1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Do you think we should escalate in the Afghanistan situation

Discussion in 'Opinions, Beliefs, & Points of View' started by Bob26003, Nov 30, 2009.


Should we escalate in Afghanistan

  1. No

    26 vote(s)
  2. Yes

    7 vote(s)
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Bob26003

    Bob26003 Well-Known Member

    What are your thoughts?

    I voted no because we have been there too long for one and killed way too many civilians. We are not helping the Afghans by being there.

    Also, the Taliban ie religious fundamentalism is a huge social movement and the longer we stay the more ppl we drive into insurgency.

    Of course they are going to fight against a military occupier.

    Also, we cannot afford it. We have enough problems at home to be worried about nation building.
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 30, 2009
  2. NoGood

    NoGood Well-Known Member

    what about the civilians that have been saved? and the ones that can still be saved? Are they not worth staying for? Money shouldnt be an issue when its human beings that people are fighting for. Money should not be above life in the scale of things.

    People are been raped and murdered and all they want is be able to live with the most basic of human rights.

    I commend the people that try and make this planet a better place.
  3. GabrielConroy

    GabrielConroy Well-Known Member

    Car crashes kill 40,000 people a year not to mention the many many more who became seriously injured yet we continue to drive them because it saves time

    there is a price on human life
  4. NoGood

    NoGood Well-Known Member

    car ACCIDENTS kill people. There is a difference in an accident and murder.
  5. GabrielConroy

    GabrielConroy Well-Known Member

    The US does not intentionally kill civilians those deaths are accidents too

    So human life can be compromised for convenience as long as its an accident then? Does that really matter if we can guarantee tens of thousands will die?
  6. Mikeintx

    Mikeintx Well-Known Member

    Actually they no longer use accidents as a way to describe car crashes. Most crashes can be prevented, but people are people.
  7. Hache

    Hache Well-Known Member

    What about those who have died, pull out and their deaths are in vein.

    The job must be finished, send in more troops to do so, I believe that is what Barack Obama is doing.
  8. Bob26003

    Bob26003 Well-Known Member

    ""The US does not intentionally kill civilians those deaths are accidents too""

    Ummmmmmm yes we do

    Hiroshima, Nagasaki, plus various civilian cities we bombed


    Now the real question is: What do the Afghans want?

    What we know is that the majority of people in Afghanistan (77%) want an end to the airstrikes that have killed hundreds, perhaps thousands, of Afghan civilians. We also know that the majority of Afghans (64%) want a negotiated end to the conflict, and are willing to accept the creation of a coalition government including the Taliban leadership.

    We also know that a majority of Afghans oppose the idea of escalating the war and increasing the number of foreign troops in the country. 73% of Afghans think that US-led forces in the country should either be decreased in number (44%) or 'kept at the current level' (29%). Only 18% of Afghans favour an increase.


    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 1, 2009
  9. Hache

    Hache Well-Known Member

    There are loads more statistics on that page which suggest not pulling out and not negotiating with the Tele-ban.

    82% of people said they would prefer the present government; only 4% favoured a Taliban government. 90% of people said they opposed Taliban fighters. The Taliban were seen as the biggest danger to the country by 58% of people; the United States was in fourth place with 8%

    69% of people thought it was a good thing that the US-led forces had come to Aghanistan to bring down the Taliban. (Down from 88% in 2006.)

    64% of Afghans thought (in January 2009) that 'The Taliban are the same as before', and had not grown more moderate.

    The BBC/ABC/ARD poll showed that 63% of Afghans supported the presence of US troops in Afghanistan (but 77% wanted an end to airstrikes). Only 8% supported the presence of Taliban fighters in Afghanistan.
  10. Bob26003

    Bob26003 Well-Known Member

    Unless we want to be there another 10 -100 years we are going to wind up negotiating with the taliban.

    Thats all there is to it.

    Also, the longer we are there, the more radicalized the population gets.
  11. fromthatshow

    fromthatshow Staff Alumni SF Supporter

    I think it's funny Obama won the Nobel Peace Prize and now he wants to send 30,000 more troops over there.
  12. Hache

    Hache Well-Known Member

    I dont think the US would be sending in 40,000 more troops if Barack Obama wanted this to go on another 10 years+ nor do I think we are in a position to tell the US Army Chief whoever that said there is a need for these reinforcements that his military analysis is wrong we will be there forever.

    All we know is what the media tell us and how they tell us. I fully back the coalition leaders, NATO leaders and inparticularly Barack Obama, this is what he is elected for, to call these shots on the intelligence he knows. Gordon Brown however, well I cant back him, he isn't the true prime minister, just some bloke sponging off Tony Blair's election success.
  13. Hache

    Hache Well-Known Member

    Well that depends if you think the Taliban are terrorists or freedom fighters, they certainly were terrorist sympathisers when we went in in 2001.
  14. Bob26003

    Bob26003 Well-Known Member

    """nor do I think we are in a position to tell the US Army Chief whoever that said there is a need for these reinforcements that his military analysis is wrong we will be there forever."""

    look at their track record. Vietnam, Iraq, Iran Contra

    Not to mention it is bankrupting us

    Probably, no nation is rich enough to pay for both war and civilization. We must make our choice; we cannot have both.
    ~Abraham Flexner

    Hache are you even American?

    Cause its not you who wont get healthcare or who will face cuts in social services because of these imperial adventures
  15. Bob26003

    Bob26003 Well-Known Member

    We have 50 million ppl without health insurance

    60% of all bandruptcies are caused because of medical. Even if you have insurance.

    Our education system is falling apart

    Our infrastructure has been given a grade of D by the society of civil engineers

    We have a major homeless problem

    1 in 4 American kids fed by food stamps

    1 in 8 adults

    Our prisons are overflowing


    The last thing we need to do is keep flushing our money down the toilet on Afghanistan.

    How about we worry about America for once?

    We have our own problems to worry about rather than trying to nation build in afghanistan
  16. i-am-from-the-moon

    i-am-from-the-moon Well-Known Member

    what is this war for anymore
  17. Bob26003

    Bob26003 Well-Known Member

    The military industrial complex
  18. Hache

    Hache Well-Known Member

    Obama is faced with 3 options....

    1. Let those there just slug it out, but will the war ever be won, how long will it take, they're fighting using methods which are not working
    2. Pull out, let Afghanistan crumble, fall into the hands of the Taliban and drug lords, Al Quaeda will no longer be running around Pakistani mountains, they can walk back in and have a strong base, Afghans who were pro NATO and NATO sympathisers will be killed, abused and threatened. The US will be the defeated laughing stock of the middle east, whipping up celebration and support for the corrupt Taliban in neighbouring Islamic countries.
    3. Put the investment into the war which was taken out for Iraq and finish the job, send in the forces that are needed on the ground, begin to establish Afghanistani government and stronger links and plan to "hand over the keys".

    It is not plausible to negotiate with the Taliban, will they uphold human rights and keep Al Quaeda out of the country? No. We must not forget NATO nations are paying for their security by being in Afghanistan. A lot of Taliban fighters are terrorists from the region and Iraqi's who lost and fled to this country. The Taliban are not afghan civilians.

    As for the other things you wanted, it does not matter that I am not American because my country has the cost of this war as well, proportionate representation. There is a larger percentage of people below the poverty line in my country than yours.
  19. GabrielConroy

    GabrielConroy Well-Known Member

    good point hadnt thought of that lol

    I just don't think there's anything to gain by staying nationbuilding is incredibly difficult and thats a hundred times as true in Afghanistan
  20. Brighid Moon

    Brighid Moon Member & Antiquities Friend

    I said "No" for the same reasons as you Bob, but I don't think what we think or want matters to TPTB.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.