Why are we in Afghanistan? Hard to say, we followed blindly with the USA into sending ground troops into the one Country on earth where ground troops ought never have been sent for any reason. History tells us why, not conspiracy theories, history.

That said, we are there now, we have Australian Troops on the ground and in order to find a way out of the morass we have to work out what is needed in order to achieve a "WIN".

What is a "WIN"? I recall asking this on another thread, nobody wants to answer...

The least realistic is some-power sharing arrangement with the Taliban, all we are doing there is choosing a different set of unwanted central rulers, that the majority of Afghans dislike intensely (no more intensely than Khazi though).

We are avoiding the main issue - that the Afghans have no reason to trust central Government, we have to work up to that point. Until the various ethnic groups/etc. come to learn to trust and rely upon local/regional Government, then it is unrealistic to expect central Government "COULD" work.

We are involved in a Country that is so badly fractured into small regional cliques, whose only real historical experience with centralized Government is horrific, be it under the British Raj, the Afghan Government, the Soviets, the Taliban and now under Khazi...

It is irresponsible in the extreme to try and slide out of the place with the proposed "power-sharing" agreement with the Taliban. There are pros, I concede that, but we are abandoning people who have supported us to a fate worse than death (and in many cases, ending in death).

All this because we are too intellectually bereft, communally, to come up with an alternative that will work. That is the greatest backstab in history on our part (if we go along with it).

Well Custard it's only what you define as a "win" that it boils down to.

Your version is to destroy the enemy as per the original intentions to enter and get the country to become a moderate self-sufficient nation with no tribalistic or theological tyrannies, seemingly at any cost.

My version of winning is to cease helping (and sacrificing our soldiers for) a country that doesn't seem to be improving, nor even tried much to move away from the deeply religious tribal discourses, cutting down the black market opium trade with a method that works- as opposed to a theory, and giving the shariah enthusiasts back the country that really was never anything else, as opposed to leaving them to eye other states to fill in the vacuum. We could possibly negotiating a withdrawal from neighbouring countries in exchange for our own withdrawal- if one side breaks this agreement so will the other- and cease continually giving terrorist groups a reason to bomb us, as opposed to a place they might leave us for.

If we cite that our withdrawal was simply because the country does not seem to be improving or incorporating our introduced systems, and not the taliban or terrorists, extremists worldwide will hardly feel emboldened to pursue militant action. Occupying the nation will however, tell them we are actively trying to suppress them and will give them little reason NOT to take up arms.

Personally I believe that 9 years is enough time to have provided or changed whatever we can, and I'm not to thrilled that we're sacrificing our soldiers for it.

I feel this is more 'win' for us than the alternative- and there is a lot more feasibility to it working out as planned

"What is a win?" Well we hear on the news today that Afghanistan not only has one $ trillion in resources,it has many $ trillions.It obiviously had to be invaded like Iraq since it had too much energy and resources.Zimbabwe is a basket case but alas has not the resources so it cannot be saved.

The heroine trade in Afghanistan is said to be worth $40 billion pa.These are real reasons for invading Afghanistan.The locals get a small portion of the street value and the middle men clean up.The Taliban use drug money to buy arms from the same dealers who supply our troops.Surely the US Military and intelligence services would know who the middle men are since their soldiers patrol the poppy fields and satellites can track the movement of the drugs.

This is corporate/Govt corruption on an enormous scale.If we in the West think that it is OK to invade other countries and kill people to shore up our share market,then we are in the zone total moral decay.

Agree Arjay. Not to mention it SHOWS across the world and reduces the chance of peace.
Of course, the people who benefit and the people who get bombed are never the same.

Yes king Hazza.in the realm of disproving the facts,the silence from our detractors is deafening.

Not to mention the substance of the reasons for being there (including to justify the fact that we invaded in the first place).