This is supposed to be the good war. But why are we there? What are the objectives? These are legitimate questions.
If it's to make life better for the Afghans or to bring democracy to the nation - beyond asking, of all the opportunities in the world, why should we care about this particular place - the fact is that no progress has been made in either of those areas in seven years of war. The Afghan government, such as it is, still maintains little control outside of Kabul.
If it's to catch Osama bin Laden, he may not be there, and if he is, then give us an "F." If it's to defeat Al Qaeda, it's not there. Meanwhile, the Taliban has only grown stronger, and why should we care about that group of militants anyway, since it no longer appears to be harboring bin Laden and if it is, it doesn't appear that we care?
No, the only purpose that seems to have any conceivable meaning would be the establishment of a secure environment for the construction and maintenance of a pipeline from the oil-rich Caspian Basin down through Afghanistan and Pakistan to the Arabian Sea.
But the key word in that last sentence is "conceivable." And, unless NATO and the United States have a different view of the situations in those two countries than the public at large, it would seem that the chances of ever achieving a permanently secure environment is somewhere between slim and none.
We took on North Vietnam after the French tried it and failed, and it was a disaster. Now we're about to go into the eighth year of taking on the insurgency in Afghanistan after the Russians tried it and failed. In both cases the wars involved somewhat hazy objectives that became even hazier with the passage of time. And the Afghan war is becoming more costly, in terms of both lives and money.
There are multiple layers of strategy between aggression and withdrawal.
Perhaps it's time to stop thinking in slogans and just think.
Meanwhile, this week, the Department of Defense released the obituaries of three military personnel killed in Iraq, ranging in age from 22 to 29.
According to the web site www.icasualties.org, U.S. deaths in Iraq now stand at 4,157, including two whose families are being notified today.
The Department of Defense also released, last week, the obituaries of six military personnel killed in Afghanistan, ranging in age from 18 to 34.
Total U.S. deaths in Afghanistan were 520 as of September 12, according to the Pentagon.
Five of the fallen heroes, this week, were felled by roadside bombs and none of those were riding in the heavily-armored M-RAPS.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 43
Of course, if we cut and run, then the odds of another attack on our homeland increase.
I agree with you. "Perhaps it's time to stop thinking in slogans and just think."
We are still in Afghanistan losing more and more American Lives, Because the Republicans have Created a Mess of American Policy and Power.
The Republicans have F#@% up this Nation...
This administration makes Policy decisions (putting peoples lives on the line) for Disgusting Republican Political Reasons... There is NO doubt that the Bush administration has and Does do this...
The Bush administration is now stepping up the Afghan Pakistan action in hopes of Getting some "Good" news for the Pitiful Republicans in their Pathetic Election Campaign...
Bush happens to be following Obama's suggestion of going into Pakistan...
Bush is transferring troops to Afghanistan as per Obama's suggestion...
We are still in Afghanistan because the F#@!ing Republicans could NOT F@##$ing "Get 'er done" !!!
Pathetic!!!
Bush may have seen what he thought was Putin's Soul in his eyes (or was it just his medication acting up???)
Putin certainly saw Bush for the PUTZ that he is... (Russia knew about war in Afghanistan... You don't take it for granted)...
If Bush the Wannabe Texan (He is NO Texan!!!) would have even spent time reading the pulp fiction of Texan Robert E. Howard he would have learned more about Afghanistan than he has during his presidency... Even Howard knew what to expect!!! and he wrote Adventure Fiction in the 1930's...
We are STILL in Afghanistan because of the Failure of Bush and the Republicans...
Sorry... But ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
I suggest you do a bit of research on just what has happened to the multi-billion dollar drug trade that was "lost", before "we" so conveniently removed the religious folks that had driven poppy production down to near zero, in Afghanistan, the worlds dominant producer. Crops now stand at record levels, and ain't nobody even trying to stop it. In fact, "our" forces stand in the way of any that might try. Ever wonder just why the "bad guys" got away? Ever wonder how Mr. Bin Laden went from public enemy number one, to be hunted down without relent or mercy . . . to someone whose whereabouts did not concern our fearless leader at all, in a matter of months?
Just a suggestion..
But I must agree that the goals have become fuzzy. Osama bin Laden's name is rarely mentioned in the media and almost never by the Bush administration and its supporters. Progress towards any goal at all has become immeasurable and lives continue to be lost.
If we could even define victory I would feel better. But in the current situation no one seems to have a yardstick for measuring progress, let alone an ultimate goal to achieve.
I do feel that we have a responsibility to the people of Afghanistan now that we have occupied their country for seven years. We broke it, we have to pay to fix it.
I think that is very astute regarding Afghanistan Pakistan and the Pipeline...
It has played (and does play) a role in Georgia Armenia and Azerbaijan (sp?) as well...
What we are seeing is that scramble for Energy Resources...
War has always expected to be a POSSIBLE (no inevitable) part of that last Desperate Scramble.
It is like that last scramble for COLONIES during the end of the Empire Days of Europe at the turn of 20th century (late 1800's early 1900's) and the culmination into WWI (What some still Ironically and Sadly call the "Great" War)...
WE MUST END THIS BEFORE IT GOES THERE!!!
THE REPUBLICANS ARE HEADED STRAIGHT FOR IT!!!
Just listen to Palin and that McCain guy...!!!
Chronological History of Afghanistan
The City of Kabul is thought to have been established between 2000 BCE- 1500 BCE
Dave, the land known as Afghanistan is the birthplace of Humankind
It is also the crossroads between Mesopotamia and the rest of the World.
The problem which confronts the world today is not in conquering and settling Afghan society but, in assisting it to achieve it's own glory.
Lifting the people of Afghanistan up should be our primary goal and in turn the region will become prosperous and settled in peaceful coexistence.
I could sit here and write out a whole laundry list of issues which should be resolved but, suffice to say we must remain in Afghanistan for the foreseeable future. Only the next President must change the policies regarding our involvement from conquest to facilitation.
I have presented plans to rid Afghanistan of it's opium production while replacing it with a energetic economy. Supplanting poverty with prosperity, despair with hope.
I know all about the Oil pipeline and the drug trade yet, it is these items which have gotten us into the unending occupation we find ourselves in today. We must change these dynamics and allow Altruism to guide our actions.
I applaud the humanitarian efforts the armed forces are including with their other duties, and that of their families who are providing supplies to do this. Unfortunately, the troops have not been given a plan or a mandate (translation: enough troops to carry out a plan) for the "mission".
If this is about Afghanistan, and the moral responsibility that remains for the conflict and its consequences, then there needs to be a plan that includes a definition of "winning" that gives the Afghan government a way of knowing when the US and other forces will exit.
If this is about Bin Laden, let the CIA find him.
If this is about oil, lets do it by treaty.
If this is about the US leadership in the world, the lack of direction in this and other areas is dissuading, rather than persuading our neighbours of that fact. Colonizers, and occupiers are not leaders ... they are conquerors who will be hated, feared, and targeted.
Such a venial war; this one and Vietnam - only for presidential reasons, for the ego of the presidents.
The population want us there,its the Taliban that don't want us there.Proof of this is when we build and protect installations.Like the one that a group of my old buddy's held under fire for one month.Just 20 of them against at least 300,taking just one wounded in that month,It makes me proud that we are there at the front fighting at last a just and able war.If we must have war then make it like this one and not like the last one.And if you were to ask any one of the British soldiers out there they would say the same thing.
Ronald Reagan sent the Marines to Beirut as peacekeepers, but they were expected to protect themselves. After a suicide bomber killed over two hundred Marines in their barracks, Reagan brought the rest home. I suppose he cut and ran too.
oy. But Obama raised 66 million in campaign financing recently, a record.
We cannot have war in Afganistan, Iraq or ANYWHERE and still remain afloat economically, worldwide.
We must get out, and get our houses in order, otherwise we will be sunk as a nation for a decade.
Seriously.
Actually, we have no control over the people of the Mideast and their society is one we don't understand. This results in our being unable to help them establish a stable democracy. They have to want it and earn it or it won't last. The same is true of Iraq, our exporting of democracy to them is a joke. Once we are out of there, so is any democracy.
We promised to bring to justice, those who planned and perpetrated the WTC disaster. But George was too anxious to cut and run from Afghanistan so he could invade Iraq. No oil under the ground in Afghanistan.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Dana-Perino-Bin-Laden-was-not-the-mastermind-of-911
Bush dealt with the Taliban and told them "you can either have a carpet of money or a carpet of bombs" and the Taliban took the bombs along with thousands of innocent murdered people.
Is your solution more money or a change in the nature of money. Have you even conceived of the possibility of that last option? I thought not.
See Invisible Hand for a real solution to lots of problems that have been damaging mankind for thousands of years around the globe.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/south_asia/7616429.stm
The Bush doctrine has always been about oil. They've been willing to sacrifice our citizens lives, bankrupt our treasure, poison the environment, destroy our international reputation, and subvert our own constitution to achieve the objective of controling it.
Enough is enough!
'Slick-Willy" is # 20 one ahead of the runner-up worst president Jimmy the bumbler Carter.Citizen,get help.Billy C. was offered bin-laden before 9/11, and no one would have died.
Well for one thing they still haven't invaded and occupied Pakistan. These things have to be taken one step at a time. We've done Phase One invade springboard nations (Afghanistan, Iraq) to get to the bigger fish...Phase Two (Pakistan, Iran [and Syria and Lebanon]). It takes a little time to accomplish these things, especially, the spin to get public approval. All in good time...there's no rush, even a change of regime in Washington won't veer them from their' intended course, especialy, Bammy who can't wait to bomb the bejeezes out of both Pakistan and Iran. No rush, at all...beside, 'our heroes' are having such a fun time of it...let's don't spoil it:
"The people of Afghanistan are caught between the devil and the dreaded Taleban. Obviously, they believe their devil is the US-led force which operates in Afghanistan under a UN mandate. The International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), as this force is properly known, is responsible for thousands of civilian deaths in Afghanistan. Last Friday, August 22, the US troops in ISAF killed 95 civilians, including 60 children and 19 women, adding to the ever increasing number of civilian deaths.
According to UN figures, in the first six months of this year alone, some 1,000 civilians had been killed in the Afghan war. This is much higher than the number of Taleban militants killed during the same period: 473. Other estimates say that more than 25,000 Afghans have died since the US aggression in October 2001.
The August 22 massacre of civilians is the worst single incident in the past seven years. At the rate civilians are killed in Afghanistan, with little or no condemnations from Nato countries which form the core of the ISAF, one wonders whether the Afghans are lesser mortals. Imagine what would happen if a terrorist kills 95 US citizens or citizens of any of the Nato countries. Such a massacre would have dominated the headlines for weeks, if not months. Giving a melodramatic touch, the western media would also carry photographs of the dead children, interviews with their neighbours, friends and teachers and statements of grieving parents and political leaders. But 60 Afghan children who died in the US attack had none of it. No speaker addressing the ongoing Democratic Party convention, where anti-Iraq-war-and-pro-Afghan-war Barack Obama is being officially anointed as the candidate of the party, dared to mention the Afghan civilian massacre, though they talked about US troops serving in Afghanistan and Iraq.
The deaths of Afghan children were largely a news-in-brief item on major western television channels.
It is not only the US troops who kill civilians in Afghanistan. The British, the Canadians and others in the ISAF also kill civilians with impunity and later say "sorry" and promise compensation after investigations. Very little happen after these empty words.
On March 12, the British government acknowledged that its troops were responsible for an air strike that killed two women and two children near Helmand. On July 26, British troops opened fire on a vehicle that failed to stop at a checkpoint in the Sangin district of the same province, killing four civilians and injuring three.
The Canadians killed a two-year-old girl and her four-year-old brother in a July 27 shooting incident in which the father of the two children was seriously wounded.
The number of incidents where civilians have been killed by US troops, is obviously high as the Americans account for more than half of the 60,000-strong ISAF.
Besides the August 22 incident, the Americans are responsible for a series of other incidents in which civilians were killed. The major incidents involving US troops this year are:
June 10: At least 30 were killed in the village of Ebrahim Kariz, Mata Khan district of Paktika Province when US forces launched an air and ground attack on the village allegedly targeting a "militant hideout." Residents said that among the dead were dozens of civilians.
July 4: Twenty-three civilians were killed in US air strikes in the district of Waygal in the province of Nouristan.
July 6: Forty-seven civilians attending a wedding (including the bride) were killed in US air strikes in Nangarhar province.
July 14: Officials in Nuristan province said almost 30 defenseless civilians were killed during an ISAF air strike in Want-Waigal district.
July 15: US Forces admit to killing eight civilians in the Bakwa district of Farah province.
July 20: Nine civilians were killed in a US air strike in the Ana Darreh district of Farah province.
August 7: US troops say they "inadvertently" killed four women and a child in an exchange of fire in an area of central Ghazni province."
more at: http://www.dailymirror.lk/DM_BLOG/Sections/frmNewsDetailView.aspx?ARTID=24676
Yada...yada...yada...who's counting these Third World, sub-human, losers, anyway. Good job, boys, gung-ho!
The reason Al Q is not there is because they've been killed, jailed, or are on the run. Disrupted is a perfectly fitting description.
Improvements have certainly been made with new roads, schools, human rights, etc. Now that we are winding down in Iraq we should be able to focus more in Afghanistan.
US Agression? Did you forget 911? Of course you did, otherwise you wouldn't make such an ignorant, insulting statement. This is why we can't let Obama win.
That's what Democrats call 'long term vision'.... LOL.
I didn't make it up, look up news sources.. or just search the wire services... Taliban did offer Osama if shown evidence of his guilt. Yes, i do think Bill Clinton did a lousy job when it came to OBL... Michael Scheuer (Head of now disbanded Bin Laden unit in the CIA) has repeatedly said that.
I think enough evidence was shown when Osama started publishing his tapes bragging about it. I do appreciate your kindness in giving the Taliban the benefit of the doubt though... very kind and decent of you, and they could not be more deserving ;)
Our goals r noble but no one likes foreign troops & the longer we stay the more hearts & minds we loose.
We have already "cut and run" because Bush wanted to invade Iraq instead! I think it shows the durabilituy of any democratic type of government we might foster in those Mideastt countries. Their culture, thought process, religion and daily practices are foreign to us and we are not equipped to deal with them.
If we installed a "strong man" in either of the countries and the leader was strong enough to hang onto it, it would last many years with relative peace. But a democratic type of government has the seeds of its own failure built in. Freedom to build a government has teh same freedom to attack, undermine and destroy that government. It is not reasonable to think that a government we have installed through our pressure on the nation, will endure. It will always be looked upon as a puppet government, attending the needs of the United States.
It seems to me that our best course of action there is to get the hell out and let those people who live there form and control their own government. It may not be a democracy since the Muslim groups believe that the church should supersede any civil government. It may also disapproving of oil pipe lines and/or nationalizing of any such things in their country. Our corporate leaders would be appalled but that is my personal opinion.
Centrist Citizen says it extremely well, the ethnic cleansing, ( a form of civil war), has been a real help to obtaining more peace in Iraq. Of course, those Sunni people, driven from their homes by Shiites, will never be able to return and claim their own property but there are less attacks bu insurgents.
We went into Afghanistan to get Bin Laden. We failed in that effort, partly because our mind was on invading Iraq instead of the job at hand. We need to leave the area as soon as possible and write it off as far as it being what we'd like. We cannot serve as God on this planet, I believe that position is already taken.
I'm not going to "hammer" you but I would ask you just who masterminded the 911 attack? Surely those who carried it out did not. I don't believe that Bin Laden did either, but an associate of his did. But people with the ability to think up and carry out such an attack, are not going to put themselves into the pilots seat, headed for their final reward! Those who carried out the attack were too busy hitting the nudie bars to plan and coordinate the operation.
I watched an interview with Bill Clinton on this subject, conducted by Fox news. The same statements were made by the interview journalist and Bill answered them in such a manner that it put the interviewer clearly in his place because of the falseness of many of the claims he was asking Bill to explain. Bill went into great detail of the pursuit of Bin Laden, and I am convinced that he did as much as could be done at that time. Other than going clandestine and ordering a hit man.
You wrote "US Agression? Did you forget 911? Of course you did, otherwise you wouldn't make such an ignorant, insulting statement. This is why we can't let Obama win."
This is not a game! We have failed miserably in getting Osama, but the US invasion was definitely "aggression" in my opinion. Your mention of 911 fails to justify an invasion of Iraq. Iraq had not been involved in that terrorist act and Saddam condemned it after it occurred. Claiming that they did is the "ignorant, insulting" comment!
One may well approve of this war but and it may be a great cause for America but there is no way to erase the fact that it was an aggressive act on the part of the USA. I, as a citizen of this country, have to claim the things we do wrong rather than deny them and pretend they were somehow not what they were! There is no honor in not owning your own mistakes.