|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
blade
Joined: 30 Jun 2007
|
 Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 7:46 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| bucheon bum wrote: |
| so blade. what do you propose instead? |
I originally proposed not going in the first place and now I propose getting out and either letting the Afgans themselves sort out their own problems. Staying and doing as mises proposes will only lead to yet more hatred of the US and it's allies elsewhere.
I wonder does anyone here really believe that the British or the Soviets fought the Afghans with one hand tied behind their backs? I don't, which is why I don't think the US will be anymore sucessful this time round either no matter what level of barbarism they stoop too.
Blade. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
So the United States should not have done anything against Afghanistan after 9/11? It should have left the Taliban in power?
Even if you put aside the foreign policy and security issues (or it made sense in those two realms to not do anything), that's just impossible politically speaking. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 10:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blade wrote: |
| I wonder does anyone here really believe that the British or the Soviets fought the Afghans with...? |
I have not looked at the British in Afghanistan but I know something about the Soviets in Afghanistan. And that is this: they were not merely fighting the Afghans, they were also fighting us and an array of others, from Britain to Egypt to Saudi Arabia to Pakistan. Training and intelligence information, funds and international contacts, Stingers. And while I believe Tehran has been meddling in Iraq, southern Lebanon, and Israel/Palestine since day one, I remain uncertain -- I suspect it would be unlikely -- that it is meddling in Afghanistan, creating to the kind of resistance that we did in the 1980s.
In any case, whatever is going on in with the United States and allies in Afghanistan on the ground today, it is not analogous to the Soviets in the 1980s. Rather, it is something new.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 04, 2009 11:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Always interesting to see the historical analogies people wield.
After the second Afghan war, the British supported Abdur Rahman Khan in a quite hands-off manner, who united Afghanistan and gave them the buffer state they needed. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
Location: Established in 1994
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 05, 2009 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| While turning Afghanistan into a middle class democratic paradise may be a bridge too far, it is in our interest to ensure that the radical Taliban not regain control. Any political configuration short of that can be taken as a victory. How Afghanistan conducts its internal affairs is not really my business, although I have opinions favoring the education of women, etc. As long as they are not providing a safe haven for suicide bombers, our attention can be directed elsewhere. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ilsanman
Joined: 15 Aug 2003
Location: Bucheon, Korea
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Google Osama Bin Laden, and see he was born in Saudi Arabia.
| Kuros wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
...the United States has a real reason to be there.
|
What is the reason?? |
Google Sept. 11th, 2001. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Ilsanman wrote: |
Google Osama Bin Laden, and see he was born in Saudi Arabia.
| Kuros wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
...the United States has a real reason to be there.
|
What is the reason?? |
Google Sept. 11th, 2001. |
|
Yes, and he was subsequently exiled from Saudi Arabia. What's your point? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Yu_Bum_suk
Joined: 25 Dec 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Pakistan's heart has never been in the American vision for Afghansitan despite whatever talk or token actions to the contrary. Indeed, if OBL is anywhere he's likely there or in Saudi Arabia. America cannot hope to establish any new friendly regimes in the region when the nations it currently claims as friends are so double-faced (and not without some justification). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Ilsanman wrote: |
Google Osama Bin Laden, and see he was born in Saudi Arabia.
| Kuros wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
...the United States has a real reason to be there.
|
What is the reason?? |
Google Sept. 11th, 2001. |
|
Yes, and he was subsequently exiled from Saudi Arabia. What's your point? |
The United States government ought to have kept her eye on the ball and not dove into a decade long nation building project (let alone a second one).
9/11 was horrible, but it was also a fluke. It did not require such a dramatic change in policy. Tighten up immigration significantly and treat terrorism as a domestic policing issue. Getting bogged down in Afghanistan does not serve the long term national interest. IMO. And while I am no 'hater' of Uncle Sam, Canada should not be involved beyond helping tighten North American security. I really don't understand what some of my Albertan friends are doing over there. It just doesn't make sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Not a fluke. The culmination of a decade of failed attempts and efforts. Not a fluke but a system, Mises. If we withdraw from Afghanistan now, the fundamentalists will almost certainly rebuild that system, follow us on our way out, and move against us again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| And do you actually require tens of thousands of soldiers on the ground to monitor and kill them? I'm against the war, but I'm hardly pro-Afghanistan sovereignty. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
| Ilsanman wrote: |
Google Osama Bin Laden, and see he was born in Saudi Arabia.
| Kuros wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| Kuros wrote: |
...the United States has a real reason to be there.
|
What is the reason?? |
Google Sept. 11th, 2001. |
|
Yes, and he was subsequently exiled from Saudi Arabia. What's your point? |
The United States government ought to have kept her eye on the ball and not dove into a decade long nation building project (let alone a second one).
9/11 was horrible, but it was also a fluke. It did not require such a dramatic change in policy. Tighten up immigration significantly and treat terrorism as a domestic policing issue. Getting bogged down in Afghanistan does not serve the long term national interest. IMO. And while I am no 'hater' of Uncle Sam, Canada should not be involved beyond helping tighten North American security. I really don't understand what some of my Albertan friends are doing over there. It just doesn't make sense. |
Treat terrorism as a domestic policing issue?
No, I don't think that's viable. Not given the proliferation of nuclear weapons and the ease with which they can be acquired and then smuggled into the United States. Assuring that each container brought into the United States is secure would be more costly and less effective than harassing Al Qaeda's training haunts with predators, drones, and spies. Waiting for Al Qaeda to strike on their initiative is more dangerous than keeping them on their toes and disrupting their operations.
Lastly, I think you're forgetting that the 9-11 was the first American assault but the last of many assaults, including the bombing of the U.S.S. Cole, the bombing of the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, and the strike at Khobar Towers in Saudi Arabia.
I think your complaint about nation-building, at least in Afghanistan, has been superceded by changes in American policy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The attacks on the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were terrible, but of marginal importance. The United States can handle a few embassy bombs, or holes blown into Navy ships. Frankly, the US cannot afford any longer these long involvements in foreign nations. I share your concern about loose WMD's and such, but I fail to see how occupying Afghanistan will prevent this. The terrorists will just move on to Somalia, Pakistan and half a dozen other shitty little failed jihadi states. Getting bogged down in Afghanistan because that's where the last attack came from, though probably not the next attack (ahem, UK) makes no sense. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 07, 2009 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| The attacks on the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were terrible, but of marginal importance. The United States can handle a few embassy bombs, or holes blown into Navy ships. Frankly, the US cannot afford any longer these long involvements in foreign nations. I share your concern about loose WMD's and such, but I fail to see how occupying Afghanistan will prevent this. The terrorists will just move on to Somalia, Pakistan and half a dozen other shitty little failed jihadi states. Getting bogged down in Afghanistan because that's where the last attack came from, though probably not the next attack (ahem, UK) makes no sense. |
Mises,
I'm very open to reducing troops and expenses and being realistic in our goals. But that's a different position than believing that the mission is hopeless and the money spent in Afghanistan is what's dooming American power.
You're right that projecting force in Afghanistan alone does not achieve all these objectives. But you were talking about your vision of domestic surveillance, which doesn't strike me as any more compelling than some of our current policies.
Anyway, the current strategy hasn't worked and Obama seems intent on changing it and making sure we don't leave Afghanistan as a haven for terrorists. I can't say I support the implementation yet, because I haven't seen it, but the focus is right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 08, 2009 8:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| The attacks on the embassies in Kenya and Tanzania were terrible, but of marginal importance.The United States can handle a few embassy bombs, or holes blown into Navy ships. Frankly, the US cannot afford any longer these long involvements in foreign nations. I share your concern about loose WMD's and such, but I fail to see how occupying Afghanistan will prevent this. The terrorists will just move on to Somalia, Pakistan and half a dozen other shitty little failed jihadi states. Getting bogged down in Afghanistan because that's where the last attack came from, though probably not the next attack (ahem, UK) makes no sense. |
Each attack that is not responded to though, emboldens others.
And would you like to be the official who has to tell the families of the people who died in such attacks that "Oh don't worry, we can afford it. After all, they're only marginally important."? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
