Do You Support The War In Afghanistan??

SharpshooterTom

Do you support the war in Afghanistan currently going on supported by NATO forces??

The initial goal was invade and overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan who were provding a safe haven for Al Qaeda and Bin Laden. Its worth noting that the Taliban did not cause 9/11, nor did they have anything to do with it. The main objective as I say was to capture Bin Laden and destroy Al Qaeda. That objective is now done, so can someone please tell me why NATO are still in Afghanistan for? With over 100,000 ground troops still deployed?

American intelligence estimates there are less than 50 Al Qaeda members in Afghanistan, most them have left and are elsewhere in the world, which makes the "war" more astonishing IMO.

To suggest that if troops pull out of Afghanistan means another 9/11 is one of the most ridiculous arguments I've heard. Given that majority of the planning for 9/11 was actually done in places like Spain, Germany, the UK, and even yes the US (where they learned to fly/land), proves Afghanistan wasn't really that relevant in 9/11 tbh. Heck 15 out of the 19 hijackers came from Saudi Arabia, we could have made an argument to invade them if we wanted. :eek:

I'm under the assumption the war and its supporters are backed by people who support invading Afghanistan by providing freedom and democracy and allowing to live a more westernised lifestyle. Reading the story regarding the Taliban beheading is disturbing, but can anything be actually done about it? Invading these countries by force engaging in war only accumulates the death toll even more. I mean think about the amount of children killed by US drone strikes and other aerial attacks?

NATO are looking for an end to the war with the vast majority of troops being withdrawn by 2014 (although there's now rumours that special American forces will stay till 2024).

Anyway clearly I'm not a supporter of the Afghanistan war so I just want to know if anyone supports it and what are your reasons for supporting it.

Ghandee

I support my legs, cos they support me.

Jarren

No

Sappa

They have no business being there,either way the country is fuked.
You can't change them and they don't want to be changed.

Tombi!

I don't really understand it but I thought the basic idea was "Bin Laden makes a video claiming he was responsible; logically America invades to get him. He's dead now." Is it a sort of "pride" thing or something that they're still trying to root out the last members?

Augmerson

It might have something to do with the fact that Afghanistan has massive oil and mineral reserves and it also borders one of the only "free" countries left in Asia/Middle East - Iran. When I say "free" what I mean is a country that is not (yet) either occupied by US forces or friendly and suppliant to US interests. Only Syria, China and Russia remain "free" in the eastern hemisphere.

Afghanistan is not a western country. Trying to stamp, with a bloody jackboot, western values onto a third-world, incredily poverty stricken and deeply devout Muslim country will not work. When the US finally do pull out, the puppet government they install will eventually be toppled by the Taliban, just like the Soviets puppet government eventually crumbled.

I am all for democracy, women's rights and peace, but the tactics and strategy employed by the US and NATO or "Coalition of the Willing" will never work in Afghanistan. And truly, it's not something that ultimately the Pentagon or the White House cares about. They wanted those resource rich former Soviet and Soviet sphere central Asian countries to be on their side of the table, all those countries that are hard to spell like Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Krygistan. They have bases in all these countries and "friendly" governments there too.

Fratton Fred

There is no oil or gas in Afghanistan and the mineral deposits are limited to gem stones.

Grayson

Where's the No but the troops should stay option.

I'm against it. But I think as long as they're there they should try to do some good and bring some stability to the place.

I'd like an option of 'No but they're there now so it's their responsibility to get the country back on its legs'.

crazy cabbage

The way i see it Afghanistan can make a perfectly good case for invading America, Built on much stronger logic than that used be america to invade them in the first place.
However if they done that there would be a worldwide public outcry and they would be labled as terrorist (presuming that they would be able to which they wouldn't).
My question then is why isn't the American troops in Afghanistan labled as terrorist? I dont see much difference between the american troops in Afghanistan and 'terrorists cells' except that American troops tend to have alot more support from polititions and the public.

Fromthetrees

I didn't vote.
I was dead against the war all along, as I was against the Iraq war, but now I feel they should stay until the country is made safe, they made the mess, they clean it up.
I fear though, that whatever is done there that Afghanistan is doomed to live in the stone age for a long time to come.

Well, anyway,
I'm off to have a big mad fry up and plan tonights drinking.

fran17

no not anymore.it was justified after 9/11 and they succeeded in breaking up the terrorist network and training camps in the country,but they simply moved on to other countries.its high time now for a complete withdrawl before any more young men are maimed or killed needlessly

Augmerson

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There is no oil or gas in Afghanistan and the mineral deposits are limited to gem stones.

"The country's natural resources include: coal, copper, iron ore, lithium, uranium, rare earth elements, chromite, gold, zinc, talc, barites, sulfur, lead, marble, precious and semi-precious stones, natural gas, and petroleum among other things. In 2010, US and Afghan government officials estimated that untapped mineral deposits located in 2007 by the US Geological Survey are worth between $900 bn and $3 trillion" - taken from Wikipedia. I've also read a few articles in papers like the Guardian about it but a quick search of the site wasn't enough to bring up the relevant article, sorry.

fran17

Augmerson wrote: »

"The country's natural resources include: coal, copper, iron ore, lithium, uranium, rare earth elements, chromite, gold, zinc, talc, barites, sulfur, lead, marble, precious and semi-precious stones, natural gas, and petroleum among other things. In 2010, US and Afghan government officials estimated that untapped mineral deposits located in 2007 by the US Geological Survey are worth between $900 bn and $3 trillion" - taken from Wikipedia. I've also read a few articles in papers like the Guardian about it but a quick search of the site wasn't enough to bring up the relevant article, sorry.

looks like the yanks will stick around then

Grayson

crazy cabbage wrote: »

The way i see it Afghanistan can make a perfectly good case for invading America, .

It's been done already. Some terrorist woman organised it
http://zerode.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/mousethatroared09.jpg


Am I right in thinking the soviet invasion was partly because of an oil pipline dispute?

czx

Augmerson wrote: »

"The country's natural resources include: coal, copper, iron ore, lithium, uranium, rare earth elements, chromite, gold, zinc, talc, barites, sulfur, lead, marble, precious and semi-precious stones, natural gas, and petroleum among other things. In 2010, US and Afghan government officials estimated that untapped mineral deposits located in 2007 by the US Geological Survey are worth between $900 bn and $3 trillion" - taken from Wikipedia. I've also read a few articles in papers like the Guardian about it but a quick search of the site wasn't enough to bring up the relevant article, sorry.

'The U.S.’s total combined resource value is $45 trillion.'

http://247wallst.com/2012/04/18/the-worlds-most-resource-rich-countries/

xDramaxQueenx

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HyTPFyyA-mA

Boombastic

Yes I hope the Goodies rescue those heroin producers from the Taliban

megafan

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There is no oil or gas in Afghanistan and the mineral deposits are limited to gem stones.

But whats important to us & the rest of the West (or oil & gas users) are the piplines travelling through the country carrying gas & oil from (X) easten block countries....

dsmythy

Nobody cares what you think. Or what I think.

steddyeddy

What amazes me is that America spends billions on their military but fail in providing basic healthcare for the poorest of their citizens.

Augmerson

czx wrote: »

'The U.S.’s total combined resource value is $45 trillion.'

http://247wallst.com/2012/04/18/the-worlds-most-resource-rich-countries/

Am I right in believing the point you are trying to make here is that the US doesn't need any more fossil fuels or other resources because it has so much of it's own?

Well, if so, it's a very valid point, but I'd put this out there. How much resources does the US consume? If the following figure is anything to go by, it's ALOT.

"The United States consumed a total of 7.0 billion barrels (19.18 million barrels per day) of refined petroleum products and biofuels in 2010 and 6.87 billion barrels (18.83 million barrels per day) in 2011. For both years, this was about 22% of total world petroleum consumption." - taken from EIA.Gov.

Old statistics yes, but if anything, those figures have grown since 2011. Energy security is a major part of US planning and strategy. They might have huge resources of their own now, but they are finite. Access and control of other resources is definitely needed. The next part is taken from Wikipedia but is reliable -

"Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution explains that if Afghanistan generates about $10 bn per year from its mineral deposits, its gross national product would double and provide long-term funding for Afghan security forces and other critical needs.The United States Geological Survey (USGS) estimated in 2006 that northern Afghanistan has an average 2.9 billion (bn) barrels (bbl) of crude oil, 15.7 trillion cubic feet (440 bn m3) of natural gas, and 562 million bbl of natural gas liquids."

Even if the US doesn't begin to take these resources out of Afghanistan for it's own needs, it's an incredible amount of resources to be effectively in control of. Now, there are major costs as to how to extract the oil and gas, and there are already major security costs due to the war, but if Afghanistan could be turned into a resource producer, it would be extremely wealthy.

czx

Augmerson wrote: »

Am I right in believing the point you are trying to make here is that the US doesn't need any more fossil fuels or other resources because it has so much of it's own?

Well, if so, it's a very valid point, but I'd put this out there. How much resources does the US consume? If the following figure is anything to go by, it's ALOT.

"The United States consumed a total of 7.0 billion barrels (19.18 million barrels per day) of refined petroleum products and biofuels in 2010 and 6.87 billion barrels (18.83 million barrels per day) in 2011. For both years, this was about 22% of total world petroleum consumption." - taken from EIA.Gov.

Old statistics yes, but if anything, those figures have grown since 2011. Energy security is a major part of US planning and strategy. They might have huge resources of their own now, but they are finite. Access and control of other resources is definitely needed. The next part is taken from Wikipedia but is reliable -

"Michael O'Hanlon of the Brookings Institution explains that if Afghanistan generates about $10 bn per year from its mineral deposits, its gross national product would double and provide long-term funding for Afghan security forces and other critical needs.The United States Geological Survey (USGS) estimated in 2006 that northern Afghanistan has an average 2.9 billion (bn) barrels (bbl) of crude oil, 15.7 trillion cubic feet (440 bn m3) of natural gas, and 562 million bbl of natural gas liquids."

Even if the US doesn't begin to take these resources out of Afghanistan for it's own needs, it's an incredible amount of resources to be effectively in control of. Now, there are major costs as to how to extract the oil and gas, and there are already major security costs due to the war, but if Afghanistan could be turned into a resource producer, it would be extremely wealthy.

Enough for Afghanistan to yield a poor ROI. Northern Afghanistan has enough crude to last the US half a year at current consumption levels?!

starbelgrade

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

The initial goal was invade and overthrow the Taliban in Afghanistan who were provding a safe haven for Al Qaeda and Bin Laden.

The used that as a way of getting the country behind them, but in reality, Bin Laden, Al Qaeda or 9/11 had very little to do with it.

Augmerson

czx wrote: »

Enough for Afghanistan to yield a poor ROI. Northern Afghanistan has enough crude to last the US half a year at current consumption levels?!

That's not how things work.

The Master of Disaster

Grayson wrote: »

Am I right in thinking the soviet invasion was partly because of an oil pipline dispute?

No the Soviets were very reluctant to get involved in Afghanistan. They were repeatedly asked by the Marxist Afghan government throughout late '78 and early '79 to send in troops to help combat the Mujahideen in the north of the country. Initially they sent advisors, then some individual crews but it was only when it looked like Kabul itself might fall did they formulate a large scale intervention, and even then with the agreement of the Afghan regime. It was all political; as the Communist nation(s) the Soviets couldn't be seen to abandon a fellow ideologue in need right on their doorstep.

Colmustard

In Osama's last interview with Robert Fisk he said the war will bankrupt america like the Afghanistan war bankrupted the Soviet Empire.

I don't know how I feel about the war, it has destabilised Pakistan who are a nuclear power with the means to deploy them anywhere on the planet.

I think now that they are in the war, they can't walk away because of Pakistan, but the Taliban have probably won this already.

It's one of those wars that the retard Bush shouldn't have started.

frag420

No!!

Spurs all the way!

im invisible

Support it? I do what i can, but i feel like its never enough

Fratton Fred

Colmustard wrote: »

In Osama's last interview with Robert Fisk he said the war will bankrupt america like the Afghanistan war bankrupted the Soviet Empire.

I don't know how I feel about the war, it has destabilised Pakistan who are a nuclear power with the means to deploy them anywhere on the planet.

I think now that they are in the war, they can't walk away because of Pakistan, but the Taliban have probably won this already.

It's one of those wars that the retard Bush shouldn't have started.

Do you really believe that the Taliban and or Al Qeada would have left Pakistan alone?

Fratton Fred

megafan wrote: »

Fratton Fred wrote: »

There is no oil or gas in Afghanistan and the mineral deposits are limited to gem stones.

But whats important to us & the rest of the West (or oil & gas users) are the piplines travelling through the country carrying gas & oil from (X) easten block countries....

That's right, an oil pipeline from Siberia to the US can only possibly go through Afghanistan........