Reasons Why We Will Be in Afghanistan a While More

towermonkey wrote: I asked in another thread, what does a win look like in Afghanistan? Please define this so we can do it and get our boys home.

The way I see it Towermonkey, an insurgency is trying to fill the power vacuum in Afghanistan. So the insurgency must be quelled. Concurrently, a reasonable facsimile of an elected government has to be standing, even if wobbly, on its own two feet. It needs to be viewed as legitimate by the people of Afghanistan. Some of the most critical infrastructure must be put back in working order so the people can have the basics and start to grow their economy. Finally, big business (be it oil/gas companies, mining companies, manufacturing etc) must begin to invest in the economy of Afghanistan so the country can begin to generate revenue and pull itself up by its own bootstraps.

Even one living, free Al Qaeda wandering the mountains of Afghanistan or Pakistan is one too many. These are some truly evil and diabolical people.

The Taliban (a broadly used term) IS the insurgency in Afghanistan. In order to put down the insurgency, the Coalition fighting there must put down the Taliban by taking out its key leaders and demonstrating that the Taliban does not have the best interest of the region in mind.

Though it was VERY expensive I believe that there was solid strategic purpose behind President Obama visiting India. Clearly I don't sit on the National Security Council, but I have to believe that the Obama visit to India was a message to Pakistan...a mortal enemy of India's. The message reads something like this, "Dear Pakistan, we are tired of playing games with you. We have some real problems with certain Taliban and Al Qaeda enjoying safe haven in your lawless border regions. We have asked you nicely many times to deal with it or let us deal with it...but you continue to sit on the fence. Soon we may become really chummy with your sworn enemy (India), start selling them some amazing weapon systems, and support THEM as they wipe your podunk country off the map. To highlight the gravity of the situation, our President and his wife are partying in India. It's your move."

Finally, I believe that Afghanistan, along with Pakistan and India, is an important strategic toe hold in South-Central Asia. There are vast deposits of oil and gas to the north in the "Istans" and untold mineral deposits in the Hindu Kush. If we can get relative security in the region then we can find ways of getting these landlocked minerals to a sea port. The local economies would benefit greatly as they try to rebuild their shattered countries. The Chinese, though not doing much to help quell the insurgency in Afghanistan, are buying up ALL the mineral rights in the region. As our young men and women bleed, they are mining copper and other minerals in the very same mountains. Our toe hold in South-Central Asia lets both the Russians and the Chinese know we are there and we are going to influence the future of that region. Western big business isn't going to invest a dime in the region until they have a reasonable expectation of getting a return on their investment through reasonable security.

It's about a lot more than killing some poor, wretched tribesmen in the mountain of Afghanistan. The stakes are very high and it's a game we must win if we have any hope of being a real player in the future global economy.

I like the way you read between the lines lionshead. I tend to see the wisdom in a lot of what you say here although I'm not sure that I agree with your conclusion. It is simply not a game to those who have loved ones in harms way over there. I know you didn't mean it that way, but that's been the way I've been looking at this for a while now. We're playing a game of chess and the pawns we're sacrificing are too high a price in my opinion.

towermonkey wrote: I like the way you read between the lines lionshead. I tend to see the wisdom in a lot of what you say here although I'm not sure that I agree with your conclusion. It is simply not a game to those who have loved ones in harms way over there. I know you didn't mean it that way, but that's been the way I've been looking at this for a while now. We're playing a game of chess and the pawns we're sacrificing are too high a price in my opinion.

I appreciate your concern with using the term "game". That was not meant in the festive sense of the word.

So you don't think I'm just blowing hot air here, I just finished a year working in Afghanistan in September. Before that I served a year there in the 2003-2004 timeframe. I won't get into the details of what I did or what I do...but suffice it to say I have had a ring side seat to what's going on there and though I'm not the "expert" some claim to be. I feel I know enough to state an opinion.

I agree totally with your concern about the sacrifice of blood and treasure too. That's why I think we either need to be "all in" or we need to get the hell out RIGHT NOW. We can't sit the fence on this one.

:thumbsup:

lionshead, any idea why the strongest military nation on Earth hasn't been able to carry out the initial objective of our invasion after all these years and billions of dollars put into the effort: find Bin Laden?

Pineguy wrote: lionshead, any idea why the strongest military nation on Earth hasn't been able to carry out the initial objective of our invasion after all these years and billions of dollars put into the effort: find Bin Laden?

That is the million dollar question isn't it? Frankly I believe OBL is the guest of tribesmen in the lawless regions of Pakistan. These men are fiercely independent and fiercely protective of the guest that sleeps under their roof. Though we may be flying armed, unmanned aircraft and conducting special operations in the periphery of this vast mountainous region, OBL is the proverbial needle in the haystack. Sometimes all the technology and military might on earth doesn't amount to much when you are in a low tech fight. Often good ole' HUMINT (human intelligence) is the BEST intelligence and the tribesmen's lips are sealed.

You would have to see the region to truly understand the magnitude of the challenge. Imagine conducting military operations in the most rugged parts of Summit County or the San Juan Mountains...but the mountains are even bigger. Add to that the absolute remoteness of the region (virtually no roads) and you are starting to get the idea.

Until Pakistan decides it REALLY wants to find him too, locating him will be sheer, blind luck. He may get unlucky some day...or someone might sell him out for the right price...but he is protected by some formidable adversaries who are operating on their turf.

Again, just my humble opinion.

What good is having the strongest military on earth when it is breaking our economy and our country trying to sustain it? Pull them out! We would be better off having them HERE protecting OUR OWN BORDERS!!! Now some rightards want to invade Iran??? :bash

Whatever, are you with the group "Liberals without Borders?" Just wondering!

towermonkey wrote: Serious question. I really don't believe this is about oil. I think it is just a case of Pandora's box. We went after al Qaeda, and beat them with numbers. Now the fight is against the Taliban. Is it worth it to fight the Taliban? I feel like we are at the brink of another Vietnam with similar casualties. If we can't even define why the hell we are there as citizens, then is it right to send our sons and daughters to fight and risk life and limb?

I have an answer for you.

We broke it and we have an obligation to stay until that which we broke is either repaired or replaced. We went after al Qaeda, but we had to remove the government there to remove the terrorists. Regardless of whether or not it was a government of which we approved, it was a government. We owe the people of the nation another functional government, again whether it is one we approve of or not, before we withdraw. The last time around we helped them topple the existing government and then didn't stick around to make sure that one replaced it. What we got for that error was a government of a nation that was willing to shelter the type of people who turn airliners filled with civilians into human guided missiles. We are obligated to stay until the government that replaces the one we displaced is capable of the primary role of any government, which is to protect the people of the nation from outside force and fraud. The last thing that we can afford to do is to leave before this is accomplished. We might not agree with the form of the government, the leader of it, or the rules and laws that it places the people under, but it must be capable of protecting its citizens from outside force and fraud.

Gotta say I agree with you PrintSmith.....we may have badly managed the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and I think we did, but the strength of a nation is in it's ability to rectify it's mistakes and learn from them. It's going to be costly.... in money and human lives, but I see no other choice......much as my instinct says to pull out. We made this mess, now we have to fix it. I won't even get into who to blame for the mess.....we, as a nation, own it.