Afghanistan war ending

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Hard-Driver, May 22, 2012.

  1. Hard-Driver

    Hard-Driver Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    8,546
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    So Obama leads NATO to agree upon a plan to exit the Afghanistan war. A HUGE accomplishment to extract this country from a quagmire of epic proportions created by 7 years of failed policies...
    http://www.cnn.com/2012/05/21/us/nato-summit/index.html

    The ability to end the Afghanistan war when there is nothing to accomplish there except to lose more american soldiers lives and waste more american taxpayer money is a significant achievement. Add this to the success of the plan supported by Obama to end the Iraq war, over the wishes of President Bush and Obama has extracted or help extract this country from two FUBARs created by stupendous incompetence.

    And what do we have on the fist page of current events of politicalforum...... something like 5 threads about Zimmerman from an incident that took place months ago and not a single thread about the plan to end a failed war policy from yesterday. IMO, that is a pathetic example of shallowness.. Who cares if we are going to stop sending our troops to die in a country for no clear objective or purpose, we need to debate if Zimmermans nose was bloody. Scoring political points is more important that actual policy. What a great example of what is wrong with this country.
     
  2. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In my opinion, the manner in which the United States will be leaving Afghanistan is completely wrong. I have read the Strategic Partnership Agreement, and the holes in the policies are quite apparent. There is no concrete amount of troops that will remain in Afghanistan post-2014 in an advisory and counter-terrorism capacity. For all we know, the drawdown could leave a serious dent in Afghanistan-United States/NATO relations.

    What I applaud the President on is including a provision to allow the Afghan government to negotiate with the Taliban on reconciliation. This is crucial for accelerating Afghan peace. As a biased party, the United States should remain at arm's length on such matters. A neutral party such as Qatar should continue to use its nation as a mediation site for negotiations. While talks fell through last year, the two sides may be able to agree on more issues now that the United States is decreasing its presence.

    Overall, the United States should be taking a more diplomatic route towards Afghanistan. Once our military forces leave, the country's violence will increase, and the Taliban counter-insurgency will reemerge. The best option is to provide a strong base of governmental reform and reconciliation from afar.
     
  3. Hard-Driver

    Hard-Driver Well-Known Member Past Donor

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2004
    Messages:
    8,546
    Likes Received:
    146
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I would question what you mean by a "dent in Afghanistan-United States/NATO relations"? We are severely disliked by the people of Afghanistan. I am unsure how withdrawl would harm such a damaged relationship.. What, do you think Afghanistan will refuse to take our aid?

    There is virtually no strategic interest in Afghanistan for the United States except to prevent it from being used as a safe haven for terrorists. That can be accomplished without our troops on the ground in the country.
     
  4. thediplomat2.0

    thediplomat2.0 Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 13, 2011
    Messages:
    9,305
    Likes Received:
    138
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The damage is not necessarily done upon the Afghan citizens anymore. That ship is beyond repair. The damage is now being done upon the Afghan government. In recent months, incidents during the beginning of the drawdown process have led to greater ideological divide between Hamid Karzai and President Obama on matters such as troop presence for counter-terrorism purposes. The aid we provide to Afghanistan is actually what persuaded Karzai to take the deal.

    I agree that according to the President, our interest in Afghanistan is to prevent the manifestation of terrorist safe havens. From my perspective, as I stated in my previous post,and as you stated, this can be accomplished without troops on the ground. This is one reason why I would have withdrawn all troops regardless of role by 2014 rather than allow some to remain post-2014 in a counter-terrorism role. My approach to dealing with the Taliban would be to encourage direct negotiations between the Karzai government and the Taliban, overseen by a neutral party. In doing so, if an agreement was reached, government reform could ensue, Afghanistan would be at greater peace, and the days of Afghanistan being a safe haven for terrorists would be drastically mitigated.
     
  5. A Common Anomaly

    A Common Anomaly New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 11, 2012
    Messages:
    773
    Likes Received:
    35
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I am happy that we are finally pulling out, but giving Obama accolades for taking 5 years to withdraw is a practice in exaggeration.
     
  6. Bluespade

    Bluespade Banned

    Joined:
    Jun 7, 2010
    Messages:
    15,669
    Likes Received:
    196
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ten years too late, but it's better than staying committed too that (*)(*)(*)(*) hole.
     

Share This Page