool and troll squashed together.

wmoonfox: TFA: the U.S. administration has asked the allies to tell it what more they can contribute in terms of financing, training for Afghan forces, and civilian experts in every sector, from agriculture to governance -- "essentially whatever you can give us to free up an American to do something else actually fight," the former official said.

I understand EU partners wanting to get out of the mess that is Iraq -- I never wanted us over there in the first place. We all went into Afghanistan together, though. If you can't live up to the commitment you made when you entered into the treaty, don't expect us to do so, either.

Considering Afghanistan is much closer to Europe than the US, one would think the Europeans would be more motivated to stabilize that area.

Gee, I can't imagine why. I mean, it's not like we shamelessly abused and squandered the good will of our allies or anything.

Maybe it has something to do with the fact that the US pulled out a huge chunk of their forces to go play in Iraq?

Crocodilly_Pontifex: GaryPDX: Looks like they don't want to fight Obama's war either.

wait wait wait, back the truck up.

"Obama's War?"

bush started the war there, and the situation is destabilizing.

he doesn't want to start ANYTHING, he wants to farking finish it.

that being said, i know you're the famous garypdx, and you're a tooroll

/thats tool and troll squashed together.

Its beyond dispute that Bush started the war in Iraq, but saying Bush "started" the war in Afghanistan is like saying Roosevelt started the war with Japan.

Does ANYBODY RTFA anymore? America is taking the lead role in Afghanistan by choice.

hubiestubert: Plenty of folks want to point fingers, but when it comes down to putting boots on the ground

Yeah, how's that working out for us again?

apeiron242 If the bad guys would stop hiding in the villages, these things wouldn't happen.

Bad guys? Real life isn't like G.I. Joe. If there are "bad guys" hiding in villages we should employ delicate tactical responses rather than simply blowing schnit up. That crap makes us look bad and does nothing more but convince potential "bad guys" we're just out to kill Muslims indiscriminately.

Perhaps if the United States stopped getting into elective large-scale shooting wars every ten years... like clockwork... then they would have less need of armed backup?

Suppose you had a brother. Suppose your brother was a foot taller than you, and used steroids, so he was huge and muscled-up, and constantly getting into roid-rage-induced bar fights.

Ever goddamn weekend, he would get into a new barfight... like clockwork... and then biatch and moan about how you never responded to his frantic 1am phone calls to drag yourself out of your house, and down to the bar, so you could back-up his roid-rage ass in yet another senseless fight.

Personally, I don't think the problem is with NATO.

The problem is with the United States, and its addiction to warfare.

Get... the hell... out.

General Zang:

Personally, I don't think the problem is with NATO.

The problem is with the United States, and its addiction to warfare.

but we have all these cool expensive toys, I mean weapons, no wait, I mean toys.

Edsel: Does ANYBODY RTFA anymore? America is taking the lead role in Afghanistan by choice.

No one wants to let facts get in the way of a good ol' flame war.

This is bad news...for Obama

Edsel: Does ANYBODY RTFA anymore? America is taking the lead role in Afghanistan by choice.

War Mongers!!!

MugzyBrown: Man On Fire: the US's attitude of "you guys are useless, we'll do it" doesn't help either.

Well if it's true, it's true

Man On Fire: neither does our refusal to submit to international courts.

Nooo way.

Why is it the right hates the idea of Americans being tried for war crimes in international courts?

As for Euopes hesitation, I'd imagine is a question of funding and the mental effects of world wars caused by entangled alliances.

As for Companies in europe profiting form these conflicts? The US does the same thing. Oil for Food was a scandal because we didn't like our cut, not because it was happening.

Edsel: Does ANYBODY RTFA anymore?

Quit being a keener or I'll pants you.

onyxia: Crocodilly_Pontifex: GaryPDX: Looks like they don't want to fight Obama's war either.

wait wait wait, back the truck up.

"Obama's War?"

bush started the war there, and the situation is destabilizing.

he doesn't want to start ANYTHING, he wants to farking finish it.

that being said, i know you're the famous garypdx, and you're a tooroll

/thats tool and troll squashed together.

Its beyond dispute that Bush started the war in Iraq, but saying Bush "started" the war in Afghanistan is like saying Roosevelt started the war with Japan.

touche'

im just trying to point out (however clumsily) that this isn't obama's war, its OUR war.

OUR soldiers, OUR sister, OUR brothers, OUR fathers, OUR mothers are over there fighting and dying.

the conflict is OURS.

and remember, afghanistan is the one where EVERYONE thinks we should be fighting.

hubiestubert: Just waiting for the French to complain bitterly that they're being excluded from the table if the situation on the ground turns around.

People wonder why I have such disdain for the EU governments' ability to react to international crisis, and this is part of the reason. Between NATO signatories pretty much sending token forces, to UN resolutions that wind up being nothing more than strongly worded letters, and then demanding to be cut in for contracts after the dust settles and critical of every juncture, but unwilling to commit anything themselves, there's not a lot to be impressed by.

Plenty of folks want to point fingers, but when it comes down to putting boots on the ground, few nations are willing to do more than cluck their tongues and make noises about sanctions that don't really do much. Which is part of the point. Plenty of European companies make tidy profits from the status quo, and if their governments DID something, it would upset the applecart.

This is the same reason people are dying in Darfur. If the US weren't occupied with Iraq to boot, I'd place blame there. As it is, the European countries have done jack with little excuse.

Crocodilly_Pontifex: GaryPDX: Looks like they don't want to fight Obama's war either.

wait wait wait, back the truck up.

"Obama's War?"

bush started the war there, and the situation is destabilizing.

he doesn't want to start ANYTHING, he wants to farking finish it.

that being said, i know you're the famous garypdx, and you're a tooroll

/thats tool and troll squashed together.

Famous?..Moi? oh c'mon. Obama could pull out of Afghanistan. But noooooo.

Crocodilly_Pontifex: im just trying to point out (however clumsily) that this isn't obama's war, its OUR war.

OUR soldiers, OUR sister, OUR brothers, OUR fathers, OUR mothers are over there fighting and dying.

the conflict is OURS.

That's NOT what Liberals said before the election.

General Zang: The problem is with the United States, and its addiction to warfare.

Typical lib, blame the 'roided-up barfly first!

Yeah but what are their feelings on "Baywatch Nights?"

GaryPDX: Crocodilly_Pontifex: im just trying to point out (however clumsily) that this isn't obama's war, its OUR war.

OUR soldiers, OUR sister, OUR brothers, OUR fathers, OUR mothers are over there fighting and dying.

the conflict is OURS.

That's NOT what Liberals said before the election.

Yeas, about Afghanistan that is exactly what we were saying.

also, go away