Afghanistan,
Posted by: Don Atkinson on 11 November 2009
Afghanistan,
Obama has been in post for .c40 weeks and quite few Americans on this forum voiced their support for him during last year’s election. It’s a bit too soon IMHO to judge his performance, but his health proposals seem to be emerging along the lines he pledged, so “fingers crossed” for his supporters…….
President Obama is considering sending a further 40,000 troops to Afghanistan, but he wants other members of NATO to contribute 4,000 of these. Can his supporters, (or opponents) outline :-
Why is the UN in Afghanistan, why NATO, why the USA?
Why should the UK and other NATO countries support the UN/NATO/USA in this campaign?
Is another 40,000 troops sufficient to achieve the objectives of the UN/NATO/USA/all the other contributors?
Cheers
Don
Obama has been in post for .c40 weeks and quite few Americans on this forum voiced their support for him during last year’s election. It’s a bit too soon IMHO to judge his performance, but his health proposals seem to be emerging along the lines he pledged, so “fingers crossed” for his supporters…….
President Obama is considering sending a further 40,000 troops to Afghanistan, but he wants other members of NATO to contribute 4,000 of these. Can his supporters, (or opponents) outline :-
Why is the UN in Afghanistan, why NATO, why the USA?
Why should the UK and other NATO countries support the UN/NATO/USA in this campaign?
Is another 40,000 troops sufficient to achieve the objectives of the UN/NATO/USA/all the other contributors?
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 11 November 2009 by mikeeschman
Obama needs to do a lot of explaining on this issue. I'm afraid there are no good answers for anyone here. Don't forget he got this one in his court mid-stream. He's not as unconstrained as he might be.
Posted on: 11 November 2009 by Haim Ronen
Japan has just committed 5 billions dollars to the aid of Afghanistan. My question is why are all the super rich oil producing Moslem nations hiding and not offering any help of their own?
Posted on: 11 November 2009 by kuma
banana stand. 
Posted on: 11 November 2009 by ewemon
quote:Originally posted by Haim Ronen:
Japan has just committed 5 billions dollars to the aid of Afghanistan. My question is why are all the super rich oil producing Moslem nations hiding and not offering any help of their own?
The question Haim would be how much of it has seen the light of day and not ended up in someones pockets or Bank account? Of course you are also right aboiut the Arab countries.
Wouldn't you have thought if this was a war on terrorism that it was in there interest to help improve the lot for the Afghan people and so help diminish the threat?
Of course it maybe the opposite in so much as they don't want to anger the terrorists and end up having them causing havoc in their countries.
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Andrew Randle
quote:Originally posted by mikeeschman:
Obama needs to do a lot of explaining on this issue. I'm afraid there are no good answers for anyone here. Don't forget he got this one in his court mid-stream. He's not as unconstrained as he might be.
Before his election, Obama already explained his policy about gearing up America's involvement in Afghanistan and winding down Iraq.
Andrew Randle
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by BigH47
quote:My question is why are all the super rich oil producing Moslem nations hiding and not offering any help of their own?
So that they stay super rich?
Most don't give a shit about their own people why should they worry about any one else?
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by shoot6x7
I heard a US security think tank guy say that Bush's response to 9/11 was wrong. The reaction was one against a nation or nations, when it should have been more specifically against a terrorist group.
In anycase, have we all gotten tired of asking what had Iraq to do with the terrorist attacks ?
I hope that it didn't turn out to be a huge distraction, while the Taliban regained its foothold in Afghanistan.
I don't know about you guys, but the whole situation is getting messier and messier. The Russian's got their asses whooped, is it NATO's turn ? What a mess ...
BTW do you guys even know that the Canadian military is the primary force in Kandahar ?
In anycase, have we all gotten tired of asking what had Iraq to do with the terrorist attacks ?
I hope that it didn't turn out to be a huge distraction, while the Taliban regained its foothold in Afghanistan.
I don't know about you guys, but the whole situation is getting messier and messier. The Russian's got their asses whooped, is it NATO's turn ? What a mess ...
BTW do you guys even know that the Canadian military is the primary force in Kandahar ?
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Don Atkinson
quote:BTW do you guys even know that the Canadian military is the primary force in Kandahar ?
errrr....sort of. My son-in-law/daughter live in Vernon BC and keep me reasonably well informed of Canadian news and issues.
So why is the UN in Afghanistan? and why should Canada, UK, rest of Nato, the Emirates etc be providing troops and/or funding?
Pretend that you are Gordon Brown/Stephen Harper trying to convince a sceptical electorate......
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Don Atkinson
Looks like the US ambassador in Kabul has recommended no more troops or money because of corruption.
My guess is he has actually suggested there is no longer any real threat from Al Quaida in Afghanistan and the best policy now would be to state that as a fact and withdraw.....just a guess!
Cheers
Don
My guess is he has actually suggested there is no longer any real threat from Al Quaida in Afghanistan and the best policy now would be to state that as a fact and withdraw.....just a guess!
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by shoot6x7
Nice to know you have a Canadian connection Don.
My fear is, the way that Afghanistan has been handled and the mess it is in now, if NATO troops withdraw, the Taliban will take over in weeks and the regime will be worse than it was before.
My fear is, the way that Afghanistan has been handled and the mess it is in now, if NATO troops withdraw, the Taliban will take over in weeks and the regime will be worse than it was before.
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Tarquin Maynard - Portly
Taliban take over > radical Islamicists in power > Pakistan falls as the extremists get bold > Taliban with nukes...
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by shoot6x7
quote:Originally posted by Mike Lacey:
Taliban take over > radical Islamicists in power > Pakistan falls as the extremists get bold > Taliban with nukes...
Makes you shudder doesn't it.
I'm not the most optimistic being unemployed for nearly six-months now, but I can't see that a troop pull out will benefit anyone except the Taliban.
What's the best case scenario ? Probably what we have now. Corruption is endemic there, democracy is likely not suited to their society.
What's the best way to maintain order there, I have no idea ...
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Bruce Woodhouse
A horribly plausible scenario. Perhaps it is Pakistan that should be receiving the aid and support (and if you are of a militaristic bent you might add troops). A strong, democratically run and economically viable Pakistan strikes me as more achievable than the same aspiration for Afghanistan.
Bruce
Bruce
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Roy T
quote:Originally posted by Mike Lacey:
Taliban take over > radical Islamicists in power > Pakistan falls as the extremists get bold > Taliban with nukes...
Seymour M. Hersh has a few thoughts on the subject as do those over at ArmsControlWonk - not sure just who to believe.
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by nap-ster
If you want a "Hollywood" version then watch Charlie Wilson's War. Trivial but the message is the same.
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by JamieWednesday
Or read it, much more depth in the book
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Don Atkinson
quote:Taliban take over > radical Islamicists in power > Pakistan falls as the extremists get bold > Taliban with nukes...
...so India, China and the Arabian Gulf States need to be motivated to help??
And Iran would have a friendly nuclear neighbour to control to help control the region?
Perhaps the UN should relieve Pakistan of its nuclear weapons.
Why don't we follow Professor Nutt's advice? Legalise opium, buy it from Afghans, stimulate their economy.....
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by novelty
Imo, there was a time when being in Afghanistan made sense, that was circa 2002 when we were trying to get OBL and Al Qaeda. We took our eye off the ball when we invaded Iraq and allowed Afghanistan to deteriorate.
Now we're amidst another nation building exercise when we should be rebuilding our own nations.
I would like to say I'm confident Obama will see the folly of our current trajectory in Afghanistan and change course but I can't.
Now we're amidst another nation building exercise when we should be rebuilding our own nations.
I would like to say I'm confident Obama will see the folly of our current trajectory in Afghanistan and change course but I can't.
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by novelty
quote:Originally posted by Mike Lacey:
Taliban take over > radical Islamicists in power > Pakistan falls as the extremists get bold > Taliban with nukes...
I think this is a commonly overplayed scenario. My riding mate is an intel officer in Pakistan NOW and says Pakistan is in no more danger than they've been for years wrt secure nukes.
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Haim Ronen
Here is an excellent perspective of the recent history and politics of the region written with a lot of knowledge and in depth.
Highly recommended.
Posted on: 12 November 2009 by Sniper
With regards to Haim's point about oil rich countries not donating funds to Afghanistan (which they have with varying degrees of success - corruption playing a big part)most (such as Saudi Arabia)prefer to donate funds and efforts to pakistan as this country is more pivotal to overall regional stability. Some Arab countries (most notably Saudi Arabia) have attracted criticism for not donating enough to (say)the recent Asian tsunami disaster fund - a shameful ommision. However a quick bit of googling will show many instances of oil rich Arab countries giving most generously to all manner of good causes. How much Israel donates to Afghanistan is a mystery to me.
Posted on: 15 November 2009 by mudwolf
oh it's just all so ugly and the idiot Bush Jr is to blame or rather his puppet masters Rummy and Cheney. It is true it's not a nation they should be after its the radicals of Islam but how can one tell?
The whole idea of creating democracy in other countries is stupid, they have to do it from within. I've seen no reports of other muslim nations stepping up to the plate or helping out.
Bush significantly sat back thru our election process and left it to the next president to clean it up. Rummy left and Cheney did nothing, but now comes out criticizing.
The whole idea of creating democracy in other countries is stupid, they have to do it from within. I've seen no reports of other muslim nations stepping up to the plate or helping out.
Bush significantly sat back thru our election process and left it to the next president to clean it up. Rummy left and Cheney did nothing, but now comes out criticizing.
Posted on: 17 November 2009 by Tarquin Maynard - Portly
quote:Originally posted by mudwolf:
I've seen no reports of other muslim nations stepping up to the plate or helping out.
Pakistan is Muslim.
Posted on: 17 November 2009 by Don Atkinson
I seem to recall the Emirates have troops and equipment in Afghanistan.
But I guess its the USA who are contributing both the most manpower and highest % of GDP.
Cheers
Don
But I guess its the USA who are contributing both the most manpower and highest % of GDP.
Cheers
Don
Posted on: 17 November 2009 by Roy T
Who has what where (pdf).