What Should American Goals be in Afghanistan?


Spade
#1
From the CBC News website:
Quote:

U.S. will likely lower its goals for Afghanistan: officials
Last Updated: Monday, January 26, 2009 | 7:59 PM ET
The Associated Press


President Barack Obama is likely to scale back U.S. ambitions for troubled Afghanistan, redefining victory in a war that his closest military and foreign affairs advisers say cannot be won on the battlefield.
Even before a planned doubling of U.S. forces occupying Afghanistan later this year, the new administration is lowering its sights — and lowering expectations. Although there is general agreement that the United States will be in Afghanistan for years to come, the new focus is on how to show even small security gains and development progress quickly.
"That's clearly the message I'm getting is, 'What are the near-term goals going to be?' " Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said when asked about Obama's agenda for Afghanistan.
Mullen and Defence Secretary Robert Gates, who has recently suggested the administration of former president George W. Bush overreached in Afghanistan, are scheduled to testify Tuesday before the U.S. Senate and House armed services committees.
Vice-President Joe Biden said the world hasn't done enough to provide economic, political and military resources to Afghanistan, and the United States and its allies lack a coherent strategy. The result is a country backsliding into Taliban control, Biden said.
He warned of higher U.S. military casualties as the Obama administration adds up to 30,000 troops to the Afghan war, where the Taliban is resurgent and where critics say the Bush administration was slow to respond.
"The bottom line here is we've inherited a real mess," Biden told CBS's program Face the Nation on Sunday. "We're about to go in and try to essentially reclaim territory that's been effectively lost."

If you were an advisor to President Obama, what would you advise the American goals in Afghanistan should be faced with the reality that victory likely cannot be won militarily?
 
gopher
#2
I would tell him to respect Afghani right to self determination.
 
In Between Man
#3
America's goals in Afghanistan should be:

- provide relief for the Canadians

- go after the Taliban and eliminate them, which what they should have been doing instead of winding up in Iraq

- give the Afghan military and police some teeth

- fight poverty, not just by throwing cash but by giving them the tools to sustain themselves

- do anything we reasonably can so that the peace loving Afghan people can have free, strong nation
 
Spade
#4
Quote: Originally Posted by gopherView Post

I would tell him to respect Afghani right to self determination.

That's interesting. And this from today's (January 27) Asia Times about Karzai's new-found sense of self determination.

Quote:

A statement from the Kremlin last Monday said Russia was "ready to provide broad assistance for an independent and democratic country [Afghanistan] that lives in a peaceful atmosphere with its neighbors. Cooperation in the defense sector ... will be effective for establishing peace in the region". It makes sense for Kabul to make military procurements from Russia since the Afghan armed forces use Soviet weaponry. But Washington doesn't want a Russian "presence" in Kabul.
Quite obviously, Moscow and Kabul have challenged the US's secret veto power over Afghanistan's external relations. Last Friday, Russian and Afghan diplomats met in Moscow and "pledged to continue developing Russian-Afghan cooperation in politics, trade and economics as well as in the humanitarian sphere". Significantly, they also "noted the importance of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization [SCO]" that is dominated by Russia and China.

SCO seeks Afghan role
Washington cannot openly censure Karzai from edging close to Russia (and China) since Afghanistan is notionally a sovereign country. Meanwhile, Moscow is intervening in Kabul's assertion of independence. Moscow has stepped up its efforts to hold an international conference on Afghanistan under the aegis of the SCO. The US doesn't want Karzai to legitimize a SCO role in the Afghan problem. Now a flashpoint arises.

Close quote
 
einmensch
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by alleywayzalwayzView Post

America's goals in Afghanistan should be:

- provide relief for the Canadians

- go after the Taliban and eliminate them, which what they should have been doing instead of winding up in Iraq

- give the Afghan military and police some teeth

- fight poverty, not just by throwing cash but by giving them the tools to sustain themselves

- do anything we reasonably can so that the peace loving Afghan people can have free, strong nation

By all means support the Northern Alliance so that they may continue to rape little boys--- give them teeth-

Continue to reward the Northern Alliance by ignoring their poppy cultivation and hand out military medals of merit to the now soldiers and their commanders for the fine job they did murdering 2000 suspected Taliban by locking them in containers until they were dead.
Continue to tell the public how horribly the Taliban treat their women and don't mention that the Northern Alliance treats their women just the same

Pay them for all the dammage, heal the sick and tell them that we are really sorry but we want that GAS PIPELINE.

Would be nice if you knew what you are talking about. Perhaps instead of spending billions demolishing Canadas $20 billion could be given to Afghanistan to build etc rather than make safe the area for the pipeline???
Canadians could be out of Afghanistan but regardless both Liberals and Conservatives agreed to keep our boys there-while the public majority wanted them out

OH I forgot Afghanistan was attacked to bring Osama bin Laden to justice-HMM ?

Don't forget --don't hand over prisoners to the Police with teeth they may start torturing with those teeth-Ja!
 
einmensch
#6
Kind of late Gopher one side has been armed. In Iraq one side has been armed. United Iraq? Tito and Soviet Union died and all the little ethnic areas became independent. When from birth the word is --Serbs are enemies and bad, Croatians are friends--with horror stories that go back 600 years-people are easy to sway--look at some of the nut cases here on this forum --of course you may call me a nut case----- one's opinion

Difficult situation- just keeping Karzai alive is a task
 
Colpy
#7
Prevent the loss of Afghanistan to the islamic loonies by killing Taliban without killing civilians, by building schools, hospitals........by supporting a reasonably tolerant gov't by Afghan standards ........l
 
EagleSmack
#8
Quote: Originally Posted by alleywayzalwayzView Post

America's goals in Afghanistan should be:

- provide relief for the Canadians

What do you have in mind?
 
einmensch
#9
Colpy, the Northern Alliance also called United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, are not loonies? Where's your head? Let's help them plant more poppies. Give them medals for buggering little Taliban boys. You agree with that don't you? Taliban are Pashtun. Ah more ethnic cleansing on your mind? Kill or resettle Pashtuns.
Just a little on your buds Colpy AROUND THE WORLD: Many Afghans haunted by Northern Alliance's past (external - login to view)
 
Colpy
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by einmenschView Post

Colpy, the Northern Alliance also called United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan, are not loonies? Where's your head? Let's help them plant more poppies. Give them medals for buggering little Taliban boys. You agree with that don't you? Taliban are Pashtun. Ah more ethnic cleansing on your mind? Kill or resettle Pashtuns.
Just a little on your buds Colpy AROUND THE WORLD: Many Afghans haunted by Northern Alliance's past (external - login to view)

Unfortunately, this is not a case of black and white......I wish it were......

What it comes down to is I haven't noticed the Northern Alliance throwing acid in little girls' faces for the crime of getting an education.

Which makes them miles ahead of the Taliban.

Much like the Israelis, nasty as they can be at times, are tens of miles ahead of Hamas.
 
Colpy
#11
Einsmench, I confess I read your source after I wrote the above link.

Nasty.

Eight years ago, in the middle of the invasion.

What I said still stands......
 
einmensch
#12
So it still stands for you -I wasn't expecting to change opaque minds

Tajik Women’s Groups Press for Domestic Violence Law (external - login to view)

But the northern alliance -- or the United Front, as it prefers to be called -- has its own history of human rights abuses. According to Human Rights Watch (external - login to view), the factions which comprise the United Front have included "indiscriminate aerial bombardment and shelling, direct attacks on civilians, summary executions, rape, persecution on the basis of religion or ethnicity, the recruitment and use of children as soldiers, and the use of antipersonnel landmines."---------and they missed a few

Give the police teeth you say! Below is how they treat their own. I guess they treat the Pashtuns much better.
Uzbekistan: Crackdown Targets Dissident Muslim Women | Human Rights Watch (external - login to view)

Germany: Uzbek Security Chief Accused of Crimes against Humanity ... (external - login to view)

I know today they are good Why???
 
Tyr
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

From the CBC News website:
Quote:

U.S. will likely lower its goals for Afghanistan: officials
Last Updated: Monday, January 26, 2009 | 7:59 PM ET
The Associated Press


President Barack Obama is likely to scale back U.S. ambitions for troubled Afghanistan, redefining victory in a war that his closest military and foreign affairs advisers say cannot be won on the battlefield.
Even before a planned doubling of U.S. forces occupying Afghanistan later this year, the new administration is lowering its sights — and lowering expectations. Although there is general agreement that the United States will be in Afghanistan for years to come, the new focus is on how to show even small security gains and development progress quickly.
"That's clearly the message I'm getting is, 'What are the near-term goals going to be?' " Adm. Mike Mullen, chairman of the U.S. military's Joint Chiefs of Staff, said when asked about Obama's agenda for Afghanistan.
Mullen and Defence Secretary Robert Gates, who has recently suggested the administration of former president George W. Bush overreached in Afghanistan, are scheduled to testify Tuesday before the U.S. Senate and House armed services committees.
Vice-President Joe Biden said the world hasn't done enough to provide economic, political and military resources to Afghanistan, and the United States and its allies lack a coherent strategy. The result is a country backsliding into Taliban control, Biden said.
He warned of higher U.S. military casualties as the Obama administration adds up to 30,000 troops to the Afghan war, where the Taliban is resurgent and where critics say the Bush administration was slow to respond.
"The bottom line here is we've inherited a real mess," Biden told CBS's program Face the Nation on Sunday. "We're about to go in and try to essentially reclaim territory that's been effectively lost."

If you were an advisor to President Obama, what would you advise the American goals in Afghanistan should be faced with the reality that victory likely cannot be won militarily?

A withdrawal over 6 months to let the Afghani's run Afghanistan. Economic and humanitarian aid by:
  • THE KUWAIT FUND FOR ARAB ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
  • THE SAUDI FUND FOR DEVELOPMENT
  • THE ABU DHABI FUND FOR ARAB ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
  • THE ARAB FUND FOR ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT
  • THE ISLAMIC DEVELOPMENT BANK
  • THE OPEC SPECIAL FUND
Half of the problem is that the US is there for economic gain and could care less about the average Afghani
 
Tyr
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by ColpyView Post

Prevent the loss of Afghanistan to the islamic loonies by killing Taliban without killing civilians, by building schools, hospitals........by supporting a reasonably tolerant gov't by Afghan standards ........l

We couldn't prevent the loss of the USA to the far right fringe loons, what makes you think we could somehow (surgically) remove the "Taliban" and not murder any civilians?

the "Taliban" are Pashtun's as are the a majority of Afghani's (42%). Should we continue to support the minority in Afghanistan
 
Trex
#15
a] Stay there forever. Pump in hundreds of billions of dollars. Be hated as unwanted, foreign invaders.

b] Leave and let the place regress back into corrupt tribal fiefdoms with pockets of fanatical extremists.

Trex
Last edited by Trex; Jan 27th, 2009 at 12:21 PM..Reason: sp
 
EagleSmack
#16
Quote: Originally Posted by TyrView Post

We couldn't prevent the loss of the USA to the far right fringe loons, what makes you think we could somehow (surgically) remove the "Taliban" and not murder any civilians?

the "Taliban" are Pashtun's as are the a majority of Afghani's (42%). Should we continue to support the minority in Afghanistan

Oh boy... the geopolitcal major. The Taliban is made up of Pashtuns but not all Pashtuns are Taliban. The Taliban is also made up of some foreigners. The Taliban was/is a movement.

For one who proclaims brilliance you are very one tracked and blinded by ideals.
 
Tyr
#17
I'm all for the American's getting their butts kicked and going through another Vietnam (they must have short memories), but for Canadian's it's time to leave Afghanistan to the Afghani's

"The foot patrol to Charkuchi, an impoverished rural enclave in western Kandahar province, didn't follow the script. Coalition forces operations in southern Afghanistan rarely do.

The Canadian soldiers, led by Afghan police, were to walk through the mud-walled village, speak to residents, wave at children and inquire about insurgent activity. The goal: to let war-weary Afghan villagers know that Canadian Forces and Afghan police are dug in at a police station a few hundred metres away.
Ten minutes into the patrol, on the outskirts of town, a shot is fired at the troops. The soldiers hit the ground. Crouching in a ditch, Master Corporal Jason Thompson, acting commander of the unit, radios the police station to get a fix on where the shot came from.

It isn't a close call - the gunman is at least 450 metres away - but the patrol is aborted and the soldiers never get a chance to mingle with the Afghans.
Two years after the success of Operation Medusa, a Canadian-led routing of Taliban forces from this region of southern Afghanistan, the insurgents have returned, emboldened and newly confident. No longer organized into armies, they have traded the battlefield for guerrilla warfare. They plant roadside bombs, assassinate police officers and, most important, infiltrate villages, compound by family compound, insinuating themselves into the lives of the locals.


"They are everywhere," Corporal Gord Martin, a Canadian Forces mentor for the Afghan police, mused about the insurgents. "They mimic us. Whatever we do, they follow. We've seen them in trees, watching us. They're 300 metres outside these walls."
As Canadian troops wait for an influx of as many as 60,000 U.S. soldiers this year, senior military officials have quietly adjusted their goals. In western Kandahar province's Zhari district, the birthplace of the Taliban movement, the key word is "holding" territory. The now-modest twin goals are to keep the residents safe and prevent insurgents from using the region, as they do in depopulated northern districts, as a freeway into Kandahar city."
 
EagleSmack
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by TyrView Post

Half of the problem is that the US is there for economic gain and could care less about the average Afghani

How silly. So 9/11 had nothing to do with it? Or are you one of those? I'll find out soon I am sure.

Afghanistan is a wasteland and there is not much there to gain economically.

Oh sure... you have the types that say the oil pipeline... which does not exist...never existed... and was only an idea. But the Left fringers ALWAYS need something to hang their hat on. No facts? Just make them up!
 
EagleSmack
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by TyrView Post

I'm all for the American's getting their butts kicked and going through another Vietnam (they must have short memories), but for Canadian's it's time to leave Afghanistan to the Afghani's

Canada retreating?!?!?!

Then that can be Canada's Vietnam!

I've never seen so many people anxious to lose...wanting to lose.
 
Spade
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

Canada retreating?!?!?!

Then that can be Canada's Vietnam!

I've never seen so many people anxious to lose...wanting to lose.

I've never seen so many people claiming they can win, even right up to the time their helicopters are going "Whuppa-whuppa," heavy with evacuees from the roofs of buildings!
 
Praxius
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

How silly. So 9/11 had nothing to do with it? Or are you one of those? I'll find out soon I am sure.

Afghanistan is a wasteland and there is not much there to gain economically.

Oh sure... you have the types that say the oil pipeline... which does not exist...never existed... and was only an idea. But the Left fringers ALWAYS need something to hang their hat on. No facts? Just make them up!

Afghanistan plans gas pipeline
BBC News | BUSINESS | Afghanistan plans gas pipeline (external - login to view)

Afghan pipeline project will start by mid-2003
Afghan pipeline project will start by mid-2003 - News - Afghanistan.org (external - login to view)

^ It's a little more then just made up.
 
EagleSmack
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

I've never seen so many people claiming they can win, even right up to the time their helicopters are going "Whuppa-whuppa," heavy with evacuees from the roofs of buildings!

FALSE.

By then it was already long over and US Combat troops were pretty much gone.

Poor attempt to spin and it doesn't change the fact that you want Canada to run away and lose.
 
EagleSmack
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by PraxiusView Post

Afghanistan plans gas pipeline
BBC News | BUSINESS | Afghanistan plans gas pipeline (external - login to view)

Afghan pipeline project will start by mid-2003
Afghan pipeline project will start by mid-2003 - News - Afghanistan.org (external - login to view)

^ It's a little more then just made up.

Have you read your own articles?

The year is 2009... nothing has been done.
 
Spade
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

FALSE.

By then it was already long over and US Combat troops were pretty much gone.

Poor attempt to spin and it doesn't change the fact that you want Canada to run away and lose.

Yep, war is just like an investment account; when things are swirling in the bowl, always invest more in the same stocks! Average down, average down!

But, the tough-talking sideline soldiers always average down with someone else's lives. FaaawwwK!
 
EagleSmack
#25
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Yep, war is just like an investment account; when things are swirling in the bowl, always invest more in the same stocks! Average down, average down!

But, the tough-talking sideline soldiers always average down with someone else's lives. FaaawwwK!

Yawn. Common tactic when one finds themselves back on their heels in these debates.
 
Praxius
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

Have you read your own articles?

The year is 2009... nothing has been done.

Oh I know nothing has been done yet.... because the place is still a hell hole and there isn't enough security to build and maintain the pipeline..... go figure.

But that doesn't mean the ideas, plans and objectives were all simply made up for argument's sake...... just like Saddam's WMDs. Just because they never existed doesn't mean they wern't part of the main reason for invasion.
 
EagleSmack
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by PraxiusView Post

Oh I know nothing has been done yet.... because the place is still a hell hole and there isn't enough security to build and maintain the pipeline..... go figure.

But that doesn't mean the ideas, plans and objectives were all simply made up for argument's sake...... just like Saddam's WMDs. Just because they never existed doesn't mean they wern't part of the main reason for invasion.

My point was that the War in Afghanistan had nothing to do with bolstering the US economy. Afghanistan is a wasteland and the "idea" of a pipeline being an excuse to go to war is crazy. Even if there is a pipeline someday the idea that the US will benefit from it over it's expenditures in the war is not sound at all.
 
Praxius
#28
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

My point was that the War in Afghanistan had nothing to do with bolstering the US economy. Afghanistan is a wasteland and the "idea" of a pipeline being an excuse to go to war is crazy. Even if there is a pipeline someday the idea that the US will benefit from it over it's expenditures in the war is not sound at all.

I know it's not sound..... it's not sound one bit..... which follows right along with the rest of Bush's decisions
 
Tyr
#29
Quote: Originally Posted by SpadeView Post

Yep, war is just like an investment account; when things are swirling in the bowl, always invest more in the same stocks! Average down, average down!

But, the tough-talking sideline soldiers always average down with someone else's lives. FaaawwwK!

Canada had nothing to lose (except maybe 100+ lives) as we should have never been there in the first place. So Spade you're right. Once the objective is uncovered as ludicrous, pour more troops and money in to try and make it seem less ludicrous. I can't believe our gov't believes the populace is that naive
 
Tyr
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by EagleSmackView Post

Canada retreating?!?!?!

Then that can be Canada's Vietnam!

I've never seen so many people anxious to lose...wanting to lose.

There's nothing to lose. It is the American's that are so paranoid about losing. They're stuck in that "shame of Vietnam" mentality and will continue to pour in more and more troops until (once again) the streets of Detroit, LA and New York will be inflamed with protesters

Duh!!! Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.... That should be the motto egraved at West Point and Annapolis It will take another 60,000+ KIA or MIA before the USA turns tail and "beats feet" for the bushes...tail tucked firmly between their legs?
 

Similar Threads

13
Poor camera angles for goals in NHL
by dumpthemonarchy | Jan 19th, 2009
7
Bad NHL hockey camera angles for goals
by dumpthemonarchy | Jul 19th, 2008
no new posts