The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Leaving Afghanistan will have consequences > Comments

Leaving Afghanistan will have consequences : Comments

By Chris Lewis, published 5/11/2010

Deserting Afghanistan now would make it a haven for terrorists.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All
And yes, you are absolutely right Chris, leaving Afghanistan would make it a haven for terrorists and perpetuate the untold suffering that Afghan women in particular suffered under the Taliban. On top of that it would promote the Islamist cause around the world to an even greater extent than the 1979 Iranian Islamic revolution and seizure of the US Embassy staff in Tehran.

Having been unfortunate enough to recently view a video clip of a young teenage girl being beaten and stoned to death in the street for refusing a forced marriage in a Sharia law governed country, the spread of fundamentalist influence has to be stopped at all costs.

It would be useful at this point though to actively seek Chinese military involvement and support in Afghanistan also. They have plenty of troops to spare and have many economic reasons to start pulling their own weight.
Posted by Conan57, Friday, 5 November 2010 9:57:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How about a budget and a time frame for acheiving a stable Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Most of the arguments seem to be just like Chris'. If we don't do "something" there will be more terrorists. Just say the magic word terrorist and that means we should send all our money and our best young people to Afghanistan to be killed for no good reason. What is the "something" our troops are going to do? Will it work? Has it ever worked? If the United States jumped off a cliff would Australia jump off a cliff too?

Why does the United States have all the answers about the best way for Afghanistan to manage its affairs? Has the United States had rousing success with its other foreign policy decisions in the middle east? Isn't there a fair chance that we are making things worse by being there? We'd probably be better off building and staffing schools and hospitals and with Schools and hospitals we could put together a meaningful time frame and budget and then see if it was successful.

Are there any other priorities that Australia could be spending its money and young people's live on that would make the world a better place. Darfur, North Korea and much of Sub-Saharan Africa don't get nearly the cash and lives that Afghanistan gets and there are plenty of people there living miserable lives that could use a hand and would probably appreciate the help. Cancer research and sustainable energy are a couple problems probably as tough to solve as Afghanistan but at least we'd know we were doing something that was really helping someone.
Posted by ericc, Friday, 5 November 2010 10:03:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ericc

I do not disagree with much of what you said.

However, my offering was to merely point out that an allied withdrawal will have some consequences, and that the region will need ongoing attention for some yet regardless of troop withdrawals.

As for a time frame, it will also need to take into account the stability of the region. If terrorism gains a more solid base there, the timetable may have to be extended.

It is a mess, and perhaps one that will haunt the world for a long time yet.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Friday, 5 November 2010 10:10:28 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Judging by the history of the past two hundred years - trying to subdue Afghanistan as a foreign invading force is a bit like invading Russia overland in winter - not recommended as a potentially successful enterprise.
Posted by Poirot, Friday, 5 November 2010 10:23:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Actually, in a conventional sense the war in Afghanistan has been fought and won a long time ago. What we are left with is a constant insurgency that foreign forces are not equipped to deal with. It is high time to pull back to segregate allied forces from the population and only intervene when open combat is necessary. The Afghan forces must now assume chief responsibility for their own destiny. The resources then required to be employed by the allies can be scaled right back to easily sustainable levels. One Australian Battalion is required together with two US or British infantry brigades, four artillery batteries, appropriate support personnel plus four squadrons of ground attack aircraft – F35s as soon as they are available, together with perhaps an over supply of Apaches and Blackhawks.

Eric C is right in that more attention does need to be directed to the African continent and piracy in the Indian Ocean. Mind you a large part of the problems in Africa stem from the Islamist push from the Iran/Afghan region. Withdrawal from Afghanistan is not an option but it should certainly be scaled back at this point to cover the role I mentioned before. Still room for a Chinese batallion to help out though in the spirit of cooperation.
Posted by Conan57, Friday, 5 November 2010 2:23:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Jon J, did the Taliban have functioning political and economic systems?

Either way the war in Afghanistan started off in a legal limbo. The current operations are on paper approved by the UN.

To look at some "succesful occupations," the post-WWII occupations of Germany and Japan yielded good outcomes (though they started from different economic and social bases). Sure both countries continue to have their fanatic extremists and issues with the US but on the whole they are safe, prosperous, democratic societies.

Now, more or less our options are:
a) We either stay in Afghanistan until the country can run itself in its own, unimposed way (or imposed way, if you prefer...)
b) Leave the country and watch as it either spirals into chaos or picks itself up unaided.

Which one do we want? The "stay in Afghanistan for democracy" argument is a little misleading, otherwise how many other countries should be on a "regime change" list? There are different ways to "stay" in Afghanistan while gradually allowing the local authorities to take over, like a few people have posted here. Fingers crossed that the corruption that power brings doesn't hit the Afghan government...or is that too late?

http://currentglobalperceptions.blogspot.com/
Posted by jorge, Friday, 5 November 2010 3:45:02 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy