Obama's Wars: It's shades of Vietnam as U.S. commanders beg for more troops to fight in Afghanistan

Cross posted at The Peace Tree.

Four quotes from an article by Eric Margolis in the Toronto Sun show how Americans don't know their history of failed imperialism when they plan their wars of occupation.

'Each time the U.S. sent more troops and bombed more villages, Afghan resistance sharply intensified and Taliban expanded its control, today over 55% of the country.'
[...]
'Any student of Imperialism 101 knows that after invading a resource-rich or strategic nation you immediately put a local stooge in power, use disaffected minorities to run the government (divide and conquer), and build a native mercenary army.'
[...]
'Such troops, commanded by white officers, were called "sepoys" in the British Indian Army and "askaris" in British East Africa.'
[...]
'The American command, deprived of men and resources by the Bush administration, only managed to cobble together an armed rabble of 80,000 Afghans. The Afghan army, like the post-Saddam Iraqi army, is led by white officers -- in this case, Americans designated "trainers" or "advisers."

'Afghanistan keeps giving me deja vu back to the old British Empire, and flashbacks to those wonderful epic films of the Raj, Drums, Lives of a Bengal Lancer, and Kim. The British imperialists did it much, much better, and with a lot more style. Many of their imperial subjects even admired and liked them.'