Sometimes I wonder: Why not diplomacy?

[Spitfire175]

Just because someone claims victory dosnt mean they actually have it. I declare victory over this debate, dosnt mean i am actually totaly correct or in the right.

Vietnam was a losing battle, the Americans lost it, thousands died in the army to stop reunification which happened in the end when America pulled out because it had lost. The people are being driven to actually plant opium poppeys and the heavy handedness of the forces there pushes them more into Al quiedas arms. Where are you getting your sources from btw? i have never,ever heard of the taliban running out of money in any of the many papers. Unless its an American only thing

Im pretty sure money isnt a massive issue compared to the untold billions the americans have sunk into it

The coalition had their victory. For a moment they held all habited areas with the support of the population. then they screwed it up.

American only thing? What? I'm not an American. Here's the news about Al quaida: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8303978.stm
And here's some news on the Taleban: http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/taliban/funding-the-taliban
And it wasn't the taleban running out of money.
I don't believe the way to eventually stabilise the country is to get more guns in there. However just leaving would collapse whatever is left of the country. It would be a true total anarchy and crisis. Not exactly sure how that's different fron the current situaton, but at least it won't be better. Then the local warlords would start fighting the taleban and each other instead of the coalition. Even better for the locals.

And yes, money IS an issue. Three things are a necessity in war: 1. money, 2. money, 3. money. No organisation can wage a war without money. How much the Yankees have put into it are irrelevant when we are discussing the Taleban.

 

[Fulax]

and if anyone knows the history of wars in Afghanistan

If you knew the history, you would know that peace with them is impossible.

I'm pretty sure the US and Afghanistan were at peace before the invasion.

 

[Mcface]

and if anyone knows the history of wars in Afghanistan

If you knew the history, you would know that peace with them is impossible.

I'm pretty sure the US and Afghanistan were at peace before the invasion.

We aren't fighting the country tough.
We are fighting religious extremists. it's VERY different.

These are people who blow themselves up, and many of their own people, just to kill one American soldier.

You can't reason with that. Nor do I want to.

 

[Spitfire175]

and if anyone knows the history of wars in Afghanistan

If you knew the history, you would know that peace with them is impossible.

I'm pretty sure the US and Afghanistan were at peace before the invasion.

But Afganistan wasn't with itself. Plus, take a period of 100 years. From 1901 to 2001. Afganistan is more of a battlefield than any onet place in the world. The russians(three times), the brits(twice on their own), the pakistani, the Soviets (russians=/=soviets), the UN, and all the tribal and religious wars makes up for a total of over 40 conflicts. It's an area that will never have peace. The Americans went there to have revenge for 9/11. That was a reason good enough to snap al quaida, but not to bash the entire country. I think the US should get out of there. But not instantly, it takes time, y'know.

 

[cuddly_tomato]

and if anyone knows the history of wars in Afghanistan

If you knew the history, you would know that peace with them is impossible.

I'm pretty sure the US and Afghanistan were at peace before the invasion.

We aren't fighting the country tough.
We are fighting religious extremists. it's VERY different.

These are people who blow themselves up, and many of their own people, just to kill one American soldier.

You can't reason with that. Nor do I want to.

You can. There is precident for a people willing to lay down their own lives for their country, and then those cultures have been reasoned with (Englands occupation of India for instance).

On the other hand, there is no Islamic precedent for this, so you do have good reason to be skeptical.

 

[Fulax]

and if anyone knows the history of wars in Afghanistan

If you knew the history, you would know that peace with them is impossible.

I'm pretty sure the US and Afghanistan were at peace before the invasion.

We aren't fighting the country tough.
We are fighting religious extremists. it's VERY different.

These are people who blow themselves up, and many of their own people, just to kill one American soldier.

You can't reason with that. Nor do I want to.

No, you're fighting the country. You invaded the country, overhtrew the government, and are now occupying the country.
Along with a small group of religious fanatics you are fighting a lot of ordinary people who want foreign armies out of their homeland.

There is no justification. By any definiton you are fighting the country.

 

[Fulax]

and if anyone knows the history of wars in Afghanistan

If you knew the history, you would know that peace with them is impossible.

I'm pretty sure the US and Afghanistan were at peace before the invasion.

But Afganistan wasn't with itself. Plus, take a period of 100 years. From 1901 to 2001. Afganistan is more of a battlefield than any onet place in the world. The russians(three times), the brits(twice on their own), the pakistani, the Soviets (russians=/=soviets), the UN, and all the tribal and religious wars makes up for a total of over 40 conflicts. It's an area that will never have peace. The Americans went there to have revenge for 9/11. That was a reason good enough to snap al quaida, but not to bash the entire country. I think the US should get out of there. But not instantly, it takes time, y'know.

We agree on something then.

Afghanistan needs stability. It will take time, but it will never, ever happen with foreign troops in the country. The sooner they leave the better.

 

[Spitfire175]

We agree on something then.

Afghanistan needs stability. It will take time, but it will never, ever happen with foreign troops in the country. The sooner they leave the better.

Stability at what cost? The taleban aren't exactly saints either.

"Now in its sixth year of existence, the taliban regime has expunged all leisure activities. Their list of what is illegal grows daily: music, movies and television, computers, picnics, wedding parties, New Year celebrations, any kind of mixed-sex gathering. They've also banned children's toys, including dolls and kites; card and board games; cameras; photographs and paintings of people and animals; pet parakeets; cigarettes and alcohol; magazines and newspapers, and most books. Afghans are not allowed to be or talk with foreigners. They've even forbidden applause -- a moot point, since there's nothing left to applaud." - http://www.simplytaty.com/broadenpages/taliban.htm

That sound like living to you?

 

[Fulax]

We agree on something then.

Afghanistan needs stability. It will take time, but it will never, ever happen with foreign troops in the country. The sooner they leave the better.

Stability at what cost? The taleban aren't exactly saints either.

"Now in its sixth year of existence, the taliban regime has expunged all leisure activities. Their list of what is illegal grows daily: music, movies and television, computers, picnics, wedding parties, New Year celebrations, any kind of mixed-sex gathering. They've also banned children's toys, including dolls and kites; card and board games; cameras; photographs and paintings of people and animals; pet parakeets; cigarettes and alcohol; magazines and newspapers, and most books. Afghans are not allowed to be or talk with foreigners. They've even forbidden applause -- a moot point, since there's nothing left to applaud." - http://www.simplytaty.com/broadenpages/taliban.htm

That sound like living to you?

No, that sounds horrible to me. Obviously I'm not a devout Muslim though. Extreme as they may be, the values of the Afghan people are closer to the Taliban's than to America's.

Horrible or not, successful and lasting rebellion can only come from within, by the will of the people. South Africa, for example. It maybe a slower form of regime change than a full-scale foreign invasion, but the results are much better.

Anyway, I'm off to bed. It's 4am here.

 

[Danny3005]

this thread is the perfect example of trying way to fucking hard. The title sucks to.
This intire fourm seems to try to hard

 

[Mcface]

and if anyone knows the history of wars in Afghanistan

If you knew the history, you would know that peace with them is impossible.

I'm pretty sure the US and Afghanistan were at peace before the invasion.

We aren't fighting the country tough.
We are fighting religious extremists. it's VERY different.

These are people who blow themselves up, and many of their own people, just to kill one American soldier.

You can't reason with that. Nor do I want to.

No, you're fighting the country. You invaded the country, overhtrew the government, and are now occupying the country.
Along with a small group of religious fanatics you are fighting a lot of ordinary people who want foreign armies out of their homeland.

There is no justification. By any definiton you are fighting the country.

You have it assbackwards.

So I guess the "ordinary" people killing woman for wearing a short sleeve T-shirt?
My Buddie's unit spent 3 months in an Afghan city, a school for girls was opened up by Americans, and the Soldiers with Afghan Police protected it for months.
They even WALKED the girls to school who couldn't afford a ride.
It was the first school most of them had been to.

Theres my Justification.

 

[Serge A. Storms]

America hasn't used armed conflict as a way to "bring peace to a region" since WWII. To put it simply, our definition of "bringing peace to a region" is going in, bombing shit, and claiming victory when we whip a little industry and American-flavored democracy on whatever we just ran over. By the same token, the Taliban isn't open to peace talks because they're not interested in peace, just like any other group that violently opposes another group for having different beliefs and values. Expecting peace out of this is like expecting a peaceful resolution between fire and gasoline.

 

[Shynobee]

Ha ha, ha hahahaha, ha, ha.. hooo.... wow... good one...

Ok, seriously though, its not is if we wouldn't WANT to have peace talks, its just that peace talks are literally impossible to have when someone, (ie radical Islamic terrorists) is arguing from a higher truth, (ie Allah).

So, sure, you could try to have a "peace talk" but here is the Radical Islam "concession," America needs to become a completely Islamic state, adopt our culture, force your women to cover their bodies at all times, and hate Jews. I'm paraphrasing of course. That is simply the Radical Islam view of America. They honestly think our western Culture is the root of all evil, and they will use their God to justify all of their points. You simply cannot argue that with reason and diplomacy.

 

[FiveSpeedf150]

They also control 80% of the country.

You're not fighting religious fanatics anymore. The Taliban are now seen as freedom fighters and as such enjoy far more support than they ever did when they were in power. This war cannot be won with 'more boots on the ground'. It also cannot be won by propping up the current government. How can any corrupt, puppet government that cannot stop it's allies bombing it's own citizens ever have any authority?

All the US is doing is perpetuating the instability of Afghanistan and the suffering of it's people. Above all, American forces have absolutely no right to be there.

The Afghan war has been a complete failure. Time to leave.

"You"? Me? I have no idea.
In case you didn't know, the the way to beat the taleban isn't conventional troops. I never said that. The way is to stop the drug trade. That is possible. Also, the current Afgan goverment is bogus. That was actually my point. Get a proper one going.

We can't even stop the drug trade in our own country.

 

[Spitfire175]

We can't even stop the drug trade in our own country.

You don't have the air force there stopping it.

 

[Poomanchu745]

We can't even stop the drug trade in our own country.

You don't have the air force there stopping it.

Im not really sure the air force would be the most effective tool in stopping drug trade. There is also the problem of US forces going to places like Bolivia where the coca plant is a major plant grown there for local consumption. They use it sort of like tobacco and see the process of turning it into cocaine as defiling the plant and its use. But the US comes in and destroys all these plants which is essentially how these poor farmers put food on the table. So we starve these poor farmers to help our own self-interests.

Stopping the drug trade is a little bit more complex when we get down to the local level especially in places like Bolivia where there are not huge drug lords controlling the coca fields for cocaine production.

 

[Spitfire175]

Im not really sure the air force would be the most effective tool in stopping drug trade. There is also the problem of US forces going to places like Bolivia where the coca plant is a major plant grown there for local consumption. They use it sort of like tobacco and see the process of turning it into cocaine as defiling the plant and its use. But the US comes in and destroys all these plants which is essentially how these poor farmers put food on the table. So we starve these poor farmers to help our own self-interests.

Stopping the drug trade is a little bit more complex when we get down to the local level especially in places like Bolivia where there are not huge drug lords controlling the coca fields for cocaine production.

You fell of the map there. What I mean is that the amount of force used to enforce the drug trade in America is tiny compared to what it is in Afghanistan. Also, the shipments of opium are military targets, they can be attacked in full force. Also, in Afganistan the source of the drugs is accesable and the shipments can be destroyed/confescated before they leave.

THe US customs and border guard are, at least in my mind, slightly less effective than the USAAF. Besides, no one said a word about bombing Bolivia or Columbia. Just that it is easier for the armed forces to destroy opium shipments than for the customs to stop cocaine from slipping through checks. Sheesh.

 

[Serge A. Storms]

Im not really sure the air force would be the most effective tool in stopping drug trade. There is also the problem of US forces going to places like Bolivia where the coca plant is a major plant grown there for local consumption. They use it sort of like tobacco and see the process of turning it into cocaine as defiling the plant and its use. But the US comes in and destroys all these plants which is essentially how these poor farmers put food on the table. So we starve these poor farmers to help our own self-interests.

Stopping the drug trade is a little bit more complex when we get down to the local level especially in places like Bolivia where there are not huge drug lords controlling the coca fields for cocaine production.

You fell of the map there. What I mean is that the amount of force used to enforce the drug trade in America is tiny compared to what it is in Afghanistan. Also, the shipments of opium are military targets, they can be attacked in full force. Also, in Afganistan the source of the drugs is accesable and the shipments can be destroyed/confescated before they leave.

THe US customs and border guard are, at least in my mind, slightly less effective than the USAAF. Besides, no one said a word about bombing Bolivia or Columbia. Just that it is easier for the armed forces to destroy opium shipments than for the customs to stop cocaine from slipping through checks. Sheesh.

I believe the point here is that whenever we've tried attacking the "drug trade" in other countries with military force, such as Columbia and Bolivia, the results usually hurt the innocent more than anyone.

 

[Spitfire175]

I believe the point here is that whenever we've tried attacking the "drug trade" in other countries with military force, such as Columbia and Bolivia, the results usually hurt the innocent more than anyone.

Indeed. In Afganistan it could be possible to conto the shipments. Could be.