• 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!

Should We Get Out Of Afganistan?

Should the U.S. pull it's troops out of Afganistan?


  • Total voters
    48

Devil505

Banned
Joined
Apr 13, 2009
Messages
3,512
Reaction score
315
Location
Masschusetts
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
After almost 9 years & a worsening situation in that god-forsaken country, is it time to declare victory & leave?
 
Yes please.
Tomorrow if possible.
 
I honestly don't know.
It's a little confusing.
 
I honestly don't know.
It's a little confusing.

The way I think about having our military involved in another country is this:

Is our presence there moral, (always a judgment call) AND is there a clearly definable & realistic path to victory for us? (if the clear answer to both of those questions is not YES...then we shouldn't be there)
 
Last edited:
A difficult choice. Although our current plan isn't working very well, that doesn't mean alternate strategies wouldn't be successful. Leaving an enemy who hosted terrorists once before back in command is a bad outcome, but not as a bad as wasting as more billions and lives for the same result. The question is: can the government actually do what is required to win?

It is simply not possible to kill the Taliban is quantifies large enough that they will stay dead when we leave. Nobody ever won a counter-insurgency by attrition. We need to create a stable nation lead by anyone who isn't the Taliban. Karzai is far to weak and puppetish to get the job done. Trying to get a leader who is democratic and U.S. friendly simply isn't possible. We should aim for only two qualities: able to rule the country and doesn't hate the U.S. enough to want to destroy us.
 
After almost 9 years & a worsening situation in that god-forsaken country, is it time to declare victory & leave?

The difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is that Afghanistan was legitimate target after 9/11. We should have never left there and gone off to fight some retard war in Iraq. What should we do now? Well now it's hard to say. Can we make a difference? Maybe. Can we clear up the mess which led to the freedom the Taliban enjoyed in the country? Maybe not so much any more. It will be tough, I don't know how it would be done, and who knows we may get side tracked into a different war while doing it.

I'm not so willing to say Afghanistan wasn't our war, but we screwed the pooch hard on this one.
 
The difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is that Afghanistan was legitimate target after 9/11. We should have never left there and gone off to fight some retard war in Iraq. What should we do now? Well now it's hard to say. Can we make a difference? Maybe. Can we clear up the mess which led to the freedom the Taliban enjoyed in the country? Maybe not so much any more. It will be tough, I don't know how it would be done, and who knows we may get side tracked into a different war while doing it.

I'm not so willing to say Afghanistan wasn't our war, but we screwed the pooch hard on this one.

A few thoughts:

1. The terrain makes Afghanistan one of the worst areas in the world for large conventional forces, as the Soviets found out.
2. We face small, mobile groups of terrorists & Taliban making our overwhelming conventional force almost useless.
3. Whatever we can do effectively, can be done with small, highly mobile elite forces & unmanned aircraft. (UAV's)
4. Our forces on the ground are simply excellent, static targets.
5. We appear (now) to be making more local enemies (bad air strikes, etc) than we are winning any Afghan hearts & minds.

Therefore, I think we should pull out of Afghanistan entirely & leave small, elite forces in the area to attack Al Quieda & Taliban...until we can train local (middle eastern) forces to take up the fight.
 
Last edited:
I honestly don't know.
It's a little confusing.

Much as I hate to agree with 10, I think this is the best answer. I doubt any one here(with maybe 1 or 2 exceptions, you know who you are) really know enough about the situation there to make a call. I am really split on the issue, it's one where I can see both sides.
 
All nations are legitimate targets.

No, only those whom threaten and attack our sovereignty. France, for instance, is not a legitimate target.
 
Much as I hate to agree with 10, I think this is the best answer. I doubt any one here(with maybe 1 or 2 exceptions, you know who you are) really know enough about the situation there to make a call. I am really split on the issue, it's one where I can see both sides.

I usually agree with you but not this time. I think, on an issue as important as war, that we citizens have a moral obligation to reasonably educate ourselves to the best of our ability & then make our wishes known to our elected representatives.
The alternative is simply to relinquish all power to "people who know better" who....unfortunately.....don't often know better than we do.

Example:
If one wishes to contact his/her President/Senator...(whatever)
You could always word your correspondence with a bit of a disclaimer but still get your point across...ie
"If the news is being reported accurately, it appears that we are making more enemies than we are winning hearts & minds, killing more innocent civilians than Taliban/Al Quieda & wasting the lives of our GI's & our national treasure with no real exit strategy in mind. If I am wrong please explain where...... but if I am right, please get our troops out ASAP."
 
Last edited:
I usually agree with you but not this time. I think, on an issue as important as war, that we citizens have a moral obligation to reasonably educate ourselves to the best of our ability & then make our wishes known to our elected representatives.
The alternative is simply to relinquish all power to "people who know better" who....unfortunately.....don't often know better than we do.

Example:
If one wishes to contact his/her President/Senator...(whatever)
You could always word your correspondence with a bit of a disclaimer but still get your point across...ie
"If the news is being reported accurately, it appears that we are making more enemies than we are winning hearts & minds, killing more innocent civilians than Taliban/Al Quieda & wasting the lives of our GI's & our national treasure with no real exit strategy in mind. If I am wrong please explain where...... but if I am right, please get our troops out ASAP."

You misunderstand what I am saying. We can and should offer our opinions, and vote for those who represent those opinions. However, the politicians should make the final determinate based on the advice they get from those who actually know more than us.
 
You misunderstand what I am saying. We can and should offer our opinions, and vote for those who represent those opinions. However, the politicians should make the final determinate based on the advice they get from those who actually know more than us.
Maybe I'm slow today but I think politicians will always make decisions based upon your (above mentioned) determinants......but.....one of the major determinants to any decision (in a democracy.... that should be heavily considered by the policy maker) should be the wishes of the voters who put them in power in the first place.
Experts can be wrong & if you get the views of 5 "Experts" on any subject you usually will get 5 different opinions.;)

In the final analysis, as messy & imperfect as democracy is, ..the collective wishes of the voters are more often than not correct & should at least be heavily considered by policy makers b4 a policy is implemented.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I'm slow today but I think politicians will always make decisions based upon your (above mentioned) determinants......but.....one of the major determinants to any decision (in a democracy.... that should be heavily considered by the policy maker) should be the wishes of the voters who put them in power in the first place.
Experts can be wrong & if you get the views of 5 "Experts" on any subject you usually will get 5 different opinions.;)

In the final analysis, as messy & imperfect as democracy is, ..the collective wishes of the voters are more often than not correct & should at least be heavily considered by policy makers b4 a policy is implemented.

The wishes of the voters cannot be ignored, but in our government type, we don't vote on the issues, but on the people to represent us. We have to have some faith that they will use their superior access to information to make the right decisions.
 
Good God no! The only reason Afghanistan began to go poorly in the first place was the lack of focus given to it by the military in favor of Iraq. Despite what you say, Devil, this is a war US and international forces are capable of fighting. If it weren't for the Bush administration's focus on Iraq I would have bet dollars to donuts that Afghanistan would be a fairly stable region (by middle eastern standards) by now.
 
Good God no! The only reason Afghanistan began to go poorly in the first place was the lack of focus given to it by the military in favor of Iraq. Despite what you say, Devil, this is a war US and international forces are capable of fighting. If it weren't for the Bush administration's focus on Iraq I would have bet dollars to donuts that Afghanistan would be a fairly stable region (by middle eastern standards) by now.

I agree that if we hadn't gotten hijacked into Iraq & had focused our attention on Afghanistan like we should have, 9 years ago, things would probably have turned out allot better.

BUT

The facts is that NOW, the Taliban has dramatically resurfaced, the Afghan people seem to be tired of us being there, Al Quieda is mainly in the untouchable tribal region of Pakistan & we are losing more & more U.S. troops every month. NATO doesn't really want to take the lead there & I just don't see a realistic way to "Win" over there.
If we can't "Win".....I say ...declare victory & get the hell out!
(maybe we could even find Bush's "Mission Accomplished" banner & use it again~!):cool:
 
Last edited:
Meh. We should devote more resources to developing infrastructure. And use
that infrastructure to recoup those resources via trade/oil. Afghanistan ends up with useable travel roads and can migrate social services much more easily. Its much easier to go to school when you have a road.

All those russian tanks lying around can probably be recycled into something.
 
Last edited:
Meh. We should devote more resources to developing infrastructure.

We almost went into another great depression......We need to spend our money on OUR infrastructure!!...Screw the caves of Afghanistan!
If we're going to "Nation Build" lets do it right here & rebuild ours!
 
Last edited:
We almost went into another great depression......We need to spend our money on OUR infrastructure!!...Screw the caves of Afghanistan!
If we're going to "Nation Build" lets do it right here & rebuild ours!

Yes, we should get out.
The sooner the better.
 
Don't get me wrong......I'm not recommending that we precipitously drop everythying in Afghanistan & Iraq & leave this afternoon.


(If I was President I'd let our troops have a nice leisurely breakfast tomorrow........& then get the hell out of the entire middle east by late afternoon!!):bolt
 
We should take troops out of Iraq but not Afghanistan. We shouldn't even go to war with Iraq because Afghanistan started 9/11 so we have to capture Osama or if we don't then he will have power.
 
Last edited:
We almost went into another great depression......We need to spend our money on OUR infrastructure!!...Screw the caves of Afghanistan!
If we're going to "Nation Build" lets do it right here & rebuild ours!

Meh the payouts and healthcare alone are twelve times the cost of iraq with no payback in sight. Getting afghans up to speed generates human and physical resources that keep on giving long term. Think big picture.
 
I agree that if we hadn't gotten hijacked into Iraq & had focused our attention on Afghanistan like we should have, 9 years ago, things would probably have turned out allot better.

BUT

The facts is that NOW, the Taliban has dramatically resurfaced, the Afghan people seem to be tired of us being there, Al Quieda is mainly in the untouchable tribal region of Pakistan & we are losing more & more U.S. troops every month. NATO doesn't really want to take the lead there & I just don't see a realistic way to "Win" over there.
If we can't "Win".....I say ...declare victory & get the hell out!
(maybe we could even find Bush's "Mission Accomplished" banner & use it again~!):cool:

Considering that this mission does have international support and the fact that we really haven't lost that many troops in Afghanistan the situation isn't nearly as dire as make it out to be. With a shift in troops from Iraq to Afghanistan and a President who is willing to listen to generals rather than his Secretary of Defense I think Afghanistan will become a major feather in Obama's cap. Success here could definitely gain him the political capital to make further democratic gains in 2010 and 2012 and maybe get his health care plan pushed through.
 
Considering that this mission does have international support and the fact that we really haven't lost that many troops in Afghanistan the situation isn't nearly as dire as make it out to be. With a shift in troops from Iraq to Afghanistan and a President who is willing to listen to generals rather than his Secretary of Defense I think Afghanistan will become a major feather in Obama's cap. Success here could definitely gain him the political capital to make further democratic gains in 2010 and 2012 and maybe get his health care plan pushed through.

That's the other side of the coin & well put. I think you're wrong but hope you're right.
 
Back
Top Bottom