Justification for war in Afghanistan

[BrianG]

...

Secondly, what's the motivation for the Taliban (who have no connection to Al-Qaeda) to allow Al-Qaeda back in if they were to regain control of Afghanistan? Last time, thanks to Al-Qaeda, the US military invaded their country, routed them from power (at least temporarily), and there was a lot of killing and destruction. Do you think they'd be up for another round of that if they were to regain control? I don't think so...

 

 

From President Obama's speech:

 

"...This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by al Qaeda. It is from here that we were attacked on 9/11, and it is from here that new attacks are being plotted as I speak. This is no idle danger; no hypothetical threat. In the last few months alone, we have apprehended extremists within our borders who were sent here from the border region of Afghanistan and Pakistan to commit new acts of terror. And this danger will only grow if the region slides backwards, and al Qaeda can operate with impunity. We must keep the pressure on al Qaeda, and to do that, we must increase the stability and capacity of our partners in the region.

 

Of course, this burden is not ours alone to bear. This is not just America's war. Since 9/11, al Qaeda's safe havens have been the source of attacks against London and Amman and Bali. The people and governments of both Afghanistan and Pakistan are endangered. And the stakes are even higher within a nuclear-armed Pakistan, because we know that al Qaeda and other extremists seek nuclear weapons, and we have every reason to believe that they would use them..."

[lemit]

Late in the day on September 11, 2001, I decided we should go into Afghanistan (and maybe Saudi Arabia and Egypt) with the smallest number of people and the best technology, extract or kill al-Quaeda and Taliban leaders, and get out as quickly as possible, while the world still thought of us as victims and would have applauded any action that was simple and dramatic. When the president said "revenge is a dish best served cold," I was reminded that we should want justice instead of revenge, and "justice delayed is justice denied." He had given exactly the wrong message and had signalled exactly the wrong policy: a massive, long-term presence that would turn us from victims into imperialists.

 

I thought then, as I think now, that the victims of 9/11 deserved swift, decisive justice. I had faith in the ability of the people of Afghanistan to heal themselves once we had surgically removed the malignant Taliban. I thought the combination of students and tribal leaders that had become the Northern Alliance would be as capable of ruling as anybody in that region.

 

Of course, by September 12, 2001, I realized that if we had used the "no-fly" list, nothing would have happened anyway. I never found out why we weren't using the list. Does anybody know? Was that just another example of our heading the wrong direction when direction was crucial?

 

It would almost be funny if so many people hadn't died and weren't still dying, but they did and they are.

 

--lemit

[BrianG]

American imposed Democracy:

Japan

Germany

South Korea

Iraqi

[JMJones0424]

If anything, democracy in South Korea was brought about by the olympic games. But if by democracy you mean military dictatorship from 1960 to 1987, then I guess you are correct.

 

South Korea - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[BrianG]

Right, the democracy in South Korea was imposed by America and the UN, unlike the dictatorship in North Korea.

[sanctus]

It is funny to see that now most of the people here agree with me in some sense that the war in Afghanistan was just an act of vengeance. This was not the case when this thread started.

 

BrianG, in Germany it was not only the Americans, in the long run also the Russian.

 

But in general i like your choice of words "imposed" democracy. That says about everything on the motivation behind. To bring freedom is to bring the freedom to choose, the choice could also be e.g. kingdom, but we don't like that because then the invasions are put in bad light...

Brought democracy to Irak sounds so nice, but then why have waited so long? Same in Afghanistan, the taliban were there since the 80'...don't you see this democracy thing is just there because it sounds nice? I mean can anyone say that "we went to Iraq because we thought there were weapons of mass destruction, but we didn't find any, it was all made up"? That would sound much worse than saying that "we brought democracy". But, like it or not, the former is closer to the truth.

Afganistan, also this democracy-argument is used, but you can't really say openly (although it seems Bush actually did") we go there for vengeance. So it is said, the Taleban are a bad regime so we go in and help the people, forgetting that it was since over 20 years like that. At least sincerity should be there and say we wanted vengeance.

[REASON]

From President Obama's speech:

 

"...This is the epicenter of violent extremism practiced by al Qaeda.....

 

So let me get this straight. You are using quotes from Barack Hussein Obama's Afghanistan strategy speech to bolster your argument? Rush would be disappointed. :naughty:

 

It doesn't surprise me that Obama is using this argument to support his decision to increase troops in Afghanistan. It is necessary for him to present it this way to encourage support. How much support would you expect him to get if he were to say that the reason he is escalating troop levels is because it is imperative that we establish a puppet regime that won't resist our interests in establishing a Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline through the region? See, that doesn't work because it's one thing to believe that our troops are dying to protect our freedom from terrorists, it's quite another to believe they are dying to secure the wealth of industry. Information must be shaped in order to control the perception of the populace, or the voter, or the consumer, or the viewer, or the listener. It's called Perception Management or propaganda.

 

So do you think if the president, or the government in general, makes a statement as to the reasons why they do something, it must be true? Our representatives, particularly the ones we would vote for, would never lie to us? Think again.

 

Look at the current situation. We have had a military presence in Afghanistan for eight years now. A new democracy was established. Citizens voted. Eight years later we're talking about an eminent terrorist threat that came from that region, that was thwarted within our borders? If this is true then apparently whatever we've tried over the last eight years hasn't worked. Is it possible that the militaristic approach will never work in the fight against terrorism? What makes you think that escalating now, for whatever length of time, will eventually work?

 

To me it's like fighting sugar ants with sugar. We want them to bow to our might and strength and respect us for our power. But the more power we display, and the more killing and destruction that occurs, the more they are enraged and the easier it becomes to find those that feel victimized to join their cause. With our invasions and militarism, we only prove the warnings of the terrorists to be correct, and more continue to join their ranks, willing to kill and die to get rid of the evil imperialists.

 

Continuing to wage this war in afghanistan, or Pakistan, or Iraq, will not defeat the scourge of terrorism. But it can lead to control over the territory and the enrichment of the military/security complex. And that's what those in power really want.

[BrianG]

I think we'll be in Afghanistan for a very long time, 20 to 50 years. We still have troops on the border of South Korea after 55 years.

 

Just defeating the insurgency in Afghanistan won't stop terrorism, we have to root out this perversion of Islam. We must call on all decent Muslims to stand against the slaughter of innocents in the name of Allah.

[REASON]

Just defeating the insurgency in Afghanistan won't stop terrorism, we have to root out this perversion of Islam. We must call on all decent Muslims to stand against the slaughter of innocents in the name of Allah.

 

Apparently you missed my point. We can't do that when they see us as the invader and the slaughterers.

[BrianG]

Your right, I did miss your point. I know many soldiers, airmen, marines and sailors, but not one of them is a slaughterer. Our troops are in Afghanistan to liberate them from the Taliban and protect them from terrorists. All the news isn't on TV, in magazines and newspapers, the day to day good works, the million acts of kindness for every crime, the hospitals, schools and development projects influence opinion more than we will ever know.

[LaurieAG]

Hi BrianG,

 

Just defeating the insurgency in Afghanistan won't stop terrorism, we have to root out this perversion of Islam.

 

Here's a hypothetical for you.

 

Just say that religious extremeists won the war and established their global caliphate in the US by building fortified settlements and military bases all over the place while removing weapons from you and your buddies.

 

Would you yourself do what you advocate?

 

If not why?

[BrianG]

Hi LauriAG,

 

Isn't that Al Qaeda's stated goal? If America were ruled by people who stoned women for adultery, executed gays, threw acid into the face of unveiled women, I would thank the liberators, give them flowers as they march through our streets.

[maikeru]

Late in the day on September 11, 2001, I decided we should go into Afghanistan (and maybe Saudi Arabia and Egypt) with the smallest number of people and the best technology, extract or kill al-Quaeda and Taliban leaders, and get out as quickly as possible, while the world still thought of us as victims and would have applauded any action that was simple and dramatic. When the president said "revenge is a dish best served cold," I was reminded that we should want justice instead of revenge, and "justice delayed is justice denied." He had given exactly the wrong message and had signalled exactly the wrong policy: a massive, long-term presence that would turn us from victims into imperialists.

 

...

 

It would almost be funny if so many people hadn't died and weren't still dying, but they did and they are.

 

--lemit

 

I agree. That was what I thought then. Still think it now. But we are not doing that and cannot do that anymore. Because of misdirection, corruption, and waste of resources, time, and good will, it has become a forever war.

 

The Forever War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[sanctus]

Which is not surprising, I mean that it became a forever-war. That there is terrorism against the western world has a lot to do with ourselves (I know, it always needs two), it won't be solved by force. We have to change too...

 

BrianG, you did not understand/reply LAurieAg's question: assume you strongly believe in something (like a woman's face must be covered) and someone from outside comes and imposes something different based on their values, then you would not welcome them with flowers...

[BrianG]

I think I did answer, even if you strongly believe a women's face must be covered, it's evil to sanction that belief with violence. I would fight evil, domestic or foreign, sovereignty comes from the individual. Al Qaeda and the Taliban do not merely have a different value system, they destroy ancient monuments and slaughter innocents.

[Theory5]

Your right, I did miss your point. I know many soldiers, airmen, marines and sailors, but not one of them is a slaughterer. Our troops are in Afghanistan to liberate them from the Taliban and protect them from terrorists.

Yes, such as in Fallujah? Where we engaged in collective punishment and slaughtered civilians? They used white phosphorous and denied that they did. If these soldiers you know have not slaughtered and killed directly, they are still slaughterers by association.

 

All the news isn't on TV, in magazines and newspapers, the day to day good works, the million acts of kindness for every crime, the hospitals, schools and development projects influence opinion more than we will ever know.

No matter what the government says, we are not helping ANYONE. We have invaded two countries on the premise of supposed terrorists, killed civilians, destroyed their homes, then after all that they were tagged, biometrics recorded, and we know where and who they are at all times now. That doesn't seem like freedom. Furthermore we insist on building a new government to OUR standards, forcing our democracy on them for no reason other than because we can and we think we know best.

 

Just defeating the insurgency in Afghanistan won't stop terrorism, we have to root out this perversion of Islam. We must call on all decent Muslims to stand against the slaughter of innocents in the name of Allah.

So we use their god to get them to do what we want? That sounds very familiar... oh thats right "God Bless America"! So you want to use propaganda to get them to believe what we are doing is right?

[alexander]

I've missed stuff here, so i'll start by breaking some "knowns", especially those by brian :coffee_n_pc:

 

Our troops are in Afghanistan to liberate them from the Taliban and protect them from terrorists.

I'm sorry, hypnotized by CNN? Problem is, like with every conflict, the wave of disinformation constantly keeps the real reasons behind the war, behind the scenes. USSR went into Afghanistan for the same reason, most of the real reasons are still vaguely known to only some people; and look at the wave of disinformation surrounding Russian involvement with Georgia in South Osettiya. Soldiers coming in to settle a genocide that georgian troops were carrying out in South Osettiya, amongst many other war crimes that were commited by the Georgian side in that conflict (killing peace keepers (at least 6) in South Osettiya, raping and going house to house killing unarmed civilians, young and old), and that was all fine, until Russia crossed the border and intervened, and in the eyes of the western press, they turned into bad guys, bam, coming in and pushing Georgian forces out of the region. And it was "unjustified", somehow omitting to mention that over 80% of South Osettiyan people are Russian citizens. And then McCain comes on in his election campaign, sympathetic to the Georgian people with "we are all a little bit Georgian tonight".

 

So, let's find the more likely reason of what US is actually doing in Afghanistan, and skip the "war on terror" which is an oxymoron, you cant fight an ideology/mind set, and the "Liberator" ideology, shown in Iraq, nam, korea, and most other wars almost every country has fought, making everyone believe you are "liberating" increases troop morale, and public support for the war...