Afghan War

[BigRedBuster]

OK...President Obama has set out a plan to bring back basically all troops out of Afghanistan and end the American involvement in the war. I support those efforts and am tired of having our military there spending billions of dollars and American lives trying to help that country. I supported the war going in and still to this day believe we had every right to do so being that the Taliban there was harboring the people who attacked us on 9/11. I have grown to believe we simply stayed there too long trying to "Fix" a country that couldn't be "fixed".

 

This is a very good article that quite frankly...makes me sad. I have always felt we were there for the right reasons. We first went in to defeat Alqaeda and kill Bin Laden and at the same time, help the Afghanistan government and people defeat the Taliban who are a horrible group of people.

 

As this article states, I feel this war is totally different than the Iraq War.

 

LINK

 

I support bringing our troops home but at the same time, I am sad for the Afghan people because it is clear what is going to happen in their country.

[wildman]

OK...President Obama has set out a plan to bring back basically all troops out of Afghanistan and end the American involvement in the war. I support those efforts and am tired of having our military there spending billions of dollars and American lives trying to help that country. I supported the war going in and still to this day believe we had every right to do so being that the Taliban there was harboring the people who attacked us on 9/11. I have grown to believe we simply stayed there too long trying to "Fix" a country that couldn't be "fixed".

 

This is a very good article that quite frankly...makes me sad. I have always felt we were there for the right reasons. We first went in to defeat Alqaeda and kill Bin Laden and at the same time, help the Afghanistan government and people defeat the Taliban who are a horrible group of people.

 

As this article states, I feel this war is totally different than the Iraq War.

 

LINK

 

I support bringing our troops home but at the same time, I am sad for the Afghan people because it is clear what is going to happen in their country.

 

I agree we've been there to long now and need to bring our troops home. But out of curiosity, what did you mean by totally different than the Iraq War?

[BigRedBuster]

For me personally, one country had people in it that attacked us...the other one didn't. At least that's a good start.

 

As of today, and as the article states, the majority of Afghan people want us there helping them. I don't think that is the case with Iraq.

[Excel]

For me personally, one country had people in it that attacked us...the other one didn't. At least that's a good start.

 

As of today, and as the article states, the majority of Afghan people want us there helping them. I don't think that is the case with Iraq.

 

"Majority of Afghan people?" meh. That's tricky, so so tricky. Josh Shahryar, an American based journalist, is claiming this based on election results. An election that one in six Afghans showed up for and his interpretation of those results. Abdullah Abdullah, a Tajik with stronger ties to the West and a history with the Northern Alliance recieved the most votes (45%) in the first round so I guess Shahryar is taking that as popular support for "us there helping them."

 

So Abdullah won 45% of the votes in an election in which roughly 16% of Afghans voted...and we're even going out on a limb assuming that a vote for Abdullah = support for continued US presence but making that assumption and running some crappy math we get just under 8% of Afghans supporting "us there helping them".

 

The things is, the south eastern provinces where the Taliban has its base, Kandahar, Helmand and the like - had very very low turnout. 5% of Kandahar. 3% of Helmand, 3% of Zabul, 3% of Urozgan.

 

Compare those numbers to the north with Balkh province (Mazar-e-Sharif) and Takhar province at around 30% and Kondoz at 59% turnout.

 

So really, what Shahryar means to say is that some literate and cosmopolitan Afghans, especially non-Pashtuns and those from northern Afghanistan seem to support a candidate who may be receptive to a deal that may provide for a limited American presence in the future. Well no sh#t Sherlock. Those people have always liked us...ok...liked us more than their southern Pashtun neighbors. They were never the "bad guys".

 

The election was by no means a strong endorsement of OEF-as usual.

[wildman]

For me personally, one country had people in it that attacked us...the other one didn't. At least that's a good start.

 

As of today, and as the article states, the majority of Afghan people want us there helping them. I don't think that is the case with Iraq.

 

The reason I asked was I served 2 tours in Iraq. I can't say it was the same everywhere. But my first trip was September 03 - July 04 with a engineer unit in Baghdad. My unit was helping rebuild the city, so I get to see and experience a lot of the city and the locals. For the most part they treated us well. Some treated us like rock stars always chanting and cheering when we come by. Would tell us of unusual cars or people in the area that they didn't know. After checking them out, most were false leads others we got intel.

 

My second trip I was with a EOD unit located mainly in Mosul from September 05 - February 06. There we obviously were called out to take care of ied's and help keep people safe. I wasn't able to get out and see the area or meet the locals as much. So I don't know if their opinions changed or if it was just the Baghdad area I was in. But I'd say if anything at one time, earlier in the war we were welcomed and wanted.

[wildman]

 

For me personally, one country had people in it that attacked us...the other one didn't. At least that's a good start.

 

As of today, and as the article states, the majority of Afghan people want us there helping them. I don't think that is the case with Iraq.

 

"Majority of Afghan people?" meh. That's tricky, so so tricky. Josh Shahryar, an American based journalist, is claiming this based on election results. An election that one in six Afghans showed up for and his interpretation of those results. Abdullah Abdullah, a Tajik with stronger ties to the West and a history with the Northern Alliance recieved the most votes (45%) in the first round so I guess Shahryar is taking that as popular support for "us there helping them."

 

So Abdullah won 45% of the votes in an election in which roughly 16% of Afghans voted...and we're even going out on a limb assuming that a vote for Abdullah = support for continued US presence but making that assumption and running some crappy math we get just under 8% of Afghans supporting "us there helping them".

 

The things is, the south eastern provinces where the Taliban has its base, Kandahar, Helmand and the like - had very very low turnout. 5% of Kandahar. 3% of Helmand, 3% of Zabul, 3% of Urozgan.

 

Compare those numbers to the north with Balkh province (Mazar-e-Sharif) and Takhar province at around 30% and Kondoz at 59% turnout.

 

So really, what Shahryar means to say is that some literate and cosmopolitan Afghans, especially non-Pashtuns and those from northern Afghanistan seem to support a candidate who may be receptive to a deal that may provide for a limited American presence in the future. Well no sh#t Sherlock. Those people have always liked us...ok...liked us more than their southern Pashtun neighbors. They were never the "bad guys".

 

The election was by no means a strong endorsement of OEF-as usual.

 

 

Those are all good points. But the places that have a strong taliban presence. Probably didn't vote because of the taliban presence. So unless we go in and get rid of the taliban presence. No way to really say if they are in support of us or not. But the current evidence shows they either don't support us or are afraid to.

[knapplc]

The author of this article is the same guy who wrote the opinion piece saying the Taliban has "won" this war because America is drawing down troops.

 

In this article he's blaming "the Liberals" for some phantom thing that is "bad."

 

Who are these "liberals?" Who is he upset with? Quoting another journalist (Josh Shahryar) who similarly fails to name names doesn't mean anything.

 

 

Clearly Messrs. Shahryar & Fisher want the U.S. military to stay in Afghanistan. But why? For how long? At what cost? What should be accomplished before they go? Neither say, and that's the reason this whole thing is a straw man.

[zoogs]

I wonder how differently Afghanistan might have turned out had we not gone into Iraq less than two years later.

 

There's something really unsatisfying about withdrawing a country and leaving it in a volatile state, which seems how it's characterized mainly, after over a decade of fighting. Kind of an 'all that for what.' But I don't know.

[Excel]

 

 

For me personally, one country had people in it that attacked us...the other one didn't. At least that's a good start.

 

As of today, and as the article states, the majority of Afghan people want us there helping them. I don't think that is the case with Iraq.

 

"Majority of Afghan people?" meh. That's tricky, so so tricky. Josh Shahryar, an American based journalist, is claiming this based on election results. An election that one in six Afghans showed up for and his interpretation of those results. Abdullah Abdullah, a Tajik with stronger ties to the West and a history with the Northern Alliance recieved the most votes (45%) in the first round so I guess Shahryar is taking that as popular support for "us there helping them."

 

So Abdullah won 45% of the votes in an election in which roughly 16% of Afghans voted...and we're even going out on a limb assuming that a vote for Abdullah = support for continued US presence but making that assumption and running some crappy math we get just under 8% of Afghans supporting "us there helping them".

 

The things is, the south eastern provinces where the Taliban has its base, Kandahar, Helmand and the like - had very very low turnout. 5% of Kandahar. 3% of Helmand, 3% of Zabul, 3% of Urozgan.

 

Compare those numbers to the north with Balkh province (Mazar-e-Sharif) and Takhar province at around 30% and Kondoz at 59% turnout.

 

So really, what Shahryar means to say is that some literate and cosmopolitan Afghans, especially non-Pashtuns and those from northern Afghanistan seem to support a candidate who may be receptive to a deal that may provide for a limited American presence in the future. Well no sh#t Sherlock. Those people have always liked us...ok...liked us more than their southern Pashtun neighbors. They were never the "bad guys".

 

The election was by no means a strong endorsement of OEF-as usual.

 

 

Those are all good points. But the places that have a strong taliban presence. Probably didn't vote because of the taliban presence. So unless we go in and get rid of the taliban presence. No way to really say if they are in support of us or not. But the current evidence shows they either don't support us or are afraid to.

 

 

They probably didn't vote for the same reason they don't join the ANA/ANP and for the same reason many of them support the Taliban and similar groups. They're Pashtuns who see the Kabul government as a bunch of religiously lost and morally/economically corrupt Northern non-Pashtuns propped up by an army of Westerners. They don't view the elections or the government as legitimate. Couple that with illiteracy and their unfamiliarity with the democractic process and you get low turnout.

 

I think that the Taliban is as much a Pashtun-nationalist group as it is a religious "insurgent" group and that the chance of a bunch of Americans and Brits rolling into Kandahar and "ridding" the local Pashtuns of the Taliban is right around 0% and an Army of Tajiks doing it is only slightly better.

[knapplc]

I think that the Taliban is as much a Pashtun-nationalist group as it is a religious "insurgent" group and that the chance of a bunch of Americans and Brits rolling into Kandahar and "ridding" the local Pashtuns of the Taliban is right around 0% and an Army of Tajiks doing it is only slightly better.

[BigRedBuster]

The author of this article is the same guy who wrote the opinion piece saying the Taliban has "won" this war because America is drawing down troops.

 

In this article he's blaming "the Liberals" for some phantom thing that is "bad."

 

Who are these "liberals?" Who is he upset with? Quoting another journalist (Josh Shahryar) who similarly fails to name names doesn't mean anything.

 

 

Clearly Messrs. Shahryar & Fisher want the U.S. military to stay in Afghanistan. But why? For how long? At what cost? What should be accomplished before they go? Neither say, and that's the reason this whole thing is a straw man.

yeah...I wasn't a fan of the "Talaban has won" article. My view is we accomplished somethings we went in to do (kill Bin Laden, cripple Alqaeda) and didn't accomplish one thing (get rid of the Taliban).

 

So, I have a problem when someone now claiming the Afghan war was a total loss and a total waste of our resources.

[BigRedBuster]

 

For me personally, one country had people in it that attacked us...the other one didn't. At least that's a good start.

 

As of today, and as the article states, the majority of Afghan people want us there helping them. I don't think that is the case with Iraq.

 

The reason I asked was I served 2 tours in Iraq. I can't say it was the same everywhere. But my first trip was September 03 - July 04 with a engineer unit in Baghdad. My unit was helping rebuild the city, so I get to see and experience a lot of the city and the locals. For the most part they treated us well. Some treated us like rock stars always chanting and cheering when we come by. Would tell us of unusual cars or people in the area that they didn't know. After checking them out, most were false leads others we got intel.

 

My second trip I was with a EOD unit located mainly in Mosul from September 05 - February 06. There we obviously were called out to take care of ied's and help keep people safe. I wasn't able to get out and see the area or meet the locals as much. So I don't know if their opinions changed or if it was just the Baghdad area I was in. But I'd say if anything at one time, earlier in the war we were welcomed and wanted.

 

Very interesting perspective. I supported the Iraq war also but feel differently about it now than the Afghan war. To me, I have no regrets for going in and getting rid of Saddam. The guy was a piece of crap that tortured and killed his own people for his own power and his two sons were even worse. I feel sorry for any of the innocent locals who were hurt or killed in the process. I don't like it that we injured Americans and lost American lives doing it.

 

It would be interesting to see (impossible) how Iraq would have been different without outside influences like Iran.

[Excel]

I supported the Iraq war

 

 

It would be interesting to see how Iraq would have been different without outside influences like Iran.

 

 

[BigRedBuster]

Here is an article on Obama's speech today.

 

LINK

 

I have been saying for a long time I am ready to bring troops home and stop being involved all over the world. The President is taking my stance and now I support this move.

However, there is a part of me that believes at some point down the road, something bad is going to happen because of this shift in policy that we won't like.

[BigRedBuster]

 

I supported the Iraq war

 

 

It would be interesting to see how Iraq would have been different without outside influences like Iran.

 

 

 

Is there a reason you chopped up my post to leave out what I said?