War in Afghan - What is it actually about now?

[stuart-b]

Ok, the war has been continuing for some time - I have not been keeping up with all the details (the media let us hear about).

Can anyone clarify the following (in their own words, all opinions welcome!):-

1) Why did we go to Afghan in the first place?
2) Why do we need to continue to remain in Afghan (I understand perhaps it is to not to let the country fall into anarchy, but is this really the issue?)
3) What benefit do the UK and USA people gain from this war?
4) Do they see an end to the war, or do you think we will continue to "occupy" the country for some years to come.
5) What do you think the Afghan people in general think?

Thanks,

[Scrumper]

stuart-b said:

Ok, the war has been continuing for some time - I have not been keeping up with all the details (the media let us hear about).

Can anyone clarify the following (in their own words, all opinions welcome!):-

1) Why did we go to Afghan in the first place?
2) Why do we need to continue to remain in Afghan (I understand perhaps it is to not to let the country fall into anarchy, but is this really the issue?)
3) What benefit do the UK and USA people gain from this war?
4) Do they see an end to the war, or do you think we will continue to "occupy" the country for some years to come.
5) What do you think the Afghan people in general think?

Thanks,

1. To remove the Taliban from power. Why that? They are/were an evil bunch of psychopaths who terrorised the country, committed awful atrocities and, crucially, provided support to Bin Laden prior to the attacks on September 11th. We went because a) we are the USA's closest ally and they asked for some help, and b) quite a few British people were killed on that day too.

At the time - eight years ago! - the invasion of Afghanistan was widely seen as a justified and proper response to the attacks.

2. We haven't got rid of the Taliban yet. Well, the core group that had their hands round the throats of the entire country are probably gone now, but they've been quite effective at stirring up nationalist fervour among the tribes. The actual Taliban themselves - the word means 'students' - have been joined by larger numbers of the same sort of people who formed the mujahadeen who fought the resistance against the Soviets in the '80s. Without our presence there the country will fail, once again. In short, moral imperative.

3. Afghanistan is one less country which various terrorist groups can use for a safe haven and a training base. Control over the border will help keep pakistan secure too. Lawless regions anywhere in the world are a bad thing for global security and the people who live there.

4. We will have to continue to occupy the country in some way. The recent shooting in a police station is a pretty clear sign that we can't hand over responsibility to the locals yet.

5. I haven't met one. I expect that people in the cities - women in particular - are pleased that the Taliban government has gone. I would think that most Afghans are probably resigned to the fact that tyranny has been replaced by chaos for the time being.

(By the way the country is called Afghanistan, not Afghan.)

[Odie]

My OPINION

1) To Stop the Taliban, or is it about the drugs.
2) To continue to fight against the Taliban or is it perhaps to do with drugs.
3) Security by destroying the Taliban infidels, or is it perhaps to do with drugs.
4) They do, I dont.
5) They are just people living how they have always lived, farming the crop that makes the most money and produces the least hassle.

Can you see a theme.

[blindswelledrat]

Exactly what scrumper says

[trickywoo]

stuart-b said:

Can anyone clarify the following (in their own words, all opinions welcome!):-

1) Why did we go to Afghan in the first place? Some nutters flew a couple of planes into a couple of tall buildings (you may have seen it on the news). They were directed / funded by more nutters living in the 'stan.
2) Why do we need to continue to remain in Afghan (I understand perhaps it is to not to let the country fall into anarchy, but is this really the issue?) The nutters live in caves and are very hard to kill.
3) What benefit do the UK and USA people gain from this war? Not a lot.
4) Do they see an end to the war, or do you think we will continue to "occupy" the country for some years to come.I don't think anyone has ever truly 'won' a guerilla war so probably down to political will how long anyone stays.
5) What do you think the Afghan people in general think?They smoke a lot of cannabis.

Thanks,

[Scrumper]

Odie said:

My OPINION

...drugs...

Can you see a theme.

I read this in the same way that people used to talk about Iraq being about oil! It's a great conspiracy theory: the whole war was designed to secure a reliable supply of cheap skag to keep the Labour client state (all bag heads, of course) happy and compliant, thus securing the perpetual victory of English Socialism. Great stuff.

Back on topic, it wasn't about drugs. EDIT: because the Taliban had actually eradicated the poppy crop by the time of the invasion. They even got money from the UN for this!

Edited by Scrumper on Wednesday 2nd December 11:09

[MX7]

stuart-b said:

5) What do you think the Afghan people in general think?

Afghanistan in 2008: A Survey of the Afghan People

[jshell]

Scrumper, excellent summary!

[stuart-b]

Thanks Scrumper and others,

I have my own opinions and ideas why we went/are still at war, but I was interested to hear what you all had to say, especially those who have served over there - what their view on it was (although I expect they are not allowed to detail such opinions on a public forum).

I was also interested to see if many people shared the same view, or if there were disparate view points.

The question I have wanted to know is, do you think the American government would have gone to war with or without the events of September the 11th happening?

The war against Iraq was said by many to be fought off the back of "Weapons of Mass Distruction" - what makes this potentially any different?

I have read/watched media detailing a threat to the US before September the 11th was immenent - was it allowed to play its course in order to justify this war?

Probably a can of worms this one.

Another question is, based on the current economic situation and problems at home, can we really afford this war?

[Hugo a Gogo]

as far as I understand it, the Taliban started against the mujahideen warlords and the stuff they used to get up to (criminal gangs basically, engaged in all the sort of stuff the Tallies are accused of now, but with more sex and booze)

[cptsideways]

And to think nobody has mentioned oil or the transportation of it through the country via a pipeline


We would'nt be there if it was'nt for oil security, the rest is just bluff to make us think it's worth being there. Yes in reality the Taliban being there won't help so its a chicken & egg situation.

[stuart-b]

MX7 said:

stuart-b said:

5) What do you think the Afghan people in general think?

Afghanistan in 2008: A Survey of the Afghan People

Thanks, bookmarked for later!

[B Oeuf]

The oil is possibly of a concern but scrumper has nailed it IMO

[MikeyMike]

stuart-b said:

Ok, the war has been continuing for some time - I have not been keeping up with all the details (the media let us hear about).

Can anyone clarify the following (in their own words, all opinions welcome!):-

1) Why did we go to Afghan in the first place?
2) Why do we need to continue to remain in Afghan (I understand perhaps it is to not to let the country fall into anarchy, but is this really the issue?)
3) What benefit do the UK and USA people gain from this war?
4) Do they see an end to the war, or do you think we will continue to "occupy" the country for some years to come.
5) What do you think the Afghan people in general think?

Thanks,

1) The threat posed by Al Qaeda wasn't new in 2001 but it was all of a sudden realised with the events of 9/11. Osama bin Laden and his Al Qaeda cohorts were based in Afghanistan a country that had been under the control of the Taliban since the early/mid 90s. Al Qaeda was given free reign to train Islamic fundementalist fighters in the region around Kandahar and the border with pakistan. Al Qaeda had declared war on the US in 1998 but the sheer magnitude of 9/11 was unbeleivable. Al Qaeda had attacked America's financial centre in the WTC and its military hub in the Pentagon. Dont forget that the White House was another probable target that was narrowly avoided.
The US simply had to act, they had been attacked on their own soil and many had lost their lives.
The US approached the Taliban and demanded they hand over Bin Laden and other key figures. The Taliban refused, the demand was re-issued with the clear message that the US would take him by force if need be. Again the Taliban refused. For the first time in history Article 5 of the NATO treaty was put into effect, this states that an attack on one member is an attack on all members and therefore all memebers are expected to react with force to maintain the security of NATO members.

The use of force was approved by the UN, and the Bush administration declared a war on terror designed to "bring Al Qaeda and Bin Laden to justice, and to prevent the emergence of other terrorist organisations."

2) The invasion and occupation of Afghanistan was initially a success, however despite several close calls, we were unable to capture Bin Laden. With the invasion of Iraq in 2003, the attentions of us and the US were drawn elsewhere, and this gave the Taliban a chance to re-group and recruit culminating in a sustained Taliban offensive in spring 2006. Being unable to train their fighters in Afghanistan, Al Qaeda now operates largely in the Afghan/pakistan border region. This area is exceptionally difficult to police due to both its geography and it political make up. Crucially Al Qaeda has openly spread into pakistan a country that posseses nuclear weapons and material, this poses a huge threat to the region and the rest of of the world. In order to stop the return of the Taliban and in turn the return of Al Qaeda to Afghanistan we need to be there until such a time when Afghanistan's own security forces can do the job.

3) The vast majority of terror plots still originate from that region however our presance greatly degrades their ability to carry out their plans as they are tied up fighting us and pakistan on their own doorstep. Opium cultivation is huge in Afghanistan and finds its way to Britain's streets which in turn fuels the vast majority of crime in this country. Counter narcotics teams are constantly working to erradicate the crop but its a long, hard job.

4) With the Yanks dedicating an extra 30'000 troops and aiming to wrap things up in 2011, a satisfactory end to the war is alot more likely than it perhaps had been. The key is in training Afghan security forces. Due to the nature of the fighting, the best way to tackle the Taliban and Al Qaeda is with boots on the ground and effective intelligence. Greater support from other NATO members wouldn't go amiss either.

5) Its hard to say, I've served there and the reaction you get changes from village to village. Nobody likes their nation to be occupied however they will ultimately side with whomever offers them the best quality of life and security.

Edited by MikeyMike on Wednesday 2nd December 12:42

[jshell]

stuart-b said:

I have read/watched media detailing a threat to the US before September the 11th was immenent - was it allowed to play its course in order to justify this war?

Probably a can of worms this one.

It is. Don't pollute your mind with that 9/11 conspiracy garbage, and garbage it is!! Imagine this: If the US govt had been found to be complicit, there'd have been a global market and political meltdown. They didn't, it didn't.

stuart-b said:

Another question is, based on the current economic situation and problems at home, can we really afford this war?

We can't afford not to, quite frankly.

[Scrumper]

Thanks. This one's quite important to me. I lost a friend on 9/11 (also missed a grim death there myself, purely through being tight, but that's by the by). I've also had family serving in Afghanistan and a couple of friends there too now so I do take quite an interest in this particular conflict.

Interesting point about the pipeline. More like a free set of mats in the decision to invade; not really a deciding factor, more of a fringe benefit.

As for whether we would have invaded anyway without 9/11? Britain wouldn't have done that alone, despite Blair's love for playing general. It would have been on human rights grounds only, especially as the T's had ended drug production there. In America, Bush's presidency was a national joke in 2001 (I moved to New York not long after he was inaugurated so I remember this well). However, he did have all those neocons behind him. They had great big Rand corporation-style plans for kick-starting 'democracy' (through force) in the middle east but those plans were centered around Iraq. I don't think Afghanistan really featured at all. It's strategically unimportant (oil pipeline excepted), notorious for being impossible to invade successfully, and doesn't really take part in regional politics anyway. My guess? No.

[Odie]

I just wanted to make it clear that im not with my drugs theory hinting that its a conspiracy and that the CIA want control of the drugs being grown in Afghan, but that we are their in order that the Taliban do not get funding from the sales of drugs.

Needless to say Drugs in my eyes is a big part of the situation (which you say where eradicated, which i doubt).

Afghanistan is a just cause BUT we have gone about it the wrong way. We have invaded someone elses country. The UK and the US are the busy bodies of the world.

We really only see what the media and governments want us to see (not being all conspiracy here, but we hear more bad news than good news). So I really cant see how i can come too a true opinion on the subject, let the government do what they think they need to do and we can support our troops where ever they are sent.

As for the equipment subject, our armed forces have always been and always will be under equiped.

[hairykrishna]

Odie said:

I just wanted to make it clear that im not with my drugs theory hinting that its a conspiracy and that the CIA want control of the drugs being grown in Afghan, but that we are their in order that the Taliban do not get funding from the sales of drugs.

Needless to say Drugs in my eyes is a big part of the situation (which you say where eradicated, which i doubt).

You're wrong though. The Taliban declared poppy cultivation un-Islamic in 2000 leading to a ~90% drop in in opium production by late 2001. We then invaded, their economy went bang and the farmers had to grow opium to sell because there was great difficulty in selling anything else. Now production is back at record levels.

Edited by hairykrishna on Wednesday 2nd December 13:54

[elster]

The original idea to go into Afghanistan was to get Bin Laden.

Then it was to stop training camps.

Then it was to stop the Taliban.

Then it was to create a stable democracy.


Reality is the people who know aren't going to tell you the real reasons.

[toppstuff]

The way I see it, Afghanistan has become a centre of focus for any anti-western pathological nutter who, given the opportunity, would happily murder us in our sleep.

The Afghan mission should be about killing as many bad guys as possible as efficiently as possible.

At the same time steps should be taken to put in place a political structure that can grow a pair of gonads and over time have the strength to stand up for themselves against totalitarian Islamists, making sure they do not return.

There are ordinary families out there who just want a life of peace, free of occupation from western forces, but also free from tyranny from Islamicist fanatics.