• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

CrusaderRabbit08 said:
We lost our opportunity to get all of those responsible when Bush diverted our efforts to start a war in Iraq.
Click to expand...

Capturing Osama Bin Laden should be of secondary importance. He is just a figure-head. We must deny AQ a home-base from which to plan and launch attacks on America. Occupying Afghanistan accomplishes this goal.

At this point in time, we cut our losses, go home, and quit interfering in the ME.
Click to expand...

What happens when the terrorists don't stop attacking our country?
 
Ethereal said:
What happens when the terrorists don't stop attacking our country?
Click to expand...

What happens when the US doesn't stop meddling in the affairs of other nations?

This is a connect-the-dots game, folks ;)
 
WI Crippler said:
Prehaps a restructuring of "states" or provinces with an emphasis on key infrastructure improvements within each province would be the key. If these people truly value the autonomy of their regions, then working with them to make improvments within their provinces would give them something they might feel is worth defending, rather than some vauge nationalistic programs they likely won't respect.
Click to expand...

Based on my experiences in Central Asia (which did not include Afghanistan, but a couple of the other -stans), a strategy based on shoring up a sense of nationalism will never work, since such feelings have never really existed there. Different tribal regions will have to be approached on a case by case basis, which for Western powers is a difficult thing to grasp since we are so used to thinking of relations in terms of nation states. It will be necessary to establish a working relationship with each individual cultural sect within the borders of Afghanistan in order to have a lasting impact.

The unfortunate thing is that it's rather late in the game to start thinking of ways to do that, and it seems like the strategy is still nationalistic in nature: creating a national army, national police force, etc. with the centre of that strategy resting with Kabul. The long-term war is about much more than Kabul and trying to make a potent central government there is not going to have lasting security impact on the areas most vulnerable to the Taliban.
 
donsutherland1 said:
I agree with you, WI Crippler.

IMO, helping each region in terms of infrastructure improvement, education, economic development, and formation of credible local security forces would probably promote an improved outcome.
Click to expand...

While I agree with Crippler, and Don on this point I think people are being a bit removed from the actual hardships that are going to be faced.

- The majority of the Afghan population has never attended school, nor can many of them read; Who teaches the teachers?

- Whenever there is an established series of schools, whose History do they learn? What is the "Afghan Nationality"? How do you compensate the differences between the nationalities that probably have not always been on the best of term? The United States, whether anyone wants to admit to it or not, has become a highly integrated facet into their modern-history... How are they to non-subjectively teach recent history?

- Why should the tribal leaders give up their local armies and local militias for some larger security force? This would seem, to the tribesmen, as if we are trying to get them destroyed-- They remember Soviet Tanks, they remember the Taliban, they remember AC-130s; Their history is rich with the British lion and the Russian Bear using the Afghan lands as an exaggerated battlefield. How can they obtain a sense of genuine security, when the people who are providing the security are just as volatile as their enemies?

- I know the northern part of Afghanistan is known for hand crafted "Persian" rugs, and the southern fertile lands for their wheat and opium, but are those really foundations for which to build a strong and stabled economy? I've read articles about the Afghanistan pipe-lines, and how they could be a potential source of economic income for the Afghanis-- but I wonder how much it could.

- Nobody seems to be taking into account the refugee problem. On all sides of the Afghanistan, disputed, borders lie millions of refugees; dirt poor, homeless, war-torn, and exponentially pissed off. We see many of the refugees (especially on the Pakistan border) joining with the clerics who promise riches they've never had, and all they have to do is die for it. Seriously, you have to think how a refugee could not think "well, I've suffered every other fathomable woe"...
 
Last edited:
Arch Enemy said:
While I agree with Crippler, and Don on this point I think people are being a bit removed from the actual hardships that are going to be faced.

- The majority of the Afghan population has never attended school, nor can many of them read; Who teaches the teachers?

- Whenever there is an established series of schools, whose History do they learn? What is the "Afghan Nationality"? How do you compensate the differences between the nationalities that probably have not always been on the best of term? The United States, whether anyone wants to admit to it or not, has become a highly integrated facet into their modern-history... How are they to non-subjectively teach recent history?
Click to expand...

Investment in education will not be an overnight proposition. It will involve training teachers, developing curricula and standards, and building schools. That is a long-term investment, but a critical one if Afghanistan is to have a chance to develop a viable economy.

- Why should the tribal leaders give up their local armies and local militias for some larger security force? This would seem, to the tribesmen, as if we are trying to get them destroyed-- They remember Soviet Tanks, they remember the Taliban, they remember AC-130s; Their history is rich with the British lion and the Russian Bear using the Afghan lands as an exaggerated battlefield. How can they obtain a sense of genuine security, when the people who are providing the security are just as volatile as their enemies?
Click to expand...

That is a strong reason why I believe the new U.S. strategy should de-emphasize Kabul and focus much more on the regional and local tribal leaders. Those leaders' support should be enlisted. Their local forces should receive assistance (training, supplies, etc.) necessary to be able to secure the areas over which they have jurisdiction, in addition to funding/technical assistance for economic development, infrastructure, etc. for their regions.

The principle of a central government should be granted. But the substance of efforts should be directed on a local and regional basis.

- Nobody seems to be taking into account the refugee problem. On all sides of the Afghanistan, disputed, borders lie millions of refugees; dirt poor, homeless, war-torn, and exponentially pissed off. We see many of the refugees (especially on the Pakistan border) joining with the clerics who promise riches they've never had, and all they have to do is die for it. Seriously, you have to think how a refugee could not think "well, I've suffered every other fathomable woe"...
Click to expand...

IMO, part of the assistance provided for infrastructure should be directed toward building permanent housing for the refugees. Humanitarian aid for the refugees will remain necessary for some time to come.
 
CrusaderRabbit08 said:
How long are you prepared to stay? ..10 years? ..20years? ..50 years?
Click to expand...

How many times should we be prepared to return because we did a half assed job the last time? This is the second time. Shall we decide to finish it the thrid time? Fourth? Fifth?
 
CrusaderRabbit08 said:
What happens when the US doesn't stop meddling in the affairs of other nations?
Click to expand...

9-11. We had stopped meddling in the affairs of Afghanistan, we pulled out right after the Soviets did. Look what happened. Hasn't your isolationist mentality been priven wrong time and again?
 
Charles Martel said:
9-11. We had stopped meddling in the affairs of Afghanistan, we pulled out right after the Soviets did. Look what happened. Hasn't your isolationist mentality been priven wrong time and again?
Click to expand...

A.Q. settled in Afghanistan because the Taliban was willing to turn a dead-eye to their operations. The affair that turned A.Q. against the West actually occurred in Saudi Arabia, and continued into Somalia (where CIA hunted down Bin Laden). We were attacked because we meddled into affairs we should not have meddled in. True, it was not Afghanistan. Afghanistan, once again, acts as the battlefield for fighting Elephants.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom