Afghanistan

The situation in afghanistan is difficult. there's no real reason why we're there. i think the main reason for UK/US presence in the country is that they're trying to set up a democratic governing system. problem is that the afghans really don't want one, nor do they like outsiders occupying their land. the UK has had multiple experiences fighting the afghans and have had alot of trouble in that region, mainly because they're such dedicated, bastard fighters; who will literally fight tooth and claw to get you the fuck out of there. they actually developed a tactic, called butcher and bolt, which they employed against towns and such, as the name implies, they run and kill a load of people, the get the fuck out of there. and it worked pretty well. now though it's impossible to employ such dirty tactics and avoid war crime accusations thanks to NATO. basically we have a load of troops over there trying to maintain control over the regions while some dipshits far far away decides what the best course of action is. while the natives are getting more and more pissed off. it's a fucking shambles.

TL;DR shit is fucked

This whole war is to just build oil pipelines from the Caspian and black sea into the middle east so we can drain the middle east of it's 8 trillion dollar oil reserves.

This war is a lie. It's not about freedom or revenge. It's all money and power. We don't give a shit about iraq establishing a stable government or killing ''terriosts'' Most of the enemies we have slain were just people defending with country with guns, the same you would do if America got invaded.

Shit is definitely fucked.

The US missed its chance to "win" in Afghanistan in early 2002. They should have handed the place over to Dostum or someone else that could be the Afghan Saddam Hussein (back when he was a US ally) and just given him a shitload of money to keep a lid on things and told him that if another terror attack ever came out of there they'd bomb it flat and hand the keys to whoever his worst enemy is.

It's got nothing to do with politicians not having the guts to allow really aggressive RoE or anything. There simply isn't an army in the world that could handle the job of trying to pacify Afghanistan no matter what the RoE are. Some of us used to sit around shitting about this when I was there and we figured that three million troops with might be able to do it if there was any way to supply them. But the reality is that if there's only 40 Chinook helicopters available, there's only 40 Chinook helicopters available no matter how aggressively you are allowed use them.

Another thing that the US especially are missing, which is exactly the thing that they missed in Vietnam, is that in the south this isn't even a COIN campaign, the Taliban are really more the "Pashtun Liberation Army" and represent a broader more or less national liberation movement (that extends into Pakistan) and considers this an existential struggle. Yes, they're extremely conservative Muslims, but that's only part of it. These guys don't know the first thing about, say, the Palestinian issue, or really give a shit about what some Saudi mullah says about anything. They want a Pashtun territory ruled by Pashtuns representing the most conservative Pashtun traditions.

This is different from, say, Helmand province, where there is a much stronger "terrorist" element and the raison d'etre of the insurgency is basically to kill Western soldiers. Which, for some reason, we insist on providing.

In Afghanistan, the US should leave. It is pointless. What is the nature of a "win" in Afghanistan? Taking the whole country over, teaching them to read, and bringing them out of their barbarous customs (like putting women in bags)? Setting up a stable democratic government? Not having Al Qaeda use it as a base? Having killed enough people? All of these are different "wins". So far only the last one seems feasible.

>>5
The British fucked up when they drew up alot of the borders, for example for thousands of years tribes bordering Iran and Afghanistan have intermarried and generally regard themselves as one and the same people....but the Brits decide to put an imaginary line between them and expect the people to abide by them.
So when fighters cross the border from either Pakistan or Iran its like WTF are those governments even trying not realising these people feel a natural kin to those across in Afghanistan and feel they have to go help them against the allies.
Its all so FUCKED

Afghanistan borders China, in this geopolitical chess being played by the Western elite, it's all about surrounding China, the only country that is not yet subdued by those in power.

Afghanistan is the largest producer of opium, Taliban stopped the opium production. The CIA is the largest distributor and buyer of opium around the world, they needed their main supplier back in business.

Afghanistan was against a gas pipeline running through their country to Russia, getting rid of the Taliban solved that problem.

USA is on the verge of complete and total bankruptcy, only war can keep their insane gigantic Ponzi scheme running for a little longer and war is after all big business for a country that basically outsourced every industry they owned to be left with basically just weapons industry.

These are the four main reasons the USA invaded Afghanistan of course directed by the Zbigniew Brzezinski's, Rockefellers and Kissingers of this world.

And no FOX news won't tell you about this, then again American television won't show you fat people either. Welcome to the real world ladies and gents!

>>7
You have caught my interest and I would like to subscribe to your newsletter.

>>1
A good analysis, for 5 years ago. Most of Afghanistan is stabilised and in fact much of Afghanistan was stable even before the war began because it was occupied by the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan who had been fighting against the Taliban since 1996. The problem areas are along the Pakistan border and Helmand province where most poppy cultivation occurs.
>>2
"IT'S THE TROOF GEORGE BUSH IS A REPTILIAN JEWS DID 9/11 HURRR"
Why would Turkey, Iran and Russia use our pipelines?
>>3
>>4
Because supporting tyrants worked out for us in the past? The Pashtuns already have regional autonomy and they have dominated Afghanistan politics since the 19th century, if anything they are fighting to gain the total dominance they had in the past. It is more likely the Taliban is a combination of global muslim extremism, heroine dealers and mis-directed nationalism.
>>5
>>6
>>7
Well I can take that all seriously because BUSH IS A REPTILIAN and clearly all your facts are straight and written within TIN FOIL KEEPS THE GOVERNMENT FROM CONTROLLING MY MIND 10 minutes of one another when usually people only come here once a day at random times.

>>10
So you think it's just some silly tinfoil hat conspiracy that the United States is on the verge of bankruptcy and the fact that there's military deployments in Afghanistan and Iraq and huge government spending is some fabrication made up by Ron Paul and his supporters?

For your information, I actually read congressional reports from time to time, and there's members of congress besides Ron Paul, the Republican Liberty Caucus, and Dennis Kucinich and they actually acknowledge that this is a problem. The rest either don't know, not aware of it, or simply don't care.

>>12
I've had this discussion before many times on my many journeys through the internets.

Troofers: hurf durf
Me: Wut. Here is a logical argument explaining why that's retarded and a few insults thrown in.
Troofer: lol you love the status quo, go suck your exec's dick, tool
Me: lolno, I realise the status quo isn't perfect I just don't think it's one huge conspiracy theory
Troofer: then why do you continue to suck capitalist cocks for money which you spend on starbucks
Me: because I'm a greedy materialist who views the status quo as a necessary evil to maintain my opulent lifestyle, until someone comes up with a practical solution that takes into account my desire to absolutely not wear sandals and eat lentils flavored only with patchouli for the rest of my life unfortunately I'm going to have to continue to suck on my exec's fabulous 11 inch black cock and have him drizzle his semen down my face and lips

>>13
You're ignorant.

Afghanistan can't be conquered. Alexandar tried and failed. Gengis Kahn failed. England and Russia invaded them when their empires were the most powerful, they failed. USA will fail too.

>>14
um ok, why?

>>15
The Afghans succeeded in conquering Afghanistan.

Some good things came from the US invasion of Afghanistan and their deposing of the Taliban but some bad ones did also.

Under the Taliban opium production and exportation in Afghanistan was virtually non-existent. Now that the Taliban have the opium from Afghanistan makes up for approximately 80% of the opium and opiates around the world.

Dogfighting, bearbaiting, and bullbaiting were virtually non-existent under the Taliban, now they're like national sports.

There was no pornography. I can't think of any more off hand.

>>15

Are you an idiot? The USA had the Northern Alliance on their side. It's not like every Afghan is fighting us.

>>19
lol russia also had an afghan army fighting with them, didn't do them much good now did it?

>>13,16
While every group of supporters of some politician always have their *ahem* "issues", and some of what you described is probably true, albeit a bit exaggerated, nevertheless it's not a complete falsehood of that of what they're saying.

Now, I know the status quo isn't perfect either, but if you look over the long term, things don't seem to look too good and they probably could end up being a lot better than they are. Now as for "conspiracy nuts" well watching conspiracy videos and reading articles are fun, but for me just purely that, fun.

I do believe that the politicians that are a part of the "status quo" believe legitimately that what they're doing is the right thing to do, and not by way of conspiracy or cohortion. And it's true a lot of government programs and departments are created (originally) in well intentioned, good faith. Over time though, they begin to do more harm than good with over regulation and restrictions. It causes quite a bit of stagnation because of it.

As for the war front, it's extremely wasteful and ends up making people less safe and secure because of it. There are frequently terrorist plots because we're over there on their land, and the longer there are forces there the more that gives them incentive  to attack on American soil. I don't think that's some conspiracy theory, sounds more like human nature to me.

And I certainly don't truly believe that Bush was some reptilian, I chuckle at the thought of whoever came up with this nonsense.

>>15
Afghanistan is not hard to conquor, that is not the issue. The issue is that while most empires could have taken over it and some did. Its just not worth the logistics and expense of occupation.
We won in Afghanistan in 2002, but its going to take 20-80 years to get it into the stage were it can self sustain.
This is a small insurgency mostly restricted to the green zone (were the drug money pays for the attacks).
The British have yet to sustain as many casualties in 8 years as they took in a few weeks in the Falklands.

>>23
20-80 years to get it into the stage were it can self sustain

This is exactly like viet nam. The only reason the army is still there is because of certain lobbyists  (allready mentioned).

(were the drug money pays for the attacks). [sic]

The funny thing is that the taliban completely eradicated opium production ₍₁₎ and since 2002 opium production has risen ₍₂₎ ,year on year, by 1500% ! How hard can it be burn some poppy fields? They're not exactly difficult to find. The fact is the US needs cheap Heroin for medicinal purposes too.

==References==
[1]http://opioids.com/afghanistan/index.html
[2]http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/26/AR2008062601813.html

>>24
Total fantasy, America and its NATO allies are in Afghanistan directly and indirectly to related to 9/11. They are there to prevent it being used as a base to attack the rest of the world.

This was achieved. Its job now is to turn a hundreds of bronze age tribes in to some kind of functioning nation, so that it won't collapse again.

There is literally nothing in Afghanistan worth the resources to take it.

The price of Heroin dropped so low in 2001-02 that the growers switched to other crop and just sold there remaining supplies.
so a 1500% increase from close to zero is not really surprising.

and finally apart from the logistics of setting fire to 100,000s of thousands of hectors of farm land which I would guess *would* be that hard. I doubt it would do much to win hearts and minds, not to mention would make such a nightmarish visual image that would massively undermine all support for the war across the world.

>>13
Me: because I'm a greedy materialist who views the status quo as a necessary evil to maintain my opulent lifestyle, until someone comes up with a practical solution that takes into account my desire to absolutely not wear sandals and eat lentils flavored only with patchouli for the rest of my life

That's the Green party that advocates those silly things especially more focus on environmentalism. Under a Libertarian-esque government your lifestyle wouldn't change much.

>>25
America and its NATO allies

Correct me if I'm wrong but it's just the british and americans doing the fighting? The others are "helping" in other ways.

They are there to prevent it being used as a base to attack the rest of the world.

It is this foreign policy that exacerbates ill will to the occupiers because of civilian casualties and atrocities committed by soldiers like abu grahib (Yes I know thats in Iraq).
There is literally nothing in Afghanistan worth the resources to take it.

Not true. A strategic vantage point in case Iran attacks and building oil pipelines. Plus, the longer the war drags on the longer the USA makes weapons.

so a 1500% increase from close to zero is not really surprising.

Ok I give you that.

and finally apart from the logistics of setting fire to 100,000s of thousands of hectors of farm land which I would guess *would* be that hard.

True but they used Agent orange in viet nam so I'm sure they could use something  a little less toxic. But yeah you re right it would undermime the support.

>>21
The world is better off without a single rogue state, it is better in the long term if Afghanistan is at least controlled by a state which responds to international pressure and is self sufficient in terms of security. Perhaps the coalition are going about the war the wrong way but this does not mean it's impossible, we just need a surge like Iraq and more effective political objectives than a corrupt election or 2, they need to work with the existing power structure instead of leaning heavily on the democratic facade they've erected, they need to draw police from local tribes to police local areas, they need to extend the United Islamic Front for the Salvation of Afghanistan (northern alliance implies it is only for the north, which is not the source of instability) to the south, allow them autonomy so they can compete with the Taliban for the loyalty of Pashtun tribes and they should be the foundation for the Afghani national army rather than randomised recruits from all over the country.

>>24
North Vietnam wasn't trying to attack America, just South Vietnam. Also the intensity of the war is much lower.
>>26
I guess I will have to support a libertarianesque government then. I never understood environmentalism, surely we should seek to control the environment and if jungles and coral reefs have tourism or scientific value then they will be preserved.

>>27
The British and the US are doing most of the fighting. But I believe almost all if not all NATO countries are using there Special forces as well as the Germans and French using there regulars in combat (the  recent air strike of the fuel tankers was called in by Germans I believe).

And there is little real ill will from the general population against the Western forces as the civilians on the ground have experience of what Taliban rule was like before 02 and know who are killing and terrorising more civilians *now* (Taliban kill 4 times as many as we do.)

For an example the Taliban do not like girls going to school, solution to this pay young men a reward for throwing acid in to the faces of 9 year old girls. There is more money for bombing the school or they have tried to use home-made poison gas (from pesticides) to kill the little girls that way. Anything really to stop Afghanistan becoming less backward as its so much easier to recruit and dominate a backward people.

No trust me you are on to a loser with the motivation thing America could just drill for the oil reserves its left untapped or travel thousands of miles, spend billions of dollars and thousands of lives insuring that a oil pipeline gets built that most likely would have been built anyway?
And America is continuing a war so it can sell it self weapons? I.e give money it has to itself? yeah real super genius stuff.

Or its doing it to prevent other 9/11 scale attacks against western civilisation?

Screw the brits, the jews, the masons and the Obliterated Nations. But I repeat myself.

>>31
That joke is even more old and worn out than your mother's pussy and only reflects on your level of intelligence.

>>32
Look who's talking.

>>33
ur mom

>>33
I love that movie, too!  Really though, this isn't the board for film critique.

>>35
it isn't?

>>36
Not really, but this board is (http://dis.4chan.org/tele/).

>>37
I thought it was deserted.

>>38
You can help populate it.

bump

"Because there's limited amount of resources."

But, of course, international capitalists are able to manage without petty geography getting in their way.

" Also, the entitlements that go out to illegal and legal immigrants alike add to the huge debt of the national government."

I don't know if this is true, and to be honest I don't care. if someone is motivated enough to spend their life's savings on travelling in a cargo container 6000Km to get to where I live because it is better clearly there are bigger issues than "they're taking our benefits" Also, illegal immigrants don't have an easy life here, given they aren't allowed out of their prison camps.

Also, please give me a couple of examples of governments that aren't in massive debt, because I don't know of any. If they do exist though, please tell me, as I'd be genuinely interested to know of them.

"But of course, I'd like to gut the entitlement system altogether, no matter if you're born here or not. "

Damn anarchists. I think personally there should be a place where there is no government, where you can choose to live, but simultaneously there should also be a country which has national healthcare, and infrastructure. Something along the lines of socialism but with some capitalism too.

>>41
I don't know if this is true, and to be honest I don't care.
It is. And you should care.
if someone is motivated enough to spend their life's savings on travelling[sic] in a cargo container 6000Km to get to where I live because it is better clearly there are bigger issues than "they're taking our benefits" Also, illegal immigrants don't have an easy life here, given they aren't allowed out of their prison camps.
The benefits attract them here, but also because trade agreements like NAFTA have made the lives of Mexican farmers utterly shitty, and then we wonder why they hop across the border into Texas.
Also, please give me a couple of examples of governments that aren't in massive debt, because I don't know of any. If they do exist though, please tell me, as I'd be genuinely interested to know of them.
The United States paid off all its debt obligations off after Andrew Jackson killed the Second Bank of the United States. Of course there was a recession that followed, but the nation was debt-free for the first and only time of its history. No government is without debt today because they've all bought into the lie that you need a central bank to maintain prices and the national economy. But that's a story for another thread.
Damn anarchists. I think personally there should be a place where there is no government, where you can choose to live, but simultaneously there should also be a country which has national healthcare, and infrastructure. Something along the lines of socialism but with some capitalism too.
Gutting the entitlement system has nothing to do with "anarchists". I advocate for a small government, not the total dismantlement of one.

Also, you posted in the wrong thread.

>>29
We already are controlling part of the environment, or at least influencing it mostly in a harmful way. Ever heard of nuclear waste, greenhouse gas, deforestation, endangered species... ? Gee, I sure can't understand why we should care either. It is not like our economy lifestyle depend on how hospitable the environment is anyway, right?

>>43
We already are controlling part of the environment, or at least influencing it mostly in a harmful way.
I can agree somewhat with this, however things have certainly improved.
Ever heard of nuclear waste, greenhouse gas, deforestation, endangered species... ?
Nuclear waste is nowhere a problem as it used to be. The only real dangerous time that nuclear energy posed was in 1979 with three mile island, and 1986 with Chernobyl. Even so, it's been quite a stable resource and certainly over the six decades of use has proved it to be a stable resource.

Greenhouse gas is why we're able to live in the first place. If there weren't any, we'd all be dead on a frozen ice ball not unlike the planet Hoth from the Star Wars series.

Deforestation is certainly a big issue. Corporatism is mostly to blame for that.

Endangered species are being actively protected by wild life foundations worldwide.

Gee, I sure can't understand why we should care either.
Stop being alarmist.
It is not like our economy lifestyle depend on how hospitable the environment is anyway, right?
If the next Year Without a Summer happens it's not going to be because of human involvement.