How can USA claim to be a military superpower when it's lost all wars???

Well, you did when you asked the following question: "Which war has it actually lost other than Vietnam?"

Had you believed that the US had won or will win in Afghanistan you would have said, "Which war has it actually lost other than Vietnam and Afghanistan?"

Except you failed to take into account the possibility of stalemate, which is neither losing or winning. If you had had the decency to read the thread then you wouldnt be wasting everyones time.

heh you are such an idiot.

At least pick an outcome and be coherent instead of being indecent by wasting everyone's time.

Thats why you are always so simplistic and can only envisage two outcomes. Limited is you.

Because it spends more on its military than the next 26 countries combined, 25 of whom are allies.

Now multiply that with the that fact there has never been a time when human beings have not been at war, and bingo, WW3, end of everyone, except those with the very biggest bunkers.

Wrong - I can only envisage one outcome.

But, by all means, argue your stalemate scenario.

True I overestimated you again, even more limited is you.

You've failed repeatedly to tell how and when the United States will achieve its objectives in Afghanistan, and now cannot tell me how and when your stalement scenario will occur, my limited friend.

You made a response to a question I never asked, but you asked yourself. For some bizarre reason I had the misfortune of being included in your thread.

You do the same again.. Jeep talking to yourself but do stop pretending people have said things they have not.

To be fair, it is pretty hard for a country to win a war against an insurgent enemy. The US has won most wars against states such as the gulf war and to some extent the Vietnam war. However after they have defeated the enemy state's army they struggle with insurgency like in Iraq

Posted from TSR Mobile

To be fair the thread asked about the US claims to be a superpower, but the OP didnt understand what the definition of a superpower was.

To be fair, you've just completely ignored my reply and have therefore shown to be incapable of defending your question disguised as a statement.

I thought you would have at least given it a shot, but the troll in you appears to be weak.

A superpower isn't a country that wins all wars it is a country that has considerable influence over the world and as of right now the US could beat any country in a non nuclear war. On top of this the US is one of the world's largest economies with most commodities being sold in dollars and not to mention the cultural influences it has.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Except you failed to take into account the possibility of stalemate, which is neither losing or winning. If you had had the decency to read the thread then you wouldnt be wasting everyones time.

Wrong - I can only envisage one outcome.

But, by all means, argue your stalemate scenario.

Not really I found your whole input to be bizarre making an irrelevant point over statements I never made. Go back and read the thread and the issue was dealt with at the time. Off you go.

Precisely, which was dealt with way back. Performance in wars was irrelevant unfortunately it didnt seem to sink in with the special people.

Only two realistic outcomes :

1) The US resends tens of thousands of soldiers to Afghanistan to recapture the areas the Taliban currently control. These soldiers then stay there for the foreseeable future.

2) The Taliban continue taking territory from the Afghan government and eventually retake most of the country back.