The Student Room Group

TSR Foreign Affairs Hub

Scroll to see replies

Original post by slawaccess23

Original post by slawaccess23
Yes. I have a bad feeling Karzai will just be a sitting target if U.S withdraws, let's face it, he's a puppet of the West and India, who have been trying to ally with Afghanistan for a long time by investing in that country, to the disgust of the Pakistanis.


I think Afghanistan will be better off if each of the different tribes were governed locally, i.e. Pashtuns by a Pashtun leader, Hazaras by a Hazara leader etc. and Karzai (or whoever) was just some figurehead to make sure the country stays stable and they don't attack each other or become hostile to one another over resources, land etc. I agree though, Karzai is just someone who is there to ensure Afghanistan follows the US.
Reply 181
Are there any independently verified reports of the Libyan death toll due to NATO air strikes?
A very interesting article from the British Embassy in Tehran:

http://ukiniran.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=613748582
Reply 183
Original post by Democracy
A very interesting article from the British Embassy in Tehran:

http://ukiniran.fco.gov.uk/en/news/?view=News&id=613748582


Makes me sick and even more angry to see people defending Iran as some champion against "Zionism" in another thread tonight when looking at these figures.
Original post by Aj12
Makes me sick and even more angry to see people defending Iran as some champion against "Zionism" in another thread tonight when looking at these figures.


But what do I know, apparently I'm "not the news" :awesome:

Sickening indeed.
Reply 185
Original post by Democracy
But what do I know, apparently I'm "not the news" :awesome:

Sickening indeed.


I was hoping the poster would see the links as you explained what was going on better than I could. Silly me for assuming he may have a little sense.
Reply 186
Think I post way to much in this thread. I blame twitter tbh

Anyway. Risks of reversing the surge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/20/world/asia/20assess.html?smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto
Obama is going to make the highly-anticipated speech outlining his views vis-a-vis Afghanistan withdrawal tomorrow.

This is going to be interesting since Obama has never really focused on explaining to the Americans what we are doing in Afghanistan, but also because there is some division within his administration now that Osama bin Laden is killed.
Reply 188
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/22/world/middleeast/22iraq.html?_r=1&smid=tw-nytimes&seid=auto

Still using car bombs by the looks of it. Interesting. Pakistan and Afghanistan seem to be leaning more towards armed assault
Reply 189
This is a stratfor article I was emailed. Said I can freely distribute it so hopefully I won't get sued for posting it here. Will spoiler because its very long.

"U.S. and Pakistan: Afghan Strategies is republished with permission of STRATFOR."


Read more: U.S. and Pakistan: Afghan Strategies | STRATFOR

U.S. and Pakistan: Afghan Strategies

Spoiler

Reply 190
Some of the threads in the forum make me want to bash my head with a rock anyways.

France is getting ready to pull out of Afgan as is the UK and US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13887033

Well done Obama despite being told this was the wrong move you went and did it anyway. As if it will make people forget the **** economy

Original post by Aj12
Some of the threads in the forum make me want to bash my head with a rock anyways.

France is getting ready to pull out of Afgan as is the UK and US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13887033

Well done Obama despite being told this was the wrong move you went and did it anyway. As if it will make people forget the **** economy


It's a good short term move for Obama politically but I think it will result in Afghanistan being occupied for longer meaning more cost and potentially more lives lost. It's a very risky move, the likelihood of Afghan forces being able to do the job the ISAF have been doing all this time is pretty low. If the Taliban strengthen or even regain control of some areas then it will be a disastrous move.
Reply 192
Original post by CombineHarvester
It's a good short term move for Obama politically but I think it will result in Afghanistan being occupied for longer meaning more cost and potentially more lives lost. It's a very risky move, the likelihood of Afghan forces being able to do the job the ISAF have been doing all this time is pretty low. If the Taliban strengthen or even regain control of some areas then it will be a disastrous move.


I just wonder how much cash Karzi will be getting year on year to keep Al Qaeda at bay
Reply 193
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13898232

One of the president of Iran's allies has been arrested on corruption charges. I can only speculate there is some kind of power struggle on?
Original post by Aj12
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13898232

One of the president of Iran's allies has been arrested on corruption charges. I can only speculate there is some kind of power struggle on?


Nothing more than an extension of the show the clerical regime has been putting on for the world for the past 32 years.

If the word "corruption" actually meant anything to them, the entirety of the regime would have to be arrested.
Reply 195
Original post by Democracy
Nothing more than an extension of the show the clerical regime has been putting on for the world for the past 32 years.

If the word "corruption" actually meant anything to them, the entirety of the regime would have to be arrested.


How do you hear about whats going on in Iran?
Original post by Aj12
How do you hear about whats going on in Iran?


Through my contacts :gangster:

Seriously, via social networking websites, various blogs, Iran News Digest, Iran Focus, BBC Persian, VOA Persian News Network, Tehran Bureau, Iran Press News, NCRI, Iranian.com, The British Embassy in Tehran, and many other random sources.

The analyses I offer are nearly always my own opinion based on my own knowledge. I don't toe any organisation's line :p:
(edited 12 years ago)
Original post by CombineHarvester
It will have been a huge loss for the US if the Taliban regain control of Afghanistan and there's no way it can be twisted to appear like a victory. I'd imagine the death of OBL will act as a springboard to get troops to withdraw but that didn't even happen in Afghanistan so it had nothing to do with it. The war cost trillions of dollars, thousands of lives and they still failed in their basic objective: get rid of the Taliban and turn Afghanistan into a democratic state. Iraq was a phantom victory, in the sense the danger was non-existent in the first place and the atrocities of the war turned it into an ideological cancer for America - particularly in the Middle East. I'd imagine the Americans will now force Karzai to negotiate with the Taliban and create some sort of deal where the Taliban still retain power, then they'll pretend they have succeeded and bail out of there asap.

The only hope I can see is if Imran Khan runs for office and gets elected in Pakistan. He's hugely popular over there and has highlighted two of Pakistan's biggest problems: corruption and terrorism. He said he wants to stop military aid which they receive from the US and deal with the problems themselves rather than rent their army out for American interests, which is completely undemocratic and has cost Pakistan 37,000 lives since this began after 9/11. The Kashmir dispute needs to be resolved preferably with UN help and strict anti-corruption policies introduced. Pakistan's economy has been doing surprisingly well despite these severe problems, over 7% growth up until the GFC and this year expected to be 5%. China is very much interested in investing in Pakistan as well as other countries in the ME and Asia so if they can resolve these two problems and eventually normalise relations with India things can be improved - in fact they could quite easily become the fastest growing economy in Asia.


Imran in terms of politics will never get elected to the people of Pakistan to the office of PM or President. His party I believe has never gained over something like 1.5% of the vote and although he is extremely popular as a cricketer, his party will never break the PML-N's stronghold on Punjab and the PPP's on Sindh. Pakistan requires a benevolent military dictatorship like under Musharraf instead of a failing authoritarian and immensely corrupt so called democracy controlled by rich landowners and media barons to name a few. The fact that economic growth fell from 7% to 3% when the PPP came to power and inflation rose while corruption skyrocketed speaks for itself. The military is by far the most educated and well equipped institution to run the country. Half the politicians don't even have degrees and some can't even read! What needs to happen is a serious clampdown by the military on corruption by introducing extremely harsh punishments for it, stopping American drone attacks to decrease terrorism within our borders and then offering a huge amnesty to the militants and launching a huge offensive against those who refuse to lay down their arms. The actions taken need to be final and decisive instead of this one step forward, two steps back game we've been playing for such a long time.

Finally the Kashmir conflict can only realistically be solved by making the borders which are in place now permanent. Neither country will surrender Kashmir or back off on the issue so that's the only proper conclusion. If only the Indians would allow a referendum but no, they know all Kashmiris despise them and would vote against them...
Original post by Aj12
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-13898232

One of the president of Iran's allies has been arrested on corruption charges. I can only speculate there is some kind of power struggle on?


Hmm.. maybe Democracy can confirm but the impression I have always gotten from the Iranians I have met is that quite a lot of people- a large minority- are quite liberal in terms of their clothing, praying, alcohol etc. which would obviously put them in a collision course with the Ayatollahs. Although admittedly a couple of Iranians who influence my views had family which fled the revolution back in 1979...
Reply 199
Original post by Inzamam99
Hmm.. maybe Democracy can confirm but the impression I have always gotten from the Iranians I have met is that quite a lot of people- a large minority- are quite liberal in terms of their clothing, praying, alcohol etc. which would obviously put them in a collision course with the Ayatollahs. Although admittedly a couple of Iranians who influence my views had family which fled the revolution back in 1979...


So little comes out of Iran tbh. I pretty much rely on Democracy for a proper picture.

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending