this seems informed and reasonable (others echoing this)https://twitter.com/TzviZucker/status/1392718016811503617?s=19 …
-
-
Show this thread
-
oh this is really good wrt answering the question and gets into specific tactics employed in 2002 apparently to great effecthttps://twitter.com/SuttonGL/status/1392718563669073922?s=19 …
Show this thread -
Show this thread
-
oh. other claims about doctrinal differences welp ok https://twitter.com/__________ur0/status/1392725676898328577?s=19 …pic.twitter.com/DCKasa4P4V
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
ok valid
End of conversation
-
-
-
there are right and wrong ways to do it also achieving limited objectives is easier than, like, pacifying and rebuilding the area
-
hm yeah
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
They're not holding territory would be my guess.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
So we've only sent in troops once in the past who knows how many rounds If they're deployed, they generally move neighborhood by neighborhood to destroy tunnels, search basements, etc and then leave. No one wants to hold this territory It won't be pretty if they do go in
-
It's such an awful awful option. I knew we were getting to this but when you see it written it strikes harder.
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.