| Sending more troops to Afghanistan will result in more soldiers to fight visible enemies, but soldiers are not equiped to uncover hidden forces. I think the war in Afghanistan isn't much of a war, so why send more troops there? These troops will use up funding for their stay, and fight nobody, unless they are all good at mingling in the street and getting information about where the enemy is.
I propose that America train agents at it's bases instead of soldiers, well more agents than it has, as the war on terror is based as a 'secret' war, one fought not with soldiers. The government will not send it's soldiers to fight, as it is not at war with America, but might be funding the 'secret' war, so America needs to get 'secretive' also. With more agents the war could be fought ndercover, hell why the mess of open war? Then America could pull troops out and send them home too, leaving only it's agents to sneak around and foil plans. A war on terror is not fought out in the open.
Sending troops to Pakistan - what will that accomplish? Will they say that there are terrorists there in Pakistan, so they need to deploy troops there? The Pakistani government recently named Bin Laden the sword of Allah, so why would they let their hero get caugh, or assist in his capture? Instead they will be wasting more money to sit around as targets, as they will be sold short by the Pakistani soldiers as to where they are for terrorist attacks. So they will be a sitting duck waiting to be bombed, with nobody to blame for the attacks. So they will just sit around and, ready to fight, be slowly eroded.
Poison for the system! |