Results are out! Find what you need...fast. Get quick advice or join the chat
Hey there Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Why the HELL is America still in Afghan?

Announcements Posted on
Live webchat: Student Finance explained - on TSR from 2 - 3pm 17-09-2014
Got a question about Student Finance? Ask the experts this week on TSR! 14-09-2014
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    "Let's declare ourselves winners....and get the hell out." It was true in 1985, when Bill Mauldin said it of the Red Army...and it's true today for Americans.

    The place is a cesspool, and that's the way the majority of them seem to want it.

    I feel the gravest sympathy for the women we would be condemning to slavery, but we simply cannot civilize that sewer of a country.

    This one, we lose.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
    And yet didnt have a clue about the mughal invasions of afganistan or the ottoman attrocites in europe and north africa. Nor did you realise that IQ is not of measure of level of education....
    that is funny

    :hmmmm:
    Funny how you can attempt to misquote me and put me out of context. ^^

    It's to see how you twist my words - just like the uneducated right wing extremist you are ^^

    Oddly I was comparing the scale of the atrocities yet for some reason you think. Let's put it in numbers how many atrocities do I quote. How many did you. Funny you didn't even know it was called the Armenian genocide. But again HOW MANY DID I quote. You're all talk but lack basic numerate abilities. i give up on you. I won't be answering again - sadly I'll continue to humiliate you ^^

    So please tell me of your great education, what you studied, you're IQ, the exams you did early and the qualifications you currently hold. I mean there is no universal accepted measure of education so obviously you're just show how intelligent you are. Some how there is a universal magical scale of education that is intertwined in nature that I'm missing. I'm sorry that I know a bit too much for you - but ah wells I can't be asked to continue this with a person who can barely count x
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
    I dont see what point you are grasping at, But i ll take a stab its something about saudi foreign policy . They are strategic ally of the US, but apart from a mutual emnity with iran, they arnt 'best buddies' The USA gets oil and sells tanks and planes to saudi, thats the extent of the relatuionship. The US doesnt support saudis 'destroy israel' stance nor its tacit support for a sunni taleban/al-quaeda regeime in afganistan.
    Contradiction. Don't you just see now how dodgy this war is?

    The US follows its own agenda as youd expect.
    Indeed.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    Most of the comments in this thread are very ill-informed, and a few just plain stupid. Contrary to popular belief, ISAF forces are there do to good, not to just shoot and bomb civilians.

    Oh, and OP, you're a ****.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by harmony_01)
    Contradiction. Don't you just see now how dodgy this war is?



    .
    read the bits of my post between what you highlighted :rolleyes:
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
    read the bits of my post between what you highlighted :rolleyes:
    You're right, I'm the one that keeps going around in circles.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by harmony_01)
    You're right, I'm the one that keeps going around in circles.
    Dont worry, it often happens when you discover you never really had a point in the first place
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by prog2djent)
    Russia

    Iran

    Heroin Trafficking

    "Stability"

    And helping their indfrastructure as a side show.

    Threat of terrorist attacks.
    Iran supported the 2001 invasion, they actually fought alongside the USA - particularly in the Battle for Herat. The war was given the approval and support of everyone in Iran from the supreme leader, to the then president Khatami and to the revolutionary guard. One reason why the USA will not attack Iran is because Iran has the capabilities to cause serious numbers of deaths for ISAF forces in Afghanistan. Russia also supported it, and they still do to this day, they have recently opened up a number of key Russian bases to NATO forces - mainly because of the fact huge numbers of Chechens were trained in Afghanistan.
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
    Yeh right lol, source of this mystery 'poll'?
    Gallup.

    http://www.globalpolicy.org/componen...154/26553.html

    Thats why there has been nearly 35 different countries with operations in afganistan
    Sorry, I forgot that everything that governments do is exactly what their populations want them to do, isn't it?:rolleyes:

    In the sense that they actualy did harbour him :dunce: and then told the US f off wehn they asked them to give him up.
    The Taliban had offered to put Bin Laden on trial and had requested evidence for the trial from the US in early October. The US rejected their offers and invaded a few days later.

    Hence the US went over there with an armed force and got him. Makes perfect sense when you think about it.
    Got him in Pakistan, that is. Where most NATO military commanders and government officials had thought he was for years before they finally went after him there. Finding OBL was way down on their priority list.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MaceyThe)
    Yes, because it's just American troops in Afghan:
    Attachment 140666

    And that's not a complete list by any means!
    Clearly, the leaders of all these countries are idiot morons liars, and a bunch of TSR users can see through their great deception and know more about what should be done with Afghanistan.




    Well what about the Afghan people who don't want the Taliban dominating their lives and think the country is heading in the right direction thanks to NATO's efforts?
    http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_60536.htm
    I know it's a **** survey, and was the first one that came up on google, but in my experience, many normal Afghans are very grateful for the work we do out there - thousands of our troops have been badly mutilated trying to help THEIR country! Literally fighting to protect a democracy against a group of armed extremists.


    When the US, Nato, and loads of countries originally went in to Afghanistan, support here, amongst the British people was high?

    We can't just pull out and go back in on a whim depending on how popular the war is on a particular day, we have comittments to train the Afghan forces, as best as possible, so that they don't end up literally swinging from the gate posts.

    Oh gawd.. I apologise for waking you up, but please do switch on your brain. You can't provide a source which is biased to prove your point to be objectively true..

    additionally: leaders CAN err. They did with the Taliban. They did with Aghanistan as satellite state. They did in the case of Hitler and the appeasement policy (awww.. throd onto your national pride there?), they did when it came to the division of north and south Korea, they did when it came to nuclear power plants. (Germany got rid of them. Still got energy here, mate.) Yes, man, leaders err. They are human, not some almighty fictional Gods!

    Plus: you are contradicting yourself. First you try to prove your point by mentioning the support amongst the British public, then you state that it's not important at all.. :bird:

    And I have spoken to a guy from Afghanistan! He told me how he had lost most of his family due to US troops, lost his university education (he had intended to become a director), and that troops turned a blind eye to drug dealing.... he had fled from his home country and had worked as a flyer distributor around 2007/2008. I knew him because he was my co-worker.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Gallup.

    http://www.globalpolicy.org/componen...154/26553.html



    Sorry, I forgot that everything that governments do is exactly what their populations want them to do, isn't it?:rolleyes:



    The Taliban had offered to put Bin Laden on trial and had requested evidence for the trial from the US in early October. The US rejected their offers and invaded a few days later.



    Got him in Pakistan, that is. Where most NATO military commanders and government officials had thought he was for years before they finally went after him there. Finding OBL was way down on their priority list.


    The poll you just provided states the countries that didnt support invasion supoorted extradtion not a taleban kangaroo court - we have just clarified the taleban turned down the request for extradtion.

    Bin laden was in afgainstan- he fled into pakistan at the USs pursuit, who were allied with th taleban and al queda, and who know doubt got a cut of bin ladens money.


    what else you got?
    • 8 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Indo-Chinese Food)
    The poll you just provided states the countries that didnt support invasion
    Err...no. In fact the first two countries listed as having majorities opposing the war were the UK and France, both of whom participated in the invasion.

    supoorted extradtion not a taleban kangaroo court - we have just clarified the taleban turned down the request for extradtion.
    The US didn't request extradition, they simply requested the Taliban 'hand him over'. That's not extradition, extradition requires a legal court process.

    [QUOTE]he fled into pakistan at the USs pursuit, who were allied with th taleban and al queda[QUOTE]

    Seriously? Pakistan have been chums of Washington for years. That's why the Americans don't care about Pakistan having nuclear weapons but kick up a huge fuss about the possibility of Iran having them.
    • 2 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    Err...no. In fact the first two countries listed as having majorities opposing the war were the UK and France, both of whom participated in the invasion. .
    Was that got to do with anything lol, we just established about 35 countries sent forces to afganistan (inlcuding support of iran btw, re to your final point below)

    (Original post by anarchism101)

    The US didn't request extradition, they simply requested the Taliban 'hand him over'. That's not extradition, extradition requires a legal court process. .
    A. Taleban doesnt have a recognised legal process,
    B.nor is signed up to the geneva convention,
    C. nor operates any legal extraditon treaty with the US.
    So all the US can do is ask them to hand him over. Which they they refused. What else you got?


    (Original post by anarchism101)


    Seriously? Pakistan have been chums of Washington for years. That's why the Americans don't care about Pakistan having nuclear weapons but kick up a huge fuss about the possibility of Iran having them.
    Chums? You mean the nuclear tests pakistan carried out to which started US sanctions against paksitan and cancellation of military supply orders? You need to proof read your sources before spouting drivel.
    • 3 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by criminal)
    America has no right to be in Afghanistan. Why are they even there? They are escalating the situation.

    GET THE F OUT OF AFGHANISTAN. MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS YOU IDIOTS.

    Discuss.
    We might be able to get out but to get out we're going to need to replace Obama in 2012 to do it.

    When Obama was running for president, he was shouting until he was blue in the face that the real fight was in Afghanistan and Iraq was a big mistake. So now he can't really change course without looking very foolish for all kinds of political reasons. Perhaps Romney, his likely opponent, will be able to figure out some kind of exit strategy much like Nixon did with vietnam
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Vikitora)
    .
    What sort of impartial source are you after??

    And jolly well done you, I have also spoken to Afghans - in Afghanistan, and encountered vast differences in opinion.
    • 7 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by anarchism101)
    (1)You recall wrong. Polls in late September found that majorities of those polled opposed war in most countries. The only countries where majorities supported war were the USA, Israel and India.



    (2)The US made no attempt to go after OBL or Al Qaeda until months after the initial invasion.

    In what sense had the Taliban 'harboured' him? The USA didn't even request his extradition before invading. For all the propaganda, the relationship between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda wasn't that close before the invasion.



    (3)Well that's a given isn't it? It was obviously good intentions, because NATO were doing it, the state and media treat that as if it's the only possibility. NATO and the US claim to have good intentions everywhere, as do all invaders and empires.
    1. I'm drunk so I'll take your word for it.

    2. As above, but the US did demand that the Taliban give up Osama bin Laden. Not exactly formal extradition proceedings but the US didn't have an extradition agreement with Afghanistan. The Taliban tried to negotiate and ask that he be tried in a neutral country but this wasn't acceptable to the US so they declared war.

    3. This has the potential to get complicated. All "empires" seek to maintain their security and influence. It's nothing less than common sense. The objective was not to punish the people of Afghanistan although this may have ended up happening. A lot of money has been poured into development projects - probably more than in most US states in the same time period. Again there are selfish motives but I will not sniff at development projects which actually have some potential to make people's lives better.
    • 0 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MaceyThe)
    What sort of impartial source are you after??

    And jolly well done you, I have also spoken to Afghans - in Afghanistan, and encountered vast differences in opinion.
    Well, I'll give you that point. There is no such thing as impartiability, objectivity. That's true. However, to paint a "black and white" image of "subjective" and "objective" is false. There are less subjective sources than the NATO and you have got to admit that quoting the NATO to prove that what the NATO is doing is correct, is not very scientific. It's the same as quoting Hitler to prove that the jews were the route of all evil....
    • 17 followers
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    To restore honour and freedom . Problem?

    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Brandmon)
    Umm no. Saying that the Mujahadeen are the Taliban is as wrong as saying that the British are Scottish.
    I think you'll find i said they were a precursor. The Americans helped the Mujahadeen to take power, and enabled Afghanistan to become accustomed to extremist leadership, which, were perfect conditions for the later emergence of the Taliban.
    • 1 follower
    Offline

    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by s.a.u)
    I think you'll find i said they were a precursor. The Americans helped the Mujahadeen to take power, and enabled Afghanistan to become accustomed to extremist leadership, which, were perfect conditions for the later emergence of the Taliban.
    It would have happened regardless of US intervention - Afghanistan was the Soviet Union's Vietnam and thus an inevitable defeat. The Afghan populace was at the time simply not accepting of a socialist government and they clamoured for Islamic traditions to be brought back to society. The eventual military intervention by the USSR meant that extremists elements would prevail. Hardly the US's fault. So the Taliban would have still rose to power, probably even more bitter if the US didn't help Afghanistan out in its crusade against the godless Communists.

Reply

Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. By joining you agree to our Ts and Cs, privacy policy and site rules

  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: April 19, 2012
New on TSR

Writing your personal statement

Our free PS builder tool makes it easy

Article updates
Useful resources
Reputation gems:
You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.