Latest 15 of 46 Total Comments Show All

• 

  Betzee at 10:10 PM JST - 21st July

  Millions have returned since 2001.Numbers are down from the 5,000 per day returning in 2004,but any way you look at it life is better because America intervened there.

  Millions? Try about one million. Most of them have been kicked out of the country where they sought refuge from the excesses of the Taligan regime, Iran. Karzai has pleaded with his counterparts in Tehran to let them stay, which most would like to do, because there are no jobs for them at home. Others are farming their land and they won't even have a way to feed themselves.

• 

  Betzee at 10:15 PM JST - 21st July

  The point about the crusade is hardly controversial, except maybe to the uninformed:

  With its experience as the former ISAF lead nation in Afghanistan, Turkey has significant expertise to bring to the table. Turkey’s numbers and capabilities would allow existing NATO forces in Kabul to expand into surrounding regions and would alleviate the pressure on American troops currently on the ground. And as NATO’s only majority Muslim member, Turkey’s foray into another high-profile tour in Afghanistan would demonstrate the campaign against terrorism is not a war against Muslims.

  https://www.kintera.org/site/pp.asp?c=biJRJ8OVF&b=13221

• 

  Betzee at 10:25 PM JST - 21st July

  The Iranians have long complained about the injustice of the situation; they sheltered over one million Afghanis who fled Taliban rule (though they received no support from the UNHCR or any other refugee assistance organization). Pakistan, by contrast, supported the Taliban regime. Yet Pakistan ends up an ally in the war on terror while Iran is branded a member of the "axis of evil."

• 

  sailwind at 10:43 PM JST - 21st July

  Guess Betzee and Sezwho aren't real happy about Obama wanting to throw more American troops into Afghanistan.

• 

  Betzee at 10:59 PM JST - 21st July

  Guess Betzee and Sezwho aren't real happy about Obama wanting to throw more American troops into Afghanistan.

  That's what both McCain and Obama want to do. The question is, what good is it going to do at this point? The government is mired in corruption and the economy dominated by the opium trade. I don't see how more troops will change either dynamic. It will, however, prompt Tehran to deport more Afghani refugees which will intensify the existing problems.

• 

  Betzee at 11:04 PM JST - 21st July

  Despite the claims by some British officers that the Taliban is being tactically routed, no one seems to have told the Islamist insurgents. Opium production in the areas under their control - and that of other warlords - has reached new records this year. Corruption and criminality, linked often to the very heart of government, is endemic. Despite $15bn in aid that has been disbursed, Afghanistan remains mired in pervasive poverty with unemployment standing at more than 40 per cent. The country's position as one of the world's poorest has barely shifted since 2001.

  Confronted with these multiple failures, the temptation, voiced yesterday by Obama, and by his Republican opponent John McCain already, is to throw more military forces at the problem in a replication of the Iraq 'surge'. A parallel attraction, encouraged by Karzai, is to insist that the international community provide ever more money in the hope that some of the billions will stick. But in a country beset by rapidly increasing pessimism over the ability of the international community finally to bring to an end Afghanistan's 30-year cycle of poverty and violence, what is needed is a large-scale rethinking of what we are doing in Afghanistan, not more violence and more largesse.

  The reality, despite the claims of Nato and Western diplomats, is that the war is far from being won. For many, it is becoming clear that it cannot be won, framed in military terms. Nor can it be won in terms of the present political settlement, largely imposed on Afghanistan, which has accepted a re-emergence of war-lordism, cronyism and the general collapse of legitimacy and the rule of law in exchange for the impression of a 'stable' central government, albeit one which holds little sway outside of Kabul. The tensions thus created have encouraged a return to a state of widening conflict.

  http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/jul/20/afghanistan.internationalaidanddevelopment

• 

  sailwind at 11:13 PM JST - 21st July

  Good job Betzee,

  Once again you've offered nothing even close to a solution.

  More troops??? Nah

  More Aid??? Nah

  How about this for a solution, get NATO out of the bloody north and take over more of the burden in the south so the central government can continue to consolidate the North and center of the country were the Taliban ain't and then feel empowered enough to exert more control the South?

  Why is the U.S and Canada stuck with that role?

• 

  Betzee at 11:16 PM JST - 21st July

  Once again you've offered nothing even close to a solution.

  Almost seven years after the Taliban was toppled, I hardly expected anyone to look to me for a solution.

• 

  sailwind at 11:30 PM JST - 21st July

  Almost seven years after the Taliban was toppled, I hardly expected anyone to look to me for a solution.

  That would be an understatement, I just wonder if the tone of yor posts will change if Obama becomes President and he's faced with exactly the same Afghanistan that Bush has had to deal with since we ousted the Taliban.......Need I remind you all of allies supported that.

• 

  SezWho2 at 12:06 AM JST - 22nd July

  sailwind,

  I can't speak for Betzee, but it beats me how you draw that conclusion from anything that I have said here.

  Here is what I am unhappy about in regard to putting more troops into Afghanistan. Our issue is not with the Taliban. In fighting the Taliban we are incurring an unnecessary conflict.

  Our beef is with the so-called al-Qaeda. Our goal should be to work with any government that will criminalize their activities.

• 

  SezWho2 at 02:22 AM JST - 22nd July

  undecidedbout08,

  I don't think it would take much for people who hold opinions different from your own to lose credibility in your eyes.

  "Do [I] honestly, truly believe that George Bush has used the office of president to launch his own personal Crusade against Muslims?" (If you'll forgive me, I'll use just the one question mark.) No, I don't. And that has never been the issue. The issue is whether Muslims or some particular subset of Muslims are capable of believing so.

  The reason that the one about God's work (no quotation marks) never seems to die is that it happens to be true. If you will look it up I think you will find that Bush is on record as saying that democracy is God's gift to humanity and elsewhere as saying that he (Bush, not God) is bringing it to Afghanistan. Additionally, I don't know about a PLO spokesman offering up the exact phrase "God's work", but I do seem to believe (responding to your belief) that our friends in Britain were embarrassed to hear him make utterances that led them to believe that he believed so.

  Nobody has suggested that all Afghanis--or even a majority of Afghanis--believe America to be conducting a crusade. The suggestion was that the presence of Turkish troops was a great boon to the international force precisely because it discourages reasonable people from believing it to be. What I find to be sad is that the word "crusade" so reactivates you that you cannot understand the clear meaning of what was said. If there are white American Christians who are willing to entertain the notion that this is a crusade, you can be fairly sure that at least one or two Afghani Muslims may believe so, especially the innocent ones on which we continue to make mistakes.

• 

  Betzee at 04:00 AM JST - 22nd July

  Here is what I am unhappy about in regard to putting more troops into Afghanistan. Our issue is not with the Taliban. In fighting the Taliban we are incurring an unnecessary conflict.

  Indeed. The Taliban enjoyed little popular support while they were in power. Their resurgence is based on offering a livelihood to Afghani subsistence farmers who were initially reluctant to grow poppies (which had been prohibited under Taliban rule). "It's OK," they were reassured, "cause it will be sold to infidels."

  There are two ways to break the back of the Taliban. One is to end addiction in user countries. Not very likely. The other is to provide Afghani farmers with an alternative livelihood. This is not something which can be accomplished either through military means or throwing good money after bad.

• 

  adaydream at 04:14 AM JST - 22nd July

  I would be estatic if they would start drawing troops out of Iraq and putting them in Afghanistan.

  Afghanistan was the war against terrorist. Iraq was the war of choice and giving the oil reserves to US oil interest. (It worked at first, until the Iraqis voted themselves a parliment and they took back control of their oil refields.)

  The war in Afghanistan was to punish them for their blatant attack and killing of US citizens.

  The attack of Iraq was to enrich the pockets of the dick cheney's buddies and george bush. But mainly dick cheney.

  Halliburton got their no bid contract in Iraq and we just left Afghanistan to flounder.

  I'm hoping that these meetings reenforce Barack's stance on bringing troops in Iraq home and upping the troops in Afghanistan.

  This whole trip id scaring the hell out of republicans. What if he comes home to accolades. Damn, that means trouble for John McCain. < :-)

• 

  SuperLib at 05:57 AM JST - 22nd July

  The question is, what good is it going to do at this point? The government is mired in corruption and the economy dominated by the opium trade. I don't see how more troops will change either dynamic.

  Extra troops won't be brought in to handle the government corruption issues, mostly the fact that the borders and other areas aren't secure enough. You're taking a solution to one problem and saying it won't help a completely unrelated problem, which is a bit odd in my opinion. It would be like saying tacking government corruption won't solve the lack of troops on the border so why take steps to solve the corruption?

• 

  SuperLib at 10:31 AM JST - 22nd July

  I hardly expected anyone to look to me for a solution.

  People should take the same approach to your endless criticism.

Register or login to add a comment!