1. Welcome! Please take a few seconds to create your free account to post threads, make some friends, remove a few ads while surfing and much more. ClutchFans has been bringing fans together to talk Houston Sports since 1996. Join us!

Al Qaeda Down to Less than 100 in Afghanistn. We Need 40k more Working Class Troops

Discussion in 'BBS Hangout: Debate & Discussion' started by glynch, Oct 7, 2009.

  1. glynch

    glynch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    18,105
    Likes Received:
    3,612
    I think it is pretty well settled that it is unlikely anybody on this forum or any of their kids are likely to go to Afghanistan, though some might be willing to put yellow ribbons on their cars again. The article discusses the absurdity of the Afghan war.

    Shame on Obama for being a war monger or playing politicas by not having the stones to confront the GOPers who will try to create an issue if he withdraws most troops.

    I really think if he acted like the Commander and Chief and told them "no", they and the electorate at large would have more respect for him.
    ***************
    A War of Absurdity

    by Robert Scheer

    Every once in a while, a statistic just jumps out at you in a way that makes everything else you hear on a subject seem beside the point, if not downright absurd. That was my reaction to the recent statement of the president’s national security adviser, former Marine Gen. James Jones, concerning the size of the terrorist threat from Afghanistan:

    “The al-Qaida presence is very diminished. The maximum estimate is less than 100 operating in the country, no bases, no ability to launch attacks on either us or our allies.”


    Less than 100! And he is basing his conservative estimate on the best intelligence data available to our government. That means that al-Qaida, for all practical purposes, does not exist in Afghanistan—so why are we having a big debate about sending even more troops to fight an enemy that has relocated elsewhere? Because of the blind belief, in the minds of those like John McCain, determined to “win” in Afghanistan, that if we don’t escalate, al-Qaida will inevitably come back.

    Why? It’s not like al-Qaida is an evil weed indigenous to Afghanistan and dependent on its climate and soil for survival. Its members were foreign imports in the first place, recruited by our CIA to fight the Soviets because there were evidently not enough locals to do the job. After all, U.S. officials first forged the alliance between the foreign fighters and the Afghan mujahedeen, who morphed into the Taliban, and we should not be surprised that that tenuous alliance ended. The Taliban and other insurgents are preoccupied with the future of Afghanistan, while the Arab fighters couldn’t care less and have moved on to more hospitable climes.

    There is no indication that any of the contending forces in Afghanistan, including the Taliban, are interested in bringing al-Qaida back. On the contrary, all the available evidence indicates that the Arab fighters are unwelcome and that it is their isolation from their former patrons that has led to their demise.

    As such, while one wishes that the Afghan people would put their houses in order, these are not, even after eight long years of occupation, our houses. Sure, there are all sorts of angry people in Afghanistan, eager to pick fights with each other and most of all any foreigners who seem to be threatening their way of life, but why should that any longer have anything to do with us?

    Even in neighboring Pakistan, the remnants of al-Qaida are barely hanging on. As The Wall Street Journal reported Tuesday, “Hunted by U.S. drones, beset by money problems and finding it tougher to lure young Arabs to the bleak mountains of Pakistan, al Qaeda is seeing its role shrink there and in Afghanistan, according to intelligence reports and Pakistan and U.S. officials. … For Arab youths who are al Qaeda’s primary recruits, ‘it’s not romantic to be cold and hungry and hiding,’ said a senior U.S. official in South Asia.”

    It’s time to declare victory and begin to get out rather than descend deeper into an intractable civil war that we neither comprehend nor in the end will care much about. Terrorists of various stripes will still exist as they have throughout history, but the ones we are most concerned about have proved mighty capable of relocating to less hostile environments, including sunny San Diego and southern Florida, where the 9/11 hijackers had no trouble fitting in.

    There is a continued need for effective international police work to thwart the efforts of a widely dispersed al-Qaida network, but putting resources into that effort does not satisfy the need of the military establishment for a conventional field of battle. That is the significance of Gen. Stanley McChrystal’s leaked report calling for a massive counterinsurgency campaign to make everything right about life in Afghanistan, down to the governance of the most forlorn village. The general’s report aims not at eliminating al-Qaida, which he concedes is barely existent in the country, but rather at creating an Afghan society that is more to his own liking.

    It is a prescription, as the Russians and others before them learned, for war without end. That might satisfy the marketing needs of the defense industry and the career hopes of select military and political aspirants, but it has nothing to do with fighting terrorism. In the end, it would seem that some of our leaders need the Afghanistan battleground more than the terrorists do.
     
  2. London'sBurning

    Joined:
    Dec 5, 2002
    Messages:
    7,205
    Likes Received:
    4,817
    If true, that's great. I hope our troops can come home soon.
     
  3. Air Langhi

    Air Langhi Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2000
    Messages:
    21,948
    Likes Received:
    6,702
    The afgan war was a tremendous waste. There are plenty of loonies in the US and we don't spend trillions trying to bring them down.
     
  4. Mr. Clutch

    Mr. Clutch Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2002
    Messages:
    46,550
    Likes Received:
    6,134
    Actually we do spend plenty of money putting cops on the street.
     
  5. juicystream

    juicystream Member

    Joined:
    Apr 17, 2001
    Messages:
    30,668
    Likes Received:
    7,227
    It isn't that Obama doesn't have the stones to go against the GOP. He said throughout the campaign that he was going to withdraw from Iraq, so they could focus on the war in Afghanistan.
     
  6. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,170
    Likes Received:
    48,346
    I think a lot of people are forgetting what happened in Afghanistan last time we just left things alone.
     
  7. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,241
    Likes Received:
    15,478
    And I think a lot of the escalation supporters can't get beyond their false dichotomy.

    Either we send in an additional 500,000 troops and spend the next 10 years violently pacifying every angry young man, sticking our noses into every 5,000 year old tribal dispute, and nation-building where no real nation has ever existed before, or we are "just leaving things alone" and surrendering the world to al Qaeda.

    There are more than these two options.
     
  8. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,170
    Likes Received:
    48,346
    I agree there are more that two options but I don't think withdrawl is a good one.

    What do you think should be done in Afghanistan? Do you think something like the Biden proposal would work?
     
  9. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    43,875
    Likes Received:
    3,745
    Glynch is feeling himself after posting his old thread immediately after 9-11
     
  10. Nice Rollin

    Nice Rollin Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,858
    Likes Received:
    321
    all this is worthless until America does something in Pakistan....they're stealing billions of dollars from us to "fight terrorism"
     
  11. Air Langhi

    Air Langhi Contributing Member

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2000
    Messages:
    21,948
    Likes Received:
    6,702
    You can't kill an idea. As long you have a bunch of disenfranchised, dissatisfied men you will have terrorism. Its not like you have to go to afg. You would just round up the neighborhood wackos and start shooting up the place.
     
  12. pgabriel

    pgabriel Educated Negro

    Joined:
    Dec 6, 2002
    Messages:
    43,875
    Likes Received:
    3,745
    Rachel Maddow had something on last night saying that we spent $6.6BB to help the military in Pakistan and only $500MM went to the cause. the rest was spillage
     
  13. Nice Rollin

    Nice Rollin Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,858
    Likes Received:
    321
    they're stealing our money. hopefully obama can keep his word during the debates saying that we might have to go into pakistan, if pakistan fails to act...

    they're keeping terrorist groups alive so that they get more money from US. every now and then they'll destroy or capture a group only to make it look like our investment is paying off....Our government has fell for it for too long. We have to eventually invade Pakistan at the Pakistan-Afghanistan border, even if that's not the most popular decision.
     
  14. Nice Rollin

    Nice Rollin Member

    Joined:
    Mar 30, 2006
    Messages:
    11,858
    Likes Received:
    321
    you're right, but what do you do then? nothing?

    it's up to their government to take care of the problem, but with no money and no army, how can they? we cant sit here and let them regroup freely. If osama bin ladin is still alive, he's in afghanistan or pakistan. i truly believe we couldve gotten him and destroyed many of the terrorist camps by now, had we not spent the majority of our time and resources in iraq.
     
  15. glynch

    glynch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    18,105
    Likes Received:
    3,612
    On ABC News a couple of night ago. They had a Afghan on with a cloth ? covering most of his face. He looked pretty tough and gaunt. He said: "The Americans have killed my father and my brother. I will kill them or die fighting". God willing." We can't kill our way out of this one.

    Maybe 500,000 troops. 10 plus years. I really think the best chance is intermarriage with locals for a generation or two, but that might require more troops.

    I might be willing to intermarry with a couple of the young, better looking ones if my wife doesn't object. :)
     
  16. glynch

    glynch Member

    Joined:
    Dec 1, 2000
    Messages:
    18,105
    Likes Received:
    3,612
    I had to laugh at that one.

    Hopefully we can stop the Afghan war before it gets even worse. I still think Obama might be shamed if we have large anti-war demos against him and what is becoming his war.
     
  17. Ottomaton

    Ottomaton Member
    Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2000
    Messages:
    19,241
    Likes Received:
    15,478
    It will probably work about as well as the McChrystal proposal.

    It is clear to me that the people who are talking about nation-building don't really understand the monumental size of what they are proposing. And 8 years in the "project" is still basically at the starting point, if not behind the starting line.

    The problem, in combination with other forces, could essentially break the economy of the USA. It would probably spill over into troops in Pakistan. Do you really think building the construct of a country in Afghanistan is worth all that? On the cost/benefit analysis, a full commitment seems very long on risk and extremely short on tangible benefit. What is it that we really gain? al Qaeda goes somewhere else? What else?

    Furthermore, we managed to force al Qaeda out of other lawless countries like Sudan without invading them. We didn't (and couldn't) even manage nation building in Somalia and the internationalist al Qaeda people aren't running around Mogadishu. Why will nation building be required here? And since we've ejected al Qaeda from other countries before, what is to stop them from draining us in Afghanistan and moving on to their next zone of anarchy in some other Asian or African locale when we've finally expended enough for "victory" and built a real country out of Afghanistan? Do we then go back to Somalia?

    Seriously, the problem in Somalia is like 1/10th the size of the job in Afghanistan. Since we did such a bang-up job there, why do we believe it will be so quick and easy to succeed here?

    The 9/11 bombers are all still Arabs and Egyptians, not Afghans. How many Pashtun shaheeds have committed international terrorist attacks on Americans?
     
    #17 Ottomaton, Oct 7, 2009
    Last edited: Oct 7, 2009
  18. A_3PO

    A_3PO Member

    Joined:
    Apr 29, 2006
    Messages:
    46,975
    Likes Received:
    12,662
    I think Obama is going to choose a middle ground that leaves his options open. It's obvious to me the smoke signals from the White House indicate he will not approve 40,000 more troops.

    IMO, the longer the administration deliberates, the more palatable it will become to deny the request for more troops.
     
  19. rocketsjudoka

    rocketsjudoka Member

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2007
    Messages:
    58,170
    Likes Received:
    48,346
    True but at the same time when you know there is a physical threat you have to deal with it. Also the best thing we can do reduce terrorism is to address those disenfranchised and dissatisfied men. Leave Afghanistan in a state of chaos or bombing them from the air isn't going to help with that.
     
  20. Deji McGever

    Deji McGever יליד טקסני

    Joined:
    Oct 12, 1999
    Messages:
    4,013
    Likes Received:
    952
    Here's to hoping the president doesn't get LBJ'ed.
     

Share This Page