• 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 Pull Out of Afghanistan?

Should we pull out of Afghanistan?

  • Yes, we should pull out of Afghanistan.

    Votes: 22 64.7%

  • No, we should not pull out of Afghanistan.

    Votes: 9 26.5%

  • Undecided

    Votes: 3 8.8%
  • Total voters
    34
Winston

Winston

Give me convenience or give me death
DP Veteran
Joined
Jan 24, 2017
Messages
24,764
Reaction score
24,145
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Progressive
Should we pull out of Afghanistan?

We've been in Afghanistan since '01, and there's no end in sight. I'm undecided on if we should pull out so, I would like to hear some arguments for each side.

Spare us the conspiracy theories that we just want to control the opium production of the world. unless you have concrete evidence to back that up.

Otherwise it seems we are attempting to stabilize a region with demographic and geographic challenges. Maybe the U.S.S.R. has already tried and learned that it cannot be done. What do you think?

Ultimately, what is best for the Afghani people?
 
Winston said:
Should we pull out of Afghanistan?

We've been in Afghanistan since '01, and there's no end in sight. I'm undecided on if we should pull out so, I would like to hear some arguments for each side.

Spare us the conspiracy theories that we just want to control the opium production of the world. unless you have concrete evidence to back that up.

Otherwise it seems we are attempting to stabilize a region with demographic and geographic challenges. Maybe the U.S.S.R. has already tried and learned that it cannot be done. What do you think?

Ultimately, what is best for the Afghani people?
Click to expand...

Afghanistan is faced with choosing between a corrupt government in Kabul run by warlords, and returning to the era of taliban rule.
 
There's a Good Reason why The Russians isn't still pouring their resources into the ****hole anymore
 
Winston said:
Should we pull out of Afghanistan?

We've been in Afghanistan since '01, and there's no end in sight. I'm undecided on if we should pull out so, I would like to hear some arguments for each side.

Spare us the conspiracy theories that we just want to control the opium production of the world. unless you have concrete evidence to back that up.

Otherwise it seems we are attempting to stabilize a region with demographic and geographic challenges. Maybe the U.S.S.R. has already tried and learned that it cannot be done. What do you think?

Ultimately, what is best for the Afghani people?
Click to expand...

Us staying would be best for the Afghani people. The idea that if something takes a long time it is not worth doing is one which has gravely hurt people around the world for a while now.

And no, I don't see the Taliban taking over chunks of the country as a plus for Afghanistan.
 
If G.W. Bush had stayed out of Iraq (Which was no threat to the USA.) and concentrated on Afghanistan the kerfuffle there could have been finished a long time ago.

Just sayin'.
 
Last edited:
Tigerace117 said:
Us staying would be best for the Afghani people. The idea that if something takes a long time it is not worth doing is one which has gravely hurt people around the world for a while now.

And no, I don't see the Taliban taking over chunks of the country as a plus for Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Do you see any parallels between the U.S.S.R.'s operation and our operation?
 
Tigerace117 said:
Us staying would be best for the Afghani people. The idea that if something takes a long time it is not worth doing is one which has gravely hurt people around the world for a while now.

And no, I don't see the Taliban taking over chunks of the country as a plus for Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Then if want the Afghani people to truly be free of the taliban, we also have to get rid of the corrupt warlords that have been plaguing Afghanistan for decades.
 
Winston said:
Do you see any parallels between the U.S.S.R.'s operation and our operation?
Click to expand...

No, not really. The USSR went in because the regime in Afghanistan wasn't quite puppet-ty enough for their liking. They cared very little about winning "hearts and minds" and focused on merely allowing their regime to remain in control of the cities and roads.

In the US campaign, we've focused quite heavily on the "hearts and minds" aspect of COIN(counter insurgency) warfare, and while it takes time, it will pay dividends. It has started to, in some places, already.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
Then if want the Afghani people to truly be free of the taliban, we also have to get rid of the corrupt warlords that have been plaguing Afghanistan for decades.
Click to expand...

A stable Afghan government not plagued by the Taliban would likely be able to handle such warlords themselves.
 
Nothing has changed except that Trump now wants our involvement in Afghanistan to be semi-secret and unknown. That is bull****!

1. Everyone in Washington keeps calling it a war but Congress does not have the balls to declare war as mandated by the Constitution.

2. Washington has not outlined a specific mission for Afghanistan.

3. What metrics are being/will be used to determine when the mission is complete?

4. Trump said that we will not make the same mistake in Afghanistan that we made in Iraq? WTF is he talking about? Does he even know?


The United States should pull out of Afghanistan soonest. We need to leave now.
 
Tigerace117 said:
Us staying would be best for the Afghani people. The idea that if something takes a long time it is not worth doing is one which has gravely hurt people around the world for a while now.

And no, I don't see the Taliban taking over chunks of the country as a plus for Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Then we should change the rules of engagement and get it over with. I do agree with you though. But if we can't kick ass over there shortly, we just aren't trying hard enough.
 
Unitedwestand13 said:
In order to create that stable government, the warlords have to abdicate power.
Click to expand...

True, but as of now the Taliban are the active threat. Defeating the active threat would make taking down other threats easier.
 
MaggieD said:
Then we should change the rules of engagement and get it over with. I do agree with you though. But if we can't kick ass over there shortly, we just aren't trying hard enough.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure it's something as simple as "changing the ROEs to fix the problem". Counter insurgency isn't the type of conflict that it's fast and easy to solve problems in, which is why historically it's been our Achilles heel.
 
shrubnose said:
If G.W. Bush had stayed out of Iraq (Which was no threat to the USA.) and concentrated on Afghanistan the kerfuffle there could have been finished a long time ago.

Just sayin'.
Click to expand...

i don't believe that "finishing" is the intent of Infinity War.
 
Ikari said:
i don't believe that "finishing" is the intent of Infinity War.
Click to expand...

If the Afghanistan war is war for the purpose of war, because war and therefore war! I support pulling out immediately and ceasing current foreign policy.
 
shrubnose said:
Sooner or later every war comes to an end.
Click to expand...

Well we've made a good show of this Infinity War thus far. I certainly hope it ends, but it plays so well into the Establishment, that it's hard to see them actually getting to the end.
 
Ikari said:
Well we've made a good show of this Infinity War thus far. I certainly hope it ends, but it plays so well into the Establishment, that it's hard to see them actually getting to the end.
Click to expand...

We will stay forever. We will just call them overseas bases. Code for occupation
 
Tigerace117 said:
Us staying would be best for the Afghani people. The idea that if something takes a long time it is not worth doing is one which has gravely hurt people around the world for a while now.

And no, I don't see the Taliban taking over chunks of the country as a plus for Afghanistan.
Click to expand...

Regarding something that takes a long time -

'When you engage in actual fighting, if victory is long in coming, then men's weapons will grow dull and their ardor will be damped. If you lay siege to a town, you will exhaust your strength.'
'Again, if the campaign is protracted, the resources of the State will not be equal to the strain.'
'Now, when your weapons are dulled, your ardor damped, your strength exhausted and your treasure spent, other chieftains will spring up to take advantage of your extremity. Then no man, however wise, will be able to avert the consequences that must ensue.'
'Thus, though we have heard of stupid haste in war, cleverness has never been seen associated with long delays.'

~Sun Tzu - The Art of War
 
Damned if we do and damned if we don't. Some reports have Russia arming the Taliban, and neighboring Iran and Pakistan arm/support their respective cadres of religious militia/martyrs.

The US has already expended tremendous assets in blood and treasure and we're right back where we started ... 90% of the country is ruled by the fundamental Taliban, brutal warlords, and opium smugglers.

The Kabul governments are corrupt and a bottomless money pit. The tribal culture of Pashtunwali rules, abetted by Sharia law. Slavery exists and women are often considered as property and chattel.

On the other hand, we cannot allow a failed-sanctuary-state where poppy crops bankroll the global terrorist plots of radical organizations such as the Taliban, Al Qaeda, Islamic State, Lashkar-e-Taiba, and others.

Afghanistan is the perfect crucible of a lose/lose situation.
 
Tigerace117 said:
I'm not sure it's something as simple as "changing the ROEs to fix the problem". Counter insurgency isn't the type of conflict that it's fast and easy to solve problems in, which is why historically it's been our Achilles heel.
Click to expand...

If I remember correctly, from years ago, we are under orders not to destroy their opium fields. Burn the damned things down. As long as they exist, people will fight for the hundreds of millions of dollars these fields MEAN to the victor.
 
why the Hell are we there in the first place?

oh, that's right; ****ing Mr. ****ing Wonderful .............. George Wonderful Bush ............ the alcoholic cocaine fly boy party animal Air Guard jerk off .............

yep; great war there W.
 
MaggieD said:
If I remember correctly, from years ago, we are under orders not to destroy their opium fields. Burn the damned things down. As long as they exist, people will fight for the hundreds of millions of dollars these fields MEAN to the victor.
Click to expand...

Not sure that's in the interest of the Corporate-State. Let's just keep the Infinity War going and see how it comes out.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom