Afghanistan: Why we should be there (or not), how to conduct the mission (or not) & when to leave
- Thread starter ruxted
- Start date
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
pinko said:
The Anti-Terrorism Act is what you consider "stripping Canadians of their civil liberties"? Seriously? Unless you are a terrorist and/or the government has good reason to believe you are, this does nothing to interfere with any of your liberties. On the contrary - it aims to protect Canadians and our way of life, give us more peace and security, and hopefully prevent another 9/11.
It's all a conspiracy to turn Canada into a police state with no privacy or personal freedom for its citizens, though, eh? :blotto:
TCBF said:
And yet we will continue to have the pipeline argument presented by anti-military activists and conspiracy wingnuts for months and years to come because it helps perpetuate the illusion of the Global Bully and its puppet partners occupying a country to steal its oil.
- Reaction score
- 146
- Points
- 710
To the idjits: the only/only/only pipeline project involving Afstan is a natural gas/gas/gas/ pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan and India (TAPI). When will the dimmer bulbs learn to Google?
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/011448.html
And TAPI ain't no sure thing:
http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/18/stories/2008101859541000.htm
No crude, dumb dudes.
Mark
Ottawa
http://www.damianpenny.com/archived/011448.html
And TAPI ain't no sure thing:
http://www.hindu.com/2008/10/18/stories/2008101859541000.htm
No crude, dumb dudes.
Mark
Ottawa
MarkOttawa said:
- Actually, Mark, it's "No crude- YET -..." Such a pipeline would provide a template that would allow future connecting pipelines from Western Siberia and the Caspian basin to ship south as well. This would access TEN TIMES the natural gas as well as perhaps 200,000,000,000 barrels of oil (basically, another Persian Gulf).
http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/CK24Ag01.html
- Note that by the time peace and stability break out in Afghanistan, the USA may well be self-sufficient in gas and oil (at least in a hemispheric sense), thus India and Pakistan would be the largest benefactors of this line.
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 430
Okay....I've read through all your argument Pinko.
We (Canada as a part of NATO) are currently rendering aid in their justice system and also in their policing services. This will take time....a long time to get it anywhere near resembling what you and I take for granted back in Canada.
As for the Bush administration, it's an outgoing one so there will be changes and the President elect has already said that the US will be bringing more to the table and finish the War on Terror. You seem to forget that 24 Canadians lost their lives on Sept 11th, 2001. Al-Qaeda has already declared war on us, are you saying that we shouldn't be taking the fight to them and the one's who allowed them to train and organize in the Afghan countryside?
Do I feel good about the cause? I sleep rather well in Kandahar province thank you.
I'm sure that you can agree with me that the Afghan people require aid in the form of either dollars or food stuff (grains etc), equipment, medical supplies, hydroelectric power to help with infrastructure rebuilding?
Guess what...we're doing that right now and have been for quite some time. To ensure that the stuff we bring to the table through NGOs makes it to the local population we have to enforce security, as the fledling ANA (Afghan National Army) and ANP (Afghan National Police) aren't able to take control yet, to ensure that the stuff isn't destroyed by the Taliban.
Try to remember that the Taliban have everything to lose if we are successful in our mission, therefore they are fighting tooth and nail. I've been on the receiving end of it and have equally dished it out, as have others that are in this discussion right now. If this means routing out the bomb makers that are trying to kill us so be it.
I'm sure you'd love to have the police back in Canada find the drug dealers and their stash before they sell it on the streets or, God forbid, get into a turf war and an innocent becomes yet another statistic.
But I digress.
So far you are only open to pushing nothing more than a conspiracy theory. Let's see...
- a UN mandated mission given to NATO to go into Afghanistan (at the invitation of it's internationally recognized government) and you are calling us invaders.
- An oil pipeline project that was pretty much abandoned well before Sept 01 due to instability in the region and will remain for the foreseeable future.
- Civil liberties under attack in Canada (one that was supported by the Liberal gov't and rammed through). It's already been said. Unless you have been planning a terrorist attack in Canada this will not apply to you.
Please tell me that you have more to stand on than this.
Regards
Now where did I put that hat? Ahhhh here it is.
<Mod hat on>
If you are here to only post inflammatory posts and then run, your time here will be rather short and you will be banned as a troll.
To the other members who are looking to incite an emotional response.....do not feed the troll. Engage with information.
The Army.ca Staff
We (Canada as a part of NATO) are currently rendering aid in their justice system and also in their policing services. This will take time....a long time to get it anywhere near resembling what you and I take for granted back in Canada.
As for the Bush administration, it's an outgoing one so there will be changes and the President elect has already said that the US will be bringing more to the table and finish the War on Terror. You seem to forget that 24 Canadians lost their lives on Sept 11th, 2001. Al-Qaeda has already declared war on us, are you saying that we shouldn't be taking the fight to them and the one's who allowed them to train and organize in the Afghan countryside?
Do I feel good about the cause? I sleep rather well in Kandahar province thank you.
I'm sure that you can agree with me that the Afghan people require aid in the form of either dollars or food stuff (grains etc), equipment, medical supplies, hydroelectric power to help with infrastructure rebuilding?
Guess what...we're doing that right now and have been for quite some time. To ensure that the stuff we bring to the table through NGOs makes it to the local population we have to enforce security, as the fledling ANA (Afghan National Army) and ANP (Afghan National Police) aren't able to take control yet, to ensure that the stuff isn't destroyed by the Taliban.
Try to remember that the Taliban have everything to lose if we are successful in our mission, therefore they are fighting tooth and nail. I've been on the receiving end of it and have equally dished it out, as have others that are in this discussion right now. If this means routing out the bomb makers that are trying to kill us so be it.
I'm sure you'd love to have the police back in Canada find the drug dealers and their stash before they sell it on the streets or, God forbid, get into a turf war and an innocent becomes yet another statistic.
But I digress.
So far you are only open to pushing nothing more than a conspiracy theory. Let's see...
- a UN mandated mission given to NATO to go into Afghanistan (at the invitation of it's internationally recognized government) and you are calling us invaders.
- An oil pipeline project that was pretty much abandoned well before Sept 01 due to instability in the region and will remain for the foreseeable future.
- Civil liberties under attack in Canada (one that was supported by the Liberal gov't and rammed through). It's already been said. Unless you have been planning a terrorist attack in Canada this will not apply to you.
Please tell me that you have more to stand on than this.
Regards
Now where did I put that hat? Ahhhh here it is.
<Mod hat on>
If you are here to only post inflammatory posts and then run, your time here will be rather short and you will be banned as a troll.
To the other members who are looking to incite an emotional response.....do not feed the troll. Engage with information.
The Army.ca Staff
"We (Canada as a part of NATO) are currently rendering aid in their justice system and also in their policing services. This will take time....a long time to get it anywhere near resembling what you and I take for granted back in Canada."
I am certainly aware of the fact that Canada is a Nato partner and that training is ongoing with respect to policing and criminal justice. I am also aware that corruption is endemic in this country and that a staple of this economy is its drug trade.
"As for the Bush administration, it's an outgoing one so there will be changes and the President elect has already said that the US will be bringing more to the table and finish the War on Terror."
It is agreed that Obama is aiming to attempt to gain a strategic advantage in the region by beefing up the American troop complement in the region. However as I understand it he contemplates incursions into Pakistan, the sovereign state adjacent to Afghanistan. If I am not mistaken there are two command structures at play in Afghanistan one which includes Nato memebers and the other a uniquely American one. In the absence of consent from the Pakistani government to violate its sovereign space one has to wonder how far this effort will go given the fact that Pakistan is a nuclear state. Rather than bringing an end to terror I submit that this will only accelerate the conflict and bring the world closer to another world war.
"Do I feel good about the cause? I sleep rather well in Kandahar province thank you."
Thanks for sharing your sleeping habits with me.
"I'm sure that you can agree with me that the Afghan people require aid in the form of either dollars or food stuff (grains etc), equipment, medical supplies, hydroelectric power to help with infrastructure rebuilding?"
Yes. As do many of the billions of poor throughout the world.
"Guess what...we're doing that right now and have been for quite some time. To ensure that the stuff we bring to the table through NGOs makes it to the local population we have to enforce security, as the fledling ANA (Afghan National Army) and ANP (Afghan National Police) aren't able to take control yet, to ensure that the stuff isn't destroyed by the Taliban. "
Please define what you mean by enforce security. I would also like you to speak to the issue of corruption within the ranks of the Afghan police and army.
"Try to remember that the Taliban have everything to lose if we are successful in our mission, therefore they are fighting tooth and nail. I've been on the receiving end of it and have equally dished it out, as have others that are in this discussion right now. If this means routing out the bomb makers that are trying to kill us so be it. "
It seems to me that you have made a conscious choice to become a soldier with the full knowledge that the nature of your work entails the dangers you describe. If you are suggesting that the Taliban is a monolithic group then I am sceptical of such a claim. Has it not occurred to you that you and your colleagues are seen as occupiers and not (as you perceive) as liberators>
"I'm sure you'd love to have the police back in Canada find the drug dealers and their stash before they sell it on the streets or, God forbid, get into a turf war and an innocent becomes yet another statistic."
I am sure you will agree Afghanistan is a narco state.
"So far you are only open to pushing nothing more than a conspiracy theory."
Well no I am not. What I am suggesting is that Afghanistan is a strategic locale for a variety of reasons including the pipelines previously referenced. Karzai himself was an oil industry insider.
"a UN mandated mission given to NATO to go into Afghanistan (at the invitation of it's internationally recognized government) and you are calling us invaders."
Your observation notwithstanding you are part of an occupying force. You can slice and dice it whatever way you want.
"An oil pipeline project that was pretty much abandoned well before Sept 01 due to instability in the region and will remain for the foreseeable future"
Your tacit acceptance of the pipeline proposition is noted.
"
Civil liberties under attack in Canada (one that was supported by the Liberal gov't and rammed through).
Agreed.
"Unless you have been planning a terrorist attack in Canada this will not apply to you."
The Arar case along with several others suggest otherwise. Maybe in your universe a police state is acceptable but let me assure you in mine it isn't.
I trust you understand my position on this issue and would add that you should recognize that not all Canadians think the same on this subject.
I am sure you will recognize that free speech includes speech that might offend. If, in your efforts at moderation, you wish to stifle such speech then so be it.
I am sure you realize that public opinion is divided in canada.
You seem to forget that 24 Canadians lost their lives on Sept 11th, 2001. Al-Qaeda has already declared war on us, are you saying that we shouldn't be taking the fight to them and the one's who allowed them to train and organize in the Afghan countryside?
I am certainly aware of the fact that Canada is a Nato partner and that training is ongoing with respect to policing and criminal justice. I am also aware that corruption is endemic in this country and that a staple of this economy is its drug trade.
"As for the Bush administration, it's an outgoing one so there will be changes and the President elect has already said that the US will be bringing more to the table and finish the War on Terror."
It is agreed that Obama is aiming to attempt to gain a strategic advantage in the region by beefing up the American troop complement in the region. However as I understand it he contemplates incursions into Pakistan, the sovereign state adjacent to Afghanistan. If I am not mistaken there are two command structures at play in Afghanistan one which includes Nato memebers and the other a uniquely American one. In the absence of consent from the Pakistani government to violate its sovereign space one has to wonder how far this effort will go given the fact that Pakistan is a nuclear state. Rather than bringing an end to terror I submit that this will only accelerate the conflict and bring the world closer to another world war.
"Do I feel good about the cause? I sleep rather well in Kandahar province thank you."
Thanks for sharing your sleeping habits with me.
"I'm sure that you can agree with me that the Afghan people require aid in the form of either dollars or food stuff (grains etc), equipment, medical supplies, hydroelectric power to help with infrastructure rebuilding?"
Yes. As do many of the billions of poor throughout the world.
"Guess what...we're doing that right now and have been for quite some time. To ensure that the stuff we bring to the table through NGOs makes it to the local population we have to enforce security, as the fledling ANA (Afghan National Army) and ANP (Afghan National Police) aren't able to take control yet, to ensure that the stuff isn't destroyed by the Taliban. "
Please define what you mean by enforce security. I would also like you to speak to the issue of corruption within the ranks of the Afghan police and army.
"Try to remember that the Taliban have everything to lose if we are successful in our mission, therefore they are fighting tooth and nail. I've been on the receiving end of it and have equally dished it out, as have others that are in this discussion right now. If this means routing out the bomb makers that are trying to kill us so be it. "
It seems to me that you have made a conscious choice to become a soldier with the full knowledge that the nature of your work entails the dangers you describe. If you are suggesting that the Taliban is a monolithic group then I am sceptical of such a claim. Has it not occurred to you that you and your colleagues are seen as occupiers and not (as you perceive) as liberators>
"I'm sure you'd love to have the police back in Canada find the drug dealers and their stash before they sell it on the streets or, God forbid, get into a turf war and an innocent becomes yet another statistic."
I am sure you will agree Afghanistan is a narco state.
"So far you are only open to pushing nothing more than a conspiracy theory."
Well no I am not. What I am suggesting is that Afghanistan is a strategic locale for a variety of reasons including the pipelines previously referenced. Karzai himself was an oil industry insider.
"a UN mandated mission given to NATO to go into Afghanistan (at the invitation of it's internationally recognized government) and you are calling us invaders."
Your observation notwithstanding you are part of an occupying force. You can slice and dice it whatever way you want.
"An oil pipeline project that was pretty much abandoned well before Sept 01 due to instability in the region and will remain for the foreseeable future"
Your tacit acceptance of the pipeline proposition is noted.
"
Civil liberties under attack in Canada (one that was supported by the Liberal gov't and rammed through).
Agreed.
"Unless you have been planning a terrorist attack in Canada this will not apply to you."
The Arar case along with several others suggest otherwise. Maybe in your universe a police state is acceptable but let me assure you in mine it isn't.
I trust you understand my position on this issue and would add that you should recognize that not all Canadians think the same on this subject.
I am sure you will recognize that free speech includes speech that might offend. If, in your efforts at moderation, you wish to stifle such speech then so be it.
I am sure you realize that public opinion is divided in canada.
You seem to forget that 24 Canadians lost their lives on Sept 11th, 2001. Al-Qaeda has already declared war on us, are you saying that we shouldn't be taking the fight to them and the one's who allowed them to train and organize in the Afghan countryside?
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
pinko said:
Pinko
I don't know how old you are, but bringing "Stability" to a Region doesn't happen overnight. Perhaps you have studied a little history. Perhaps you have heard of World War II. Perhaps you have heard of Western Europe. How long did it take for "Stability" to take place in Europe after the Second World War? Over Sixty years and many generations. Do you think we can bring any semblance of Stability to Afghanistan in less time? This will take many generations to clean up. The Americans will not be able to do it themselves. NATO as a partnership, may.
Afghanistan is a "Geographical meeting point" that many "Political Powers" are seeking to control. If NATO leaves, then they will step in. You may recognize the Russian, Iranian, Chinese and Pakistani interests in the country. They are already contributing to the destabilization of the Region.
Both Pakistan and Iran are nations that are relatively unstable as is. Pakistan is a country that has many areas that are totally out of control. Pakistan is already a "Nuclear Nation" and Iran is attempting to become one. Is this what we want? A Region that is totally unstable?
There are many serious problems in Afghanistan. Corruption. Foreign "agents provocateur". Different culture. Complex Allied ROEs, intelligence sharing, National Caveats, organizational/command structures, etc. It is a very serious problem, and one that we can not walk away from. There is no way that a couple of years of fighting the Taliban, or WOT, is going to stabilize the Region. It will take a very long time to bring stability to the Region
We are now in a position of: "We are Screwed if we do; and we are screwed if we don't."
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
pinko said:
Note the buzzwords of propaganda peppered throughout this poster's comments. It's hard to have a debate or discussion with someone who hears from the horse's mouth so to speak what the truth is, and then s/he dismisses that truth and continues to spew rhetoric and spin BS. Clearly, it suits this individual's agenda to ignore the facts.
I still have 23 days until I swear in, so as I'm not even a member of the military yet, I'm not one of the BTDT posters. I just know that if you want to find out the truth about something, you go to the source, not to the local coffee shop to hear the latest hype. The vast majority of posters here are military members, however, and many of those have been to Afghanistan; some of them are still there now. Those are the people who know what is going on and shouldn't be dismissed as though they don't know WTF they are talking about in this or any other discussion. The fact that John Q. Public thinks s/he knows more about what's happening in Afghanistan or in any other DND mission around the world than the military personnel themselves is downright ridiculous, not to mention arrogant. That a person would continue to assert in multiple posts that s/he knows more than these people just defies explanation.
As I used to tell my students before any kind of speech, debate, or presentation: Know your audience.
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 210
BZ! Celtic Girl, but are you sure s(he) heard it from the horse's mouth? Sorry but I kinda think he heard it from the horse's nether regions since it is the same recycled BS as seen in various left-leaning newspapers, etc.
Cheers
tango22a
Cheers
tango22a
- Reaction score
- 1
- Points
- 430
pinko is not here for debate whomever they are he/she/it is just present to spread its own agenda. You are wasting your time engaging them
- Reaction score
- 19,024
- Points
- 1,360
pinko said:
Pinko, your statement is incorrect. Neither NATO nor American forces are an occupying force.
Reference: The Hague Convention - IV: Regulations concerning the Laws and Customs of War on Land (18 October 1907). Annex to the Convention, Section III, Article 42.
The Government of the Islamic Republic of Afghanistan is the internationally-recognized authority for the country, and NATO/coalition forces are assisting the recognized authority at the Government's request.
McG
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 2,473
- Points
- 1,160
Coincidentally, if you go digging into any military doctrine on the topic, you will find that we’ve been aware from the start that military role in counter insurgency is to set the security conditions that will allow for the diplomatic and rest-of-government solution to the conflict. This is neither new nor interesting, unless one is arguing from an uninformed position. Soldiers know that an insurgency is a political problem requiring a political solution. Discriminately applied military power is a key enabler to allow for humanitarian relief, reconstruction and the initiate of political efforts.pinko said:
pinko said:
pinko said:
pinko said:
If the US is a “bully” and (as it seems) you do not trust their motives or methods in Afghanistan, why would you want to bestow upon them the sole authority for international efforts in stabilization & military security within Afghanistan? A secure and peaceable Afghanistan is, for now, dependant on a large military security/stability effort. This role is being filled by Afghan security forces and ISAF. Shutting down this effort would be the same as turning our back on the Afghan people and their suffering.pinko said:
As the resources required are separate, wouldn’t you think it would bew best to support international security efforts and help in developing effective policing and judicial systems? While we are at it, lets help in the development of effective boarder security and prison services. Of course, being read-in, you know we are already doing this.pinko said:
pinko said:
There is no occupation. The international community (including the United Nations and many non-NATO nations) is operating in Afghanistan at the request of the democratically elected government. That government is not perfect, but it will continue to improve over time and as the Afghan people continue to exercise their new democratic rights.pinko said:
Are we seen as occupiers, or is that your perception? I have not seen any indicators to support your position. I do know of Afghan elders who lost their composure to sadness when learning of the killing of a Canadian CIMIC officer who had been supporting the village. I have read more than a few news articles quoting Afghans complaining of the foreign fighters, but these were in the context of Arabs and Chechens fighting for Al Qaida.pinko said:
Again, it is still not an “occupation.” Further, while preventing a return of the Taliban Regime is an element of our role it is a tangential element. Our primary function is to establish security for humanitarian and reconstruction efforts and to set the conditions for a political solution.pinko said:
Reconstruction , counterinsurgency and reconciliation are not over-night wonder events. They take a lot of time. Despite that, I do not agree there is very little evidence of improvement. The ANP, for all of their problems, are becoming more professionalized (in Kandahar this is a large part due to mentoring by Canadian military police and RCMP). The reliability of the electrical grid is improving. A much greater number of young Afghans are being educated (including girls) due to the establishment of many new educational facilities and the heightened security fought for by ISAF. New born children now have a much greater chance of living to their first birthday. This list goes on; the evidence is out there. You just have to honestly want to look for it.pinko said:
I’m sorry but this, at best, is a cognitive distortion. You certainly could not take the number of time though history that a nation has attempted “subduing the peoples” of Afghanistan and arrive at a statistically relevant conclusion. None of the variables are controlled, so the application of scientific method is unachievable to begin with. However, your observation really looses all relevance when one considers that we are not making any attempt toward “subduing the peoples” of Afghanistan.pinko said:
The Taliban is not a monolithic group. This makes negotiating at a macro level difficult to impossible. Instead, such political efforts must be aimed at the local levels or intermediate levels of leadership.pinko said:
We’ve not followed the US. The legitimacy of our effort is larger even than NATO. We are in Afghanistan as part of a united international community. The United Nations continues to authorize the ISAF mission and request member states to contribute to its efforts. Many of the nations which were vocally opposed to operations in Iraq have been actively supportive and involved in Afghanistan from the start.pinko said:
RED HERRING ALERT!!! Our deployment in Afghanistan and our domestic posture on terrorism are not linked. The Anti-Terrorism Act could have been passed even had we not deployed to Afghanistan, and our deployment to Afghanistan would not have ended earlier had the Anti-Terrorism Act not been passed. Please take your intellectually dishonest obfuscationist to a more relevant forum. If you want to discuss the Anti-Terrorism Act, then I suggest you start here: http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/index.php/board,70.0.html or http://forums.milnet.ca/forums/index.php/board,22.0.htmlpinko said:
We could probably get into an interesting discussion on how well typical members of either side of that debate are informed of the issues. But it is not really relevant to the current discussion.pinko said:
There are problems. While the military community is doing its part through mentoring of Afghan security forces, these problems are largely political and require the involvement of such organizations. As mentioned previously, development in Afghanistan is (by the nature of all such activities anywhere) a slow process. Progress will come, but not in we leave now.pinko said:
That would be enforcing the rule of law, and protecting the population from terrorism. While some elements of the Taliban may limit their aggression to military targets, there is a significant number which deliberately target the civilian population and political figures. Deliberate beatings, disfigurements and killing of the civilian population is an abhorrent means of achieving one’s political ends. Unlike the Taliban, the international coalition does not employ such techniques. The coalition does work to protect the population from this, and these attack would not stop if we were to suddenly leave.pinko said:
Diffusing our efforts across the world will dilute those efforts to the point of ineffectiveness. We’ve started a concentrated humanitarian effort in Afghanistan. We are best to see it through to an self-sustainable conclusion before fully removing our efforts and re-allocating to another place where we can do good. To do otherwise would be a disservice to Afghanistan and every other future nation from which we’d leave as soon as it lost the media’s 15 min of interest.pinko said:
- Reaction score
- 2
- Points
- 430
Well I'm done trying to talk with you Pinko. You are consistently restating nothing more than catch phrases and not backing them up with fact.
G2G and MCG have taken you to task and have sufficiently picked apart each and every argument that you have made. With hard evidence literally in your face I'm sure you'll say it's nothing more than a neoconservative conspiracy.
Your type have come and gone, usually stamping their feet on their soap box resulting in banning.
As for free speech, this is a privately owned site and we enjoy voicing our opinions at the leisure and whim of the owner. Don't like it? Too bad.
The fact that you are still here speaks volumes. At least you're trying to stand your ground. We're not going to stifle debate.
The Army.ca Staff
G2G and MCG have taken you to task and have sufficiently picked apart each and every argument that you have made. With hard evidence literally in your face I'm sure you'll say it's nothing more than a neoconservative conspiracy.
Your type have come and gone, usually stamping their feet on their soap box resulting in banning.
As for free speech, this is a privately owned site and we enjoy voicing our opinions at the leisure and whim of the owner. Don't like it? Too bad.
The fact that you are still here speaks volumes. At least you're trying to stand your ground. We're not going to stifle debate.
The Army.ca Staff
Crewman:
I studied Western Civilization history at university many years ago. In the interim I have read a number of texts on the events in the region including Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. I would like to point out that the conflict in Afghanistan has gone on longer than WWll if that is the benchmark you using. I don't doubt there is a reordering in the region but where I think we differ is in how this will be accomplished. I take the view that this will eventually be resolved (one way or another) by Afghnaistan and its neighbours and it may include a redefinition of borders.
You seem to acknowledge the strategic nature of this area. If there is to be peace in the region there needs to be a coming together of all stakholders in the conflict including Russia, Iran, China and Pakistan. For this to happen Nato and/or the USA need to engage these parties through diplomatic channels.
You state:
"There are many serious problems in Afghanistan. Corruption. Foreign "agents provocateur". Different culture. Complex Allied ROEs, intelligence sharing, National Caveats, organizational/command structures, etc."
This is a fair characterization of the issues. Of particular interest is your reference to the national caveats.
"We are now in a position of: "We are Screwed if we do; and we are screwed if we don't.""
I take it you are making this comment as a soldier. If this is the case then I can certainly see where you are coming from.
Anyway I appreciate your response.
I studied Western Civilization history at university many years ago. In the interim I have read a number of texts on the events in the region including Samuel Huntington's Clash of Civilizations. I would like to point out that the conflict in Afghanistan has gone on longer than WWll if that is the benchmark you using. I don't doubt there is a reordering in the region but where I think we differ is in how this will be accomplished. I take the view that this will eventually be resolved (one way or another) by Afghnaistan and its neighbours and it may include a redefinition of borders.
You seem to acknowledge the strategic nature of this area. If there is to be peace in the region there needs to be a coming together of all stakholders in the conflict including Russia, Iran, China and Pakistan. For this to happen Nato and/or the USA need to engage these parties through diplomatic channels.
You state:
"There are many serious problems in Afghanistan. Corruption. Foreign "agents provocateur". Different culture. Complex Allied ROEs, intelligence sharing, National Caveats, organizational/command structures, etc."
This is a fair characterization of the issues. Of particular interest is your reference to the national caveats.
"We are now in a position of: "We are Screwed if we do; and we are screwed if we don't.""
I take it you are making this comment as a soldier. If this is the case then I can certainly see where you are coming from.
Anyway I appreciate your response.
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
Brian
Don't think that the membership here are incapable of thought or research, here and on other means. Fact is, you may be dealing with more than research here when you begin to include actual time on the ground and in the Region, as many here have. They have done their research, been through numerous briefings on the History and Culture of the Region, and then gone there and come back. Some are even posting from there as we carry on this discussion. Many have read all the same books as you, and more. (You may want to use the SEARCH function and research some of the "recommended readings" some have posted.) They, however, have had the opportunities to actually deal with Afghans, so they don't give your thoughts as much credibility as you seem to believe.
I am sure some of your friends lurking will agree, that it is one thing to read about a person's travails, but yet another thing to actually walk in his boots.
I am sure we are all curious as to what your actual thoughts are as to a solution to the problems in this Region, especially if NATO, and the Americans, pack up their bags and leave. Could you expound on your thoughts as to how Afghans will bring stability to their nation if we all leave?
Don't think that the membership here are incapable of thought or research, here and on other means. Fact is, you may be dealing with more than research here when you begin to include actual time on the ground and in the Region, as many here have. They have done their research, been through numerous briefings on the History and Culture of the Region, and then gone there and come back. Some are even posting from there as we carry on this discussion. Many have read all the same books as you, and more. (You may want to use the SEARCH function and research some of the "recommended readings" some have posted.) They, however, have had the opportunities to actually deal with Afghans, so they don't give your thoughts as much credibility as you seem to believe.
I am sure some of your friends lurking will agree, that it is one thing to read about a person's travails, but yet another thing to actually walk in his boots.
I am sure we are all curious as to what your actual thoughts are as to a solution to the problems in this Region, especially if NATO, and the Americans, pack up their bags and leave. Could you expound on your thoughts as to how Afghans will bring stability to their nation if we all leave?
- Reaction score
- 25
- Points
- 430
pinko said:
Now just to set you straight, I, and most others here, realize that we can go back to Alexander the Great, and we probably still haven't reached the origins of the problems in Afghanistan. What I am pointing out about WW II is that it has taken over 60 years to bring stability to a "Western Culture" in Europe, and it can never be expected that we will be able to bring stability to this Region, with such a vastly different culture, ethics and moral background. This is not Mcdonald's where we can go in and get a Big Mac and leave in a few minutes/go in and end the atrocities and leave the next day. This will probably take many more generations than it took in Europe, before we will ever see any semblance of stability in the Region.
"Now just to set you straight, I, and most others here, realize that we can go back to Alexander the Great, and we probably still haven't reached the origins of the problems in Afghanistan. What I am pointing out about WW II is that it has taken over 60 years to bring stability to a "Western Culture" in Europe, and it can never be expected that we will be able to bring stability to this Region, with such a vastly different culture, ethics and moral background. This is not Mcdonald's where we can go in and get a Big Mac and leave in a few minutes/go in and end the atrocities and leave the next day. This will probably take many more generations than it took in Europe, before we will ever see any semblance of stability in the Region. "
George:
With reference to your most recent remarks comparing the events of World Warll and those of Afghanistan has it not occured to you that this is a radically different world we live in than the one you relate to around the time of WWll?
I question the premise of the comparison you have drawn but for the moment let us say that it is a valid one. You have indentified a number of different factors that need to be addressed and if you don't mind I'd like to focus on the issue of culture. I am wondering if you would elaborate on what cultural distinctions are to be drawn between the "western culture" and that of those resident in Afghanistan. I have been led to believe that Afghanistan is composed of a variety of tribes with no particular allegiance to a national government. It might be helpful if you could speak to this issue and in addition address the way the British shaped the borders in the region as a former colonial power.
Here is a website that sets out tribal composition.
http://afghanistan.saarctourism.org/ethnic-groups.html
George:
With reference to your most recent remarks comparing the events of World Warll and those of Afghanistan has it not occured to you that this is a radically different world we live in than the one you relate to around the time of WWll?
I question the premise of the comparison you have drawn but for the moment let us say that it is a valid one. You have indentified a number of different factors that need to be addressed and if you don't mind I'd like to focus on the issue of culture. I am wondering if you would elaborate on what cultural distinctions are to be drawn between the "western culture" and that of those resident in Afghanistan. I have been led to believe that Afghanistan is composed of a variety of tribes with no particular allegiance to a national government. It might be helpful if you could speak to this issue and in addition address the way the British shaped the borders in the region as a former colonial power.
Here is a website that sets out tribal composition.
http://afghanistan.saarctourism.org/ethnic-groups.html
Similar threads
