Afghanistan- why are we still at it ?

[Commander Cody]

To start this off, I don't intend for this to be offensive. I hold th highest respect for all service men and women in arms. But- why are we in Afghanistan ? Why aren't we defending our own borders from illegal aliens and border wars ? We defeated the insurgents years ago. We are only in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan. If we got out of there, we could save millions of dollars. We can spread the military out on our own borders, killing two birds with one stone. ( what I mean is, we save money and cut down on illegal aliens. Again, I highly respect all in arms. I'm just trying to see what people think.
Cody

 

[mattyem]

one answer being "piped around the bazaars" is money money money. Or as it has been phrased

"the military industrial complex"

War equals money, money equals power. When you look back to US history how often has she been at complete peace on the international stage..........

As for the pole, now forces are already committed, and money spent I think we should stay but with a clear and precise exit strategy in mind. Another poll worth considering "should we have gone in" or asking the question "how should we have done this different. All show the beauty of hindsight.

 

[Bonza]

To start this off, I don't intend for this to be offensive. I hold th highest respect for all service men and women in arms. But- why are we in Afghanistan ? Why aren't we defending our own borders from illegal aliens and border wars ? We defeated the insurgents years ago. We are only in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan. If we got out of there, we could save millions of dollars. We can spread the military out on our own borders, killing two birds with one stone. ( what I mean is, we save money and cut down on illegal aliens. Again, I highly respect all in arms. I'm just trying to see what people think.
Cody

Well for starters I don't think the insurgents have been defeated, as the fighting continues. Most of the Taliban may be gone, but the insurgency remains.

And it's the responsible thing to stay and engage with the Afghanistan government forces until such a time as the region becomes more stable and able to defend itself from potential insurgencies. Pulling out too quickly could turn Afghanistan into a total bloodbath - and I think the United States has done the right thing in that it wishes to stabilise the region so that doesn't happen. Being in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan is at this point in the conflict precisely the point - there is a responsibility to build stability before the armed forces pull out, so as to avoid excessive bloodshed and political upheaval in the future. I realise this approach is not without its own problems, but I think a sudden pulling out would result in large problems for Afghanistan and may in fact undo a lot of the work done over the last few years. That said it's a complex issue, more complex than the time I've given thinking about it most likely, and the current Afghani government is not without its flaws so I understand parts of my perspective may be faulty.

I can't comment on the border control issue as I'm Australian and have little knowledge of how serious the issue has become, or whether it gets drummed up by the media (no offence, but this happens a lot with asylum seekers in Australian media and politics so I tend to reserve my opinion these days until I've seen some actual numbers).

But I imagine using the military to control border immigration could have some major issues, not the least of which is that the military is intended to fight wars, not control civilian population movement. And doesn't there exist a federal agency (US Customs and Border Protection) for whom this issue is one of their primary mandates? From what I understand they are the largest law enforcement agency in the United States, and may be far more well equipped in terms of established practices and law enforcement powers than the military for this task.

You say "why aren't we defending our own nation from border wars" - what border wars? What possible threat of invasion exists on the borders of the United States?

 

[FormerDirtDart]

Well for starters I don't think the insurgents have been defeated, as the fighting continues. Most of the Taliban may be gone, but the insurgency remains.

And it's the responsible thing to stay and engage with the Afghanistan government forces until such a time as the region becomes more stable and able to defend itself from potential insurgencies. Pulling out too quickly could turn Afghanistan into a total bloodbath - and I think the United States has done the right thing in that it wishes to stabilise the region so that doesn't happen. Being in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan is at this point in the conflict precisely the point - there is a responsibility to build stability before the armed forces pull out, so as to avoid excessive bloodshed and political upheaval in the future. I realise this approach is not without its own problems, but I think a sudden pulling out would result in large problems for Afghanistan and may in fact undo a lot of the work done over the last few years. That said it's a complex issue, more complex than the time I've given thinking about it most likely, and the current Afghani government is not without its flaws so I understand parts of my perspective may be faulty.

I can't comment on the border control issue as I'm Australian and have little knowledge of how serious the issue has become, or whether it gets drummed up by the media (no offence, but this happens a lot with asylum seekers in Australian media and politics so I tend to reserve my opinion these days until I've seen some actual numbers).

But I imagine using the military to control border immigration could have some major issues, not the least of which is that the military is intended to fight wars, not control civilian population movement. And doesn't there exist a federal agency (US Customs and Border Protection) for whom this issue is one of their primary mandates? From what I understand they are the largest law enforcement agency in the United States, and may be far more well equipped in terms of established practices and law enforcement powers than the military for this task.

You say "why aren't we defending our own nation from border wars" - what border wars? What possible threat of invasion exists on the borders of the United States?

I would add that the only way to effect illegal immigration is to target the employers, not try to chase down individuals. Of course, business crushing penalties would be needed, not simple fines.

 

[Feanor]

Was it our responsibility in the first place ?

I think we made it our responsibility when we handed out AKs like the UN hands out aid during a famine. Also stinger missiles and funding.

 

[STURM]

To start this off, I don't intend for this to be offensive. I hold th highest respect for all service men and women in arms. Cody

Yes, all who serve deserve our respect and gratitude. But let's not forget the Afghan population, who unlike foreign troops, do not get named in the media when they get killed.

We defeated the insurgents years ago. We are only in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan. If we got out of there, we could save millions of dollars. We can spread the military out on our own borders, killing two birds with one stone. ( what I mean is, we save money and cut down on illegal aliens. Again, I highly respect all in arms. I'm just trying to see what people think.
Cody

As Bonza pointed out, the insurgency is far from defeated and is still a major problem. If the insurgency were really defeated would there still be a requirement for foreign troops to be in Afghanistan? Any premature withdrawal could lead to a repeat of what happened when the U.S. and other countries downgraded or severed their involvement in Afghanistan follwing the Soviet withdrawal.

 

[My2Cents]

To start this off, I don't intend for this to be offensive. I hold th highest respect for all service men and women in arms. But- why are we in Afghanistan ? We defeated the insurgents years ago. We are only in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan. If we got out of there, we could save millions of dollars.

Maybe you ought to tell the Taliban that they are defeated, it seems they have not gotten the message yet. :flame

But the war is not about the Taliban, it is about denying al-Qaeda a safe sanctuary to operate from. Because the Taliban will not agree to keep al-Qaeda out they cannot be allowed to return to power in Afghanistan. Al-Qaeda is still operating from a number of areas now, including Pakistan and Yemen, but none of those are safe because the local government is, at least officially, hostile.

Why aren't we defending our own borders from illegal aliens and border wars ? We can spread the military out on our own borders, killing two birds with one stone. ( what I mean is, we save money and cut down on illegal aliens.

It is illegal for the military to assume law enforcement powers on US soil. See Posse Comitatus Act. And before you say “Congress can override it.” understand that this is a major states rights issue that would end a lot of political careers, i.e. it is not going to happen.

 

[Spetsznaz]

Unaware of that ruling. Maybe Congress should boost Border Patrol funding instead. I used to live on the Texas border.:whip

This is a whole new, issue and if you want you can make a thread on (However I would not recommend it) go ahead. I will respond to this.

The problem in border patrol is not funding, its more lack in numbers to cover more area and the lack of harsh measures.

As for Afghanistan, what feanor said about the AK and stingers, although...with the stingers we really over did it.

 

[Awang se]

American mistake is to allied themselves with drug dealers and mafia lords during the invasion of Afghanistan. In a way, despite US attempt to work for the people of Afghanistan, through this crime lords, they unwittingly work against the interest of normal afghan people. this what delayed the creation of stable Aghan goverment. I say just do away with Karzai and his cohort. assasinate him if you have to and put someone with more sense on the helm.

 

[STURM]

As for Afghanistan, what feanor said about the AK and stingers, although...with the stingers we really over did it.

It's not the numbers of the Stingers or other weapons that were handed out that was the problem but the policy of letting the Pakistani's decide on which groups would receive the aid. The criteria for rebel groups led by people like Haqqani and Hetmayar, to receive weapons and cash, was not their performance in the field but their close ties with the ISI and shared interests. Pakistan only started shifing their support to the Taliban when it was clear that their main man, Hetmayar, was losing power and support.

American mistake is to allied themselves with drug dealers and mafia lords during the invasion of Afghanistan.

Until the Taliban took over most of the country, people like Dostum and Ismail Khan were practically running their own governments in areas they controlled. With the benefit of hindsight it may have been a mistake but the U.S. really didn't have a choice as the cooperation of the warlords was essential in defeating the Taliban in 2001 [for a number of years after the U.S. invasion the warlords were happy making cash out of providing vital services to U.S and other foreign troops but when that started drying up they resorted depending again on opium]. Similiarly, Kazai depends a lot on a number of different warlords [some of which are not Pashtuns] to keep things in check in the provinces, without their cooperation things would get very tricky and more unstable.

 

[T.C.P]

Without supporting of the warlords you are lloking at another Somalia, except it will be in a much more strategically important position, The war lords may be criminals but as long as you pay them and have some level of control over them(like the Karzai govt) you can keep things from going cazy (yes more crazy than things are now, as hard as that may be to believe)

 

[Feanor]

Or... we could establish the necessary presence commit the necessary troops and resources, and actually take control of the border and contry-side.

 

[T.C.P]

Or... we could establish the necessary presence commit the necessary troops and resources, and actually take control of the border and contry-side.

Really you think that is possible, the US had to practically grovel to make the public understand that more troops were needed and to make the Europeans commit more.

The more troops you will commit the more the death toll will rise and more your presence will be sledge hammered by the media.

Not to mention that the Afghans despise you, they despise all foreign troops on their soil, the amount of troops needed to take complete control of the mountains and the country side will exceed 500000(my rough estimation), this no. of foreign soldiers will be seen as threats by the Afghans and the extremists will use this to recruit more troops. Most Taliban recruits believe that they are fighting foreign invaders, most don't believe the terrorist views, they believe they are freedom fighters. Afghans will always oppose Foreign troops, they are too proud.

Also you forget that Afghans hate each other, their is too much racial hate there, the US wants to make Pashtuns, Hazaras, Tajiks live together, something they do not want to, for generations they have believed that Afghanistan belongs to their respective race and for generations they have hated each other, you cannot remove so much bad blood easily. It will take decades worth of teaching children that thier for fathers were wrong and that all races should respect each other and live together peacefully. You are trying to help a people who need help but do not want it, they oppose it. The only way you can make Afghanistan stable would be to break into separate states each state for each race and monitor the borders to prevent war.

 

[rip]

To start this off, I don't intend for this to be offensive. I hold th highest respect for all service men and women in arms. But- why are we in Afghanistan ? Why aren't we defending our own borders from illegal aliens and border wars ? We defeated the insurgents years ago. We are only in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan. If we got out of there, we could save millions of dollars. We can spread the military out on our own borders, killing two birds with one stone. ( what I mean is, we save money and cut down on illegal aliens. Again, I highly respect all in arms. I'm just trying to see what people think.
Cody

I think that you are not evaluating the situation correctly but you are right about the inability of the US to control its borders and the situation in Afghanistan and other places like it are indeed related. Most of us now live in a world where everybody affects everybody else. The historical definition of a nation (as a defined geographical area under which a governing body has effective control) is one that no longer works in practice. You have global trade, global monetary systems, and global interest of all kinds which also comes along with global crime and global terrorism. The effectiveness of borders to isolate one people from the problems of another people, even on the other side of the Earth, regardless of the problems we are talking about, has and will continue to decrees as borders are in effect dissolving everywhere before our eyes.
The issues of refugees, (economic, political or religious), bringing with them their problems to flood over borders in to places that were free of these problems before. The greatest and most successful globalizes of all, are criminals. They find ways to successfully cooperate with each other even when they hate each other’s guts far better and more effectively that the so called responsible governments which are charged with controlling them. But a failed state is even the worst of all possible conditions. They are effectively controlled by criminals no matter by what flag or cause they espouse.

 

[airforcegeek]

To start this off, I don't intend for this to be offensive. I hold th highest respect for all service men and women in arms. But- why are we in Afghanistan ? Why aren't we defending our own borders from illegal aliens and border wars ? We defeated the insurgents years ago. We are only in Afghanistan to defend Afghanistan. If we got out of there, we could save millions of dollars. We can spread the military out on our own borders, killing two birds with one stone. ( what I mean is, we save money and cut down on illegal aliens. Again, I highly respect all in arms. I'm just trying to see what people think.
Cody

With all due respect to your opinion on this matter I frankly disagree with your view of the situation in Afganistan. One of the key matters concerning this issue is the fact that Pakistan definitely has reasonably advanced missile technology and is rumored to possess a nuclear program. If Afganistan is overrun by the Taliban as it inevitably will if left to fend for itself then the taliban will spread to Pakistan and perhaps gain control of some of these missiles then the world is faced by a rouge state with these missiles. Secondly, this being the main NATO incentive, the Taliban harbours terrorists and provides them a safe haven to plan attacks.

 

[Spetsznaz]

Really you think that is possible, the US had to practically grovel to make the public understand that more troops were needed and to make the Europeans commit more.

The more troops you will commit the more the death toll will rise and more your presence will be sledge hammered by the media.

Not to mention that the Afghans despise you, they despise all foreign troops on their soil, the amount of troops needed to take complete control of the mountains and the country side will exceed 500000(my rough estimation), this no. of foreign soldiers will be seen as threats by the Afghans and the extremists will use this to recruit more troops. Most Taliban recruits believe that they are fighting foreign invaders, most don't believe the terrorist views, they believe they are freedom fighters. Afghans will always oppose Foreign troops, they are too proud.

Also you forget that Afghans hate each other, their is too much racial hate there, the US wants to make Pashtuns, Hazaras, Tajiks live together, something they do not want to, for generations they have believed that Afghanistan belongs to their respective race and for generations they have hated each other, you cannot remove so much bad blood easily. It will take decades worth of teaching children that thier for fathers were wrong and that all races should respect each other and live together peacefully. You are trying to help a people who need help but do not want it, they oppose it. The only way you can make Afghanistan stable would be to break into separate states each state for each race and monitor the borders to prevent war.

Absolutely and amazingly well put, especially the part about many taliban fighters see them selves as fighting foreigners on their soil, rather than the extremist aspect being the only aspect focused on.

I am not sure that a division of Afghanistan is that great of a solution though. :daz Primarily because these separate factions have moved beyond separation:gun

Not to mention the fact that if this where to happen, who is going to be doing the monitoring and acting as a buffer? How long would this last? Forever? Very possible. Can you image how much money would be going away on a regular basis, after all your solution can last decades.

EDIT: This might contribute to the conversation I strongly suggest you take a look at it. PS: I know wikipedia is frowned on, but this to just get a general idea.
[ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pentagon%27s_New_Map"]The Pentagon's New Map - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

 

[riksavage]

As one US General said: 'we need to bomb the bastards forward to the Stone Age'. The place is a basket case with no clear indigenous leadership with a common goal. The current batch of incumbents are too busy filling their boots to care about anyone or anything beyond the pale of Kabul.

I would focus my resources on developing an opium parasite, once perfected, crop spray the fields and give them the option of growing pomegranates. If that doesn't work close the borders and let them get on with it. Cut the opium supply off and you cut one of the major revenue sources financing global terrorism.

We in the West will never get to grips with the tribal system, the eye-for-an-eye culture and almost zero desire for democratic government. So either we baby-sit them infinitum, install a brutal pro-Western Dictator with a Stalinist approach to tribal cleansing, or (easiest option) withdrawal and wall them in.

Post 2015 there is no way the fledgling Afghan Army will be able to stop the factions, warlords and Taliban from kicking off once more, it will be another countdown to mayhem as was witnessed in Cambodia after Pol Pot entered the capital.

 

[STURM]

The only way you can make Afghanistan stable would be to break into separate states each state for each race and monitor the borders to prevent war.

T.C.p da Devil, are you really serious?? If history has taught us anything it is that artificial borders created by outside powers against the wishes of the locals is a recipe for disaster....... Stalin created artificial borders in Central Asia. Western countries created artificial borders in the Middle East and in the Indian sub-continent and look what happened. I don't claim to have a solution for the mess that Afghanistan is now in but I'm very sure that breaking up the country into different halves is not the solution. It is something that will come back to bite us at a later date.

As one US General said: 'we need to bomb the bastards forward to the Stone Age'.

Which will accomplish nothing as one major lesson learnt even before the U.S, invasion is that an attrition based strategy with great reliance on firepower, against insurgents doesn't always produce the intended results.

 

[T.C.P]

T.C.p da Devil, are you really serious?? If history has taught us anything it is that artificial borders created by outside powers against the wishes of the locals is a recipe for disaster....... Stalin created artificial borders in Central Asia. Western countries created artificial borders in the Middle East and in the Indian sub-continent and look what happened. I don't claim to have a solution for the mess that Afghanistan is now in but I'm very sure that breaking up the country into different halves is not the solution. It is something that will come back to bite us at a later date.



s.

Why not seperate them? Its not like trying to separate 1 entire tribe or people, it would be the seperation of many different tribes and culture who don't go well together and have no intention of getting along together peace fully.

During the monarchy and the time of the Taliban the Hazaras were treated like animals for being Shias, the Pashtuns consider all other tribes to be unclean immigrants polluting their Afghanistan. If you keep Afghanistan as one country after the US leaves you are looking at a situation that will make Somalia look like the most stable country in the planet. The Pashtuns will start ethnic cleansing of all Hazaras and Tajiks, the Hazaras will fight back probably with support from Iran.

Without the US supplying them with weapons all the fighting tribes will grow opium to fund their war.

In my view there are only 2 options

1. Keep Afghanistan whole but seal off all the borders(including land) to prevent the heel on earth from spreading.
or
2. Separate them into different countries where each tribe has its own nationality, but deploy UN and military border guards to prevent the states from going to war.l

One thing you people forget is that an Afghan never forgets a crime done to his family and will never forgive it, he will try to get revenge even if it is the last thing he does, countless decades will be spent on war of revenge.

Afghanistan is not Vietnam where the people were united. In fact its the common hatred against American troops that manage some sort of unity between the tribes.

 

[STURM]

2. Separate them into different countries where each tribe has its own nationality, but deploy UN and military border guards to prevent the states from going to war.

Asuuming there is the political will for such a course of action, who will fund the operation and who will contribute the troops? And for how long will ''UN and military border guards'' be expected to ''prevent the states from going to war'' and under what mandate?

One thing you people forget is that an Afghan never forgets a crime done to his family and will never forgive it, he will try to get revenge even if it is the last thing he does, countless decades will be spent on war of revenge. [/B].

On the contrary, I'm very aware, though not familiar, with the Pashtun code of Pashtunwali :.

In fact its the common hatred against American troops that manage some sort of unity between the tribes.

I think you're mistaken, it's not the ''common hatred against American troops'' as you put it, but rather the dislike, in common with most people, of having foreign troops on one's soil. To say that 'hatred' of American troops unites the Afghans is too simplistic.

To create several new states based on enthnicity would create a very dangerous precedent, apart from being in this day and age morally wrong. This would lead to the Pashtuns in the North West Frontier, the Baluchis in Baluchistan, the Tajiks in Smarkand and Bakhara, etc, the Kurds in Turkey, Iraq and Syria, the Turkmons in Iraq etc, to seek independent states.