Thread: Afghanistan and Syria

If Assad wants to come out of this alive and not shot beside a dusty road and dragged behind a pickup truck, then he had better be gone well before the end of this summer... long before Obama has to 'look tough' to try and get re-elected.

OTOH... Obama had better not fuck this up. Assad still killing folks and/or a huge Middle Eastern war started over a US/Obama/NATO mist-step and it could sink him. Obama took us to war in Libya w/o even bothering to ask Congress. Dare he do that again, and so close to the election?

We'll have to see...

Fifty years time, what are people going to look back and see? The "war on terror" seems to have an endless string of fronts and new campaigns to be opened up at will. What happened to "not our country, not our problem".

It's a cold heartless policy, but it might be an interesting change to have a time period where we're not at war with somebody. The US seems to be trying to give nazi germany a run for it's money in "number of countries to invade in shortest time."

Originally Posted by Twelfth

Fifty years time, what are people going to look back and see? The "war on terror" seems to have an endless string of fronts and new campaigns to be opened up at will. What happened to "not our country, not our problem".

Cell phones, the internet and international jet travel. Make the world smaller and the problem on the other side of the world no longer is on the other side of the world.

Originally Posted by tsquare

Cell phones, the internet and international jet travel. Make the world smaller and the problem on the other side of the world no longer is on the other side of the world.

However nobody appointed us god. And contrary to popular military doctrine, might does not make right.

Originally Posted by Twelfth

Fifty years time, what are people going to look back and see? The "war on terror" seems to have an endless string of fronts and new campaigns to be opened up at will. What happened to "not our country, not our problem".

It's a cold heartless policy, but it might be an interesting change to have a time period where we're not at war with somebody. The US seems to be trying to give nazi germany a run for it's money in "number of countries to invade in shortest time."

Godwin law'd.

Originally Posted by Twelfth

However nobody appointed us god. And contrary to popular military doctrine, might does not make right.

popular military doctrine? Take a look down at the local bar on most any Saturday night...

Originally Posted by jviehe

Godwin law'd.

Ok ok, I probably deserved that. Instead say we're giving the post ww2 soviet Union, or post Meiji restoration Japan a run for it's money.

jviehe, et al,

Let's look at these one at a time.

Originally Posted by jviehe

So, what should be done if anything? Syria is in a civil war, the US is telling the civilians to overthrow Assad. Afghanis are killing US soldiers over trashing some Korans. Obama says it wont affect US policy, but that the GOP candidates could make it worse by criticizing Obama (sounds familiar). The UN is writing strongly worded letters to Syria, while Assad drops bombs, and The President campaigns for office.

(COMMENT)

Syria: The US should stay clear of this one. This is Syrian-on-Syrian. That means it is not clear cut that the Syrian people want to change their government. If the US supports one side or the other, it will look as if that side is aligned with the devil. It will appear to the Arab that the US is intervening again for their own selfish agenda.

The US cannot win. The Syrians haven't decided what they want. The various Syrian Government Forces are common Syrian. If they opposed the government, they could change it overnight. But they are committed to something else.

Afghanistan: We've been there a decade. We need to get ourself out before we have to fight our way our. What is really going on there? Well, a couple of things.

• First, there are Afghan's just waiting for the opportunity to take the US/NATO to task for anti-American//anti-Occupation reasons. This has nothing to do with sacred writings or religious believes. This is a case where the opposing force is exploiting the ignorance of a culture in order to erode local indigenous support. The Taliban (the Government in Exile) see an opportunity and took it. It is the exploitation of the illiterate and the religion itself, for the purpose of political gain.
  
  
• Second, thousands of decisions and actions are made every day in Afghanistan (probably millions of decision throughout the Muslim world); that are culturally related; and have the potential to be explosive. If the US/NATO was right in 99% of the cases, there would still be some instances where there would be a mistake. This is a case where there was no intent to challenge the belief or disrespect the culture. Yet, the intellectual capacity of the entire cultural strata fails to recognize this. This is clearly an example where the Afghan People are not demonstrating that they should enjoy the company of the 21st Century.

I propose that we give the country back to these pious and enlightened leaders of the Taliban - and - abandon this culture to choose its own destiny. The people of Afghanistan obviously prefer the Taliban to the influences of the US. Yes, let their piety be their guide, left to their own devices.


In this way, the US can avoid any cultural clashes and confrontation with a people of intolerance. We can eliminate any event that might be interpreted as disrespectful, and honor their beliefs through non-interference.

The President:

• The US needs to attend its own problems. The US economy is crumbling. Look at your house and tell me which major end-items or high tech devices you have that are made in America. If the US is to be a World Leader, then it must have a world class - first rate economy. And that requires a 21st Century infrastructure, improved manfacturing and production capacity, it must become the center of the world for learning and enlightenment, and it must be a hub of which science and technology revolve. Only then will revenue flow and support all the various programs America has to be the first among nations.
  
  
• The US must become the "trusted" benevolent leaders. It has to stop working entirely in its own best selfish interests. It must become the "honest Broken" in disputes among nations and focus on diplomatic solutions rather than military solutions.

Thes are just some of the things America needs to consider.

Most Respectfully,
R

Originally Posted by tsquare

popular military doctrine? Take a look down at the local bar on most any Saturday night...

My point is at that point the owner of the bar tends to call the appointed cops to sort it out. America is playing the equivilent of the nosey neighbor coming into somebodies house and telling them what's wrong with their lives. However this neighbor brings a shotgun and can't be kicked out for being an inquisitive prick.

Originally Posted by RoccoR

jviehe, et al,

Let's look at these one at a time.

What does the US do if they leave Afghanistan and anti-amercan groups resume using it as a base to launch attacks. Or the Taliban resume murdering and oppressing afghanis?

Originally Posted by Twelfth

My point is at that point the owner of the bar tends to call the appointed cops to sort it out. America is playing the equivilent of the nosey neighbor coming into somebodies house and telling them what's wrong with their lives. However this neighbor brings a shotgun and can't be kicked out for being an inquisitive prick.

Lets say the bar owner is enslaving the waitresses. Raping and beating them. America should stay out of it? What about the UN treaties and resolutions which call for protecting human rights?

Originally Posted by jviehe

Lets say the bar owner is enslaving the waitresses. Raping and beating them. America should stay out of it? What about the UN treaties and resolutions which call for protecting human rights?

You're describing a situation of invasion. The metaphor being that each country is a person. Your situation is far more like the US one than anyone would like, the bartender has raped the woman on the grounds that "it's good for her and it's what she really wants" while she violently denies it.

There might be an argument there if so many larger countries didn't ignore the UN whenever they felt like it. They seem to be using those treaties as justification whenever they want to do something, and ignore them when they're inconvenient. Either they apply to everyone, or they dont, you can't use the law as your shield to arrest a man and then go around breaking it yourself.

Originally Posted by jviehe

What does the US do if they leave Afghanistan and anti-amercan groups resume using it as a base to launch attacks. Or the Taliban resume murdering and oppressing afghanis?

Those that hate us enough to attack us, will attack us regardless of where their home base is. We cannot occupy every square inch of the globe, and we piss people off when we try to. So if we leave Afghanistan, and the Taliban move back in, at least we will know where they are.

And if it's Afghanis murdering Afghanis, I hate to say it, but it's really none of our business. They must fight for themselves if they want freedom. And in the end, I don't think they would want us to liberate them anyways. When it's all over, they will want to be able to say, "Hey, look what we did for ourselves!" not "Hey, look what America stepped in and helped us with . . ."