Comments on: Plan B for Afghanistan: cut and run? Tracking U.S. politics Wed, 16 Nov 2016 03:39:51 +0000 hourly 1 By: Casper Lab Mon, 28 Sep 2009 11:55:02 +0000 It’s not a question of ‘cutting and running’, it’s a question of quickly withdrawing like gentle-people from something that is very far removed from most realities known to the rest of the World, while negotiating optimum oil prices for the future. Shock and awe simply fuels more hatred.

By: dom youngross Fri, 25 Sep 2009 19:36:13 +0000 Cut and run. Yeah, right. The House in Vegas similarly counts on the high probability that someone up $500 at the black jack table isn’t going to ‘cut and run.’ Instead, that $500 winner will likely stay and turn into a $4 grand loser that dreamt of getting up $10K.

The toppling of the Taliban gov’t back in late 2001 was as good as it gets for us and the Afghans, it was the up-$500 part.

The promised ‘war of necessity’ in Afghanistan has served Obama’s purpose, it perversely helped get him elected. Now that the ‘war of necessity’ is no longer politically rewarding, Obama will discard it for the same, previous Bush Afghanistan strategy which toppled the Taliban gov’t in late 2001. It could well have been such a contingency option in Obama’s plan all along.

Obama’s street-smart enough to know he’s riden the Afghan horse as far as it will take him and it’s ready for the glue factory for one last value squeeze. And Obama’s street-smarter yet to know that one day too long with the boots-on-the-ground ‘war of necessity’ will lead to Soros telling him not to run in 2012.

By: Praveen Fri, 25 Sep 2009 16:58:25 +0000 We need to understand the cultural, religious and economic differences between WEST (including Russia) and Afghanistan.
I think the best solution is to pull back ALL western forces and OUT SOURCE the job to International Peace Keeping Force (IPKF) under UN command. I would also add that the IPKF should be recruited from mostly Muslim countries or from countries with Good Muslim population, so the forces understand the traditions / religion of Afghan people.
West should monitor the progress and Fund re construction and humanitarian support.

By: Rob Fri, 25 Sep 2009 15:44:32 +0000 After all the bravado and, lets face it, bs that we have said over the years in regard to Russia cutting their losses in afghan it would be hugely embarassing for us to do the same.

that being said, if we did then we should at least rebuild the country somewhat, unlike what is happening in Iraq where running water/electricty is only just about available.

as for the opium, the extremists are far from the ones benefiting financially from this…this much is obvious from the amount of drug lords/their lackies being liquidated – and not by US/NATO hands.

remote bombing are counter-productive/pointless, costs are relatively high and the amount of civilian casualties only add to the talibs numbers. something we clearly dont need.

By: Thomas Pound Thu, 24 Sep 2009 01:44:59 +0000 The question is why the successful strategy implemented in the early days of the war, one that focused on CIA and special forces acting in collaboration with Afghan tribesman, was, in large part, replaced by a brute force occupation strategy.

Given the effectively heterogeneous nature of the population, the difficulty of the terrain, and the historical precedent of the failed Soviet occupation, it seems clear that a traditional war in which NATO forces rely on large numbers of troops seems doomed to fail.

Furthermore, covert support of the opium trade by Russian interests, as payback for American interference during the Soviet occupation decades ago presents an additional challenge.

The most effective approach to the conflict would be to return to the original model. Remove all but a skeleton force – cease funding contractors, cease becoming involved in internal politics, and use conserved funds to aggressively bring all opium production under NATO control by purchasing all output directly from the growers. This would effectively cut off funding of extremists and allow NATO to gradually transition growers to boutique cash crops on a larger scale than done now. Additionally, a sizable portion of conserved funds could be channeled into a broad range of humanitarian initiatives including housing, education and communications infrastructure. Education and free flow of information is NATO’s best ally.

By: Mufaso Wed, 23 Sep 2009 19:03:05 +0000 No more troops are needed in Afghanistan. If the U.S. would send Bob Dylan into all the caves with his guitar and harmonica I guarantee you Bin Laden, al Qaeda, and the Taliban would come running out screaming for the waterboard. Within 30 seconds of Dylan’s singing “You Belong to Me” there would be unconditional surrender.

By: Boys Military Schools Wed, 23 Sep 2009 13:47:17 +0000 Ever since American troops are in and out of Afghanistan and Iraq. For how many years had past and president had been elected. Promises that they will make something that they could benefit soldiers in the Middle East. No offense with the superiors this is what I’ve notice with what is happening now.

By: Casper Lab Wed, 23 Sep 2009 12:17:32 +0000 You have no idea what you are dealing with, it is a separate reality. Much worse than Agent Orange.

By: jean delarue Wed, 23 Sep 2009 11:34:24 +0000 Maany say that solving these mid east problems requires solving the Palestine issue.
We kicked Iraq out of their occupation of Kuwait after mere months but Israel has been in the “occupied territory” for , what , 40 years?
They could be removed from there like we did the Iraqis from Kuwait, it might solve a lot of issues.

By: Matt Wed, 23 Sep 2009 10:22:40 +0000 What too many people are too naive to understand about this is that if we lose Afghanistan to the taliban, we will soon lose NUCLEAR PAKISTAN to the taliban!!! This isn’t about some stupid pipeline! (though why turn down a perk or two?) This is about keeping tactical nukes out of the hands of radical hajjis!
Connect the dots, people! It’s not as simple as isolationism! This is the world stage, and pretending that distance has no effect here is stupidity at best, and maliciously dangerous at worst!