It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Time to Get Out of Afghanistan

page: 1
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Time to Get Out of Afghanistan


www.washingtonpost.com

[Washington] should keep faith with [the troops] by rapidly reversing the trajectory of America's involvement in Afghanistan, where, says the Dutch commander of coalition forces in a southern province, walking through the region is "like walking through the Old Testament."

The U.S. strategy is "clear, hold and build." Clear? Taliban forces can evaporate and then return, confident that U.S. forces will forever be too few to hold gains....
(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Three Former Top CIA Agents Say War In Afghanistan Ma

[edit on 1-9-2009 by Animal]




posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:36 AM
link   


Military historian Max Hastings says Kabul controls only about a third of the country -- "control" is an elastic concept -- and " 'our' Afghans may prove no more viable than were 'our' Vietnamese, the Saigon regime." Just 4,000 Marines are contesting control of Helmand province, which is the size of West Virginia. The New York Times reports a Helmand official saying he has only "police officers who steal and a small group of Afghan soldiers who say they are here for 'vacation.' " Afghanistan's $23 billion gross domestic product is the size of Boise's. Counterinsurgency doctrine teaches, not very helpfully, that development depends on security, and that security depends on development. Three-quarters of Afghanistan's poppy production for opium comes from Helmand. In what should be called Operation Sisyphus, U.S. officials are urging farmers to grow other crops. Endive, perhaps?


All in all this war is lost. It was likely lost before it began but was most certainly lost when G. W. Bush shifted the USA's military focus from Afghanistan to Iraq.

There is nothing left to do here except send our family and friends to their deaths in a foreign land and to loose more money at a time when we don't have any to spare.

Pack it up and bring it home is the only sane course of action left.



U.S. forces are being increased by 21,000, to 68,000, bringing the coalition total to 110,000. About 9,000 are from Britain, where support for the war is waning. Counterinsurgency theory concerning the time and the ratio of forces required to protect the population indicates that, nationwide, Afghanistan would need hundreds of thousands of coalition troops, perhaps for a decade or more. That is inconceivable.

So, instead, forces should be substantially reduced to serve a comprehensively revised policy: America should do only what can be done from offshore, using intelligence, drones, cruise missiles, airstrikes and small, potent Special Forces units, concentrating on the porous 1,500-mile border with Pakistan, a nation that actually matters.


No more excuses, bring the troops home now. End the war in Afghanistan.

www.washingtonpost.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:38 AM
link   
the entire soviet union couldnt subdue afghanistan and they are right next door.
a bankrupt america on the other side of the world has no chance in hell.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by nowayjose
the entire soviet union couldnt subdue afghanistan and they are right next door.
a bankrupt america on the other side of the world has no chance in hell.


Main reason the Soviet Union did not prevail was thanks to significant resources the United States made available to the mojahedeen. Now, we are fighting much of the same organizations we helped create. Bad karma.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   
Shouldn't have been there in the first place.

As for getting out...Well, there's no time like the present.

Although I fear those who profit from this war will not allow it to cease without fully exploiting the situation.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   
The last power that successfully conquered Afghanistan was led by Alexander the Great, and that didn't even last very long.

This is a fools quest, always has been.

But, if we were to pull out of Iraq and Afghanistan, who, and how would the vast military industrial complex be fed.?



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


I can't say that I disagree, but politically, I don't know how this administration can back out of Afghanistan at the present time. During the campaign, they referred to it as the 'Good War' and one that had to be won. Now, just seven months into this term and with the situation rapidly deteriorating in Afghanistan, I'm not sure that the Obama adminstration has a way out.

That's unfortunate, but I don't see this war being wrapped up for the forseeable future, at least until this administration can find something that can be called a significant victory over there.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 09:58 AM
link   
Yup. We shouldn't have ever been there. We shouldn't still be there. We we've been bombing crap in Afghanistan since the late nineties. It's really one of the only things keeping our economy going right now. (I know, it's not really 'going' but you get the point.)

When the Military folks signed up, they swore to fight all enemies of the constitution, foreign and domestic....what they didn't tell them was a bad economy is a domestic enemy, so the soldiers, marines, sailors, everyone else, will be expected to give their lives to protect our economy by allowing us to continue the manufacture and sale of weapons.

Yay America!!!



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 10:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by KSPigpen
It's really one of the only things keeping our economy going right now. (I know, it's not really 'going' but you get the point.)


I subscribe to the notion that things like bombs do not in fact stimulate the economy.

You see we dump big cash into bombs that we drop on other countries.

We might as well be dropping big baskets of flaming cash, it would have the same economic effects here at home.

Sure there is an initial economic bump, but the wealth is wasted.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 

Creation of an effective central government? Afghanistan has never had one. U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry hopes for a "renewal of trust" of the Afghan people in the government, but the Economist describes President Hamid Karzai's government -- his vice presidential running mate is a drug trafficker -- as so "inept, corrupt and predatory" that people sometimes yearn for restoration of the warlords, "who were less venal and less brutal than Mr. Karzai's lot."

I think this is the important part of the article. We then have to consider what the USA actually went there for. There is nothing there! Afghanistan is important simply because of its strategic position between China, the Russian Federation & Iran, primarily, but also in proximity to natural gas deposits & potential pipeline routes.
The Taliban never had control of the country, but even if they did, they would not have favoured US energy corporations interests. But if we consider past US actions, the CIA much prefer to support a single regime: 1 that can dominate an entire country just sufficiently for US corporate interests to flourish, but not enough to allow the regime to do without continued US aid. No wonder, dealing with a single dictator or puppet govt. is way cheaper than doing it yourself or catering to multiple factions.
Therefore, the plan here, knowing full well that Afghanistan cannot be ruled in such a way, was to occupy enough territory there to prevent anyone else destabilising the Taliban & promoting their own interests.
Who? China. A country with a burgeoning need for energy, enough money to buy off individual warlords & no need to pretend to anyone, @home or abroad, that "democracy" was ever an issue.
Having palmed off part of the expense to its allies, there is no incentive for the USA to get out of Afghanistan.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 10:52 AM
link   
I have to agree that it is time to bring our troops home. Not to start a political divide, but I am curious as to what happened to all the anti-war people that were out in force during GWB term.

Seems like they have all gone fishing.

As long as our military is handicapped from performing as a military, we have no chance in hell of winning that war.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 10:57 AM
link   
No way! Send MORE troops! Dont start what you can finish, the fallen soldiers would be mortified!



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:04 AM
link   
reply to post by Haydn_17
 


The fallen soldiers would be six foot under actually,i don't think they care much what old,bitter men think...don't start something that is none of your business and is in actual fact your own creation is the lesson to be learnt.Leave a small number of troops to train Afghanistan police/military.Thats it.Course that will not happen as that is not the purpose of why the troops are over in Afghanistan in the first place.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animal
There is nothing left to do here except send our family and friends to their deaths in a foreign land and to loose more money at a time when we don't have any to spare.


I couldn't agree more. We should never have gone over there. We're just sending our people and money down a meat grinder.

jam, I am still anti-this-war. Have been from the first time I realized that we were being lied to. I HATE that Obama is continuing this war. He's wrong to stay there and he's wrong to try again to take Afghanistan. Obama is making a HUGE mistake!

There.
I hope people feel better.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Benevolent Heretic
 



I HATE that Obama is continuing this war.


We may disagree from time to time, but your honesty has to be admired. A lot of Obama supporters would defend him on this issue till the end. Fact is we have no concise mission, spending money like crazy, and look bad every time we make a mistake.

This is not a military war. This a Washington controlled military war. If they aren't going to let the military do what it does best, they need to bring them home.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   
Heads up folks:

Pentagon Worried About Obama's Commitment to Afghanistan.



The prospect that U.S. Army Gen. Stanley McChrystal may ask for as many as 45,000 additional American troops in Afghanistan is fueling growing tension within President Barack Obama's administration over the U.S. commitment to the war there.

...administration officials said that amid rising violence and casualties, polls that show a majority of Americans now think the war in Afghanistan isn't worth fighting.



Do you think?

It is about time we had an administrations that was eve remotely interested in what 'we the people' think.

The war in Afghanistan is a joke and has been ever since Bush opted to focus on Iraq instead.

We are only loosing loved ones, respect, and money in Afghanistan.

As someone said in another one of my many anti-Afghanistan threads:

"Afghanistan, where nations go to die".

Lets hope the growing criticism of this war actually causes our present administration to act before:



Although the assessment didn't include any request for more troops, senior military officials said they expect McChrystal later in September to seek between 21,000 and 45,000 more troops. There currently are 62,000 American troops in Afghanistan.



www.mcclatchydc.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:18 AM
link   
yup BH is 100% right on. I too was a hard line Obama supporter who is now more or less on the fence (if I am not on it I am now on the other side).

Obama dropped the ball with Iraq and Afghanistan.

Poor form IMHO.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Animal
All in all this war is lost. It was likely lost before it began but was most certainly lost when G. W. Bush shifted the USA's military focus from Afghanistan to Iraq.

There is nothing left to do here except send our family and friends to their deaths in a foreign land and to loose more money at a time when we don't have any to spare.

Pack it up and bring it home is the only sane course of action left.

No more excuses, bring the troops home now. End the war in Afghanistan.



Into the Storm...

We have not lost. The northern alliance holds most of the territory to the NORTH. No Taliban activity in that region. We have pushed them into Pakistan to the west where they get most of their support. Anybody been reading various sources on what's been going on there?

The Southern territory is a place we have not been active this whole time. It's there that the Taliban have been hold up in Afghanistan. When people bring up the Soviets de-buckle in the country remember they lost over 15.000 in little under 8 years. We have been there what? 7. and have lost a little over a 1.000 That is hardly a comparison to what they soviets got.

The Southern region was a well known hide out and staging area that was not touched until this spring. The casualties have increased becuase they have taken the fighting to them. I agree we should find an exit strategy. But lost?

Lets' get real here they have not overan any positions nor taken any cities nor are have we had any massacres. Most the the Taliban are not Afghanistanis.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by jam321
 


Im not picking an ideological fight here...but what would be "letting the military do what it does best" actually mean? you are an american,you have an ideology...the taliban no matter how crude also have an ideology.Let's not forget that the *taliban* is a blanket term and not one single unit.There are over a dozen of movements that the msm in the west labels as the taliban.Im just wondering if you think the american ideology that you adhere to could be killed via bullets and airstrikes? I doubt it could be,same with the taliban.I agree though,get the hell out of the place.Leave enough troops to train the Afghanistani police/military and let them deal with their own problems as a nation.



posted on Sep, 1 2009 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


Why the disappointment? On this case, I cannot criticize him. He's doing exactly what he said he would do during the campaign, which was to refocus our military efforts on Afghanistan and to increase the troop presence there. He's done that.



new topics

top topics



 
5
<<   2 >>

log in

join