Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 33

Thread: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

  1. #21
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by CrusaderRabbit08 View Post
    How long are you prepared to stay? ..10 years? ..20years? ..50 years?
    As long as necessary. It's a matter of national security.

  2. #22
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Once again, how does this solve our problems? AQ will still try to destroy America. We have to be proactive, not reactive in our approach to America's enemies.
    What problem would that be?

    Being proactive is how we got in this mess. You can only piss off other people and nations so long, before radical elements decide to strike back.

    Our interventionism is the problem. Changing our foreign policy to one of non-interventionism would go a long way to reduce the threats against us and to ease tensions in the world.

    It's the libertarian thing to do

  3. #23
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by CrusaderRabbit08 View Post
    What problem would that be?


    Being proactive is how we got in this mess. You can only piss off other people and nations so long, before radical elements decide to strike back.
    What's done is done. AQ is playing for keeps and they will not be bargained with. It's a war.

    Our interventionism is the problem. Changing our foreign policy to one of non-interventionism would go a long way to reduce the threats against us and to ease tensions in the world.

    It's the libertarian thing to do
    Our foreign policy should be situational and flexible.
    Last edited by Ethereal; 11-30-09 at 04:59 AM.

  4. #24
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    We lost our opportunity to get all of those responsible when Bush diverted our efforts to start a war in Iraq.

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

  5. #25
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    Our foreign policy should be situational and flexible.
    Interventionism is sure to keep us on our toes then

  6. #26
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Chicago
    Last Seen
    04-02-15 @ 06:08 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    8,211

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by CrusaderRabbit08 View Post
    We lost our opportunity to get all of those responsible when Bush diverted our efforts to start a war in Iraq.
    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.
    What happens when the terrorists don't stop attacking our country?

  7. #27
    Professor
    CrusaderRabbit08's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    05-13-10 @ 02:41 AM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    2,022

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by Ethereal View Post
    What happens when the terrorists don't stop attacking our country?
    What happens when the US doesn't stop meddling in the affairs of other nations?

    This is a connect-the-dots game, folks

  8. #28
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Canada
    Last Seen
    12-26-10 @ 06:57 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    8,083

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by WI Crippler View Post
    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.
    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.

  9. #29
    Familiaist


    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    North Carolina
    Last Seen
    11-16-16 @ 09:36 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    7,470

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by donsutherland1 View Post
    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.
    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 by Arch Enemy; 11-30-09 at 01:32 PM.
    "I do not underestimate the ability of fanatical groups of terrorists to kill and destroy, but they do not threaten the life of the nation. Whether we would survive Hitler hung in the balance, but there is no doubt that we shall survive al-Qa'ida." -- Lord Hoffmann

  10. #30
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    11-28-17 @ 04:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    11,690

    Re: Senator says Afghan forces, not US, key to success

    Quote Originally Posted by Arch Enemy View Post
    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?
    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?
    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"...
    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.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •