When will we know that we have won the war in Afghanistan?

Head Librarian Gender: Number of posts: 2308 Registration date: 2008-07-30

5 unarmed, off-duty British servicemen died yesterday when a member of the nascent Afghanistani police force shot them dead and escaped on a motorcycle.

This brings the 2009 casualty figure amongst serving British soldiers to the highest total since the Falklands/Malvinas conflict with Argentina in the early 1980's.

In the latter conflict, the war aims were clear, whether you agreed with them or not: recover the islands.

How and when will we know that we have "won" the war in Afghanistan?

_________________
The salmon-falls, the mackerel-crowded seas

King of Pop Gender: Number of posts: 3131 Registration date: 2008-05-05

_________________
The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without.

From my professional experience I know that we have quite a lot of people who fled from Afghanistan living here in Antwerp. I can only assume that a similar thing is happening in a lot of other european cities.

These peope came her to escape from violence and possible also to escape from poverty.
But they didn't come here because they wish to be a part of Europe - how the hell would they even be able to conceive what that even means. They live in an entirly different reality than the new world they are living in. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out this will eventually lead to trouble.

As long as you haven't solved those problems - which will be a work for 3 or 4 generations - I don't think anyone should claim they have won the Afghan war. Except maybe the Taliban.

_________________
Le bon sens est la chose du monde la mieux partagée; car
chacun pense en être si bien pourvu que ceux même
qui sont les plus difficiles à contenter en toute autre chose
n'ont point coutume d'en désirer plus qu'ils en ont.

Schrödinger's Hepcat Number of posts: 4486 Registration date: 2008-04-28

It's really a matter of definitions--define "war" and define "win."

I'm sure neither side will ever formally surrender.

There was a formal surrender after the American civil war, but there were still skirmishes (some on the scale of wartime battles), raids, bandit gangs (Jesse James was a Southern rebel), etc., that historians consider to be continuations of the civil war.

Some say the last battle of the Civil War was a clash between West Virginia coal miners and the forces of the mine owners in 1921--called "The Battle of Blair Mountain."

_________________
I don't do it for the money, babe. I do it to entertain people.-- Susan Boyle

Head Librarian Gender: Number of posts: 2308 Registration date: 2008-07-30

It's unwinnable, then?

If the purpose of the war is to establish a Western-style democracy, then it's never going to happen, is it?

_________________
The salmon-falls, the mackerel-crowded seas

Schrödinger's Hepcat Number of posts: 4486 Registration date: 2008-04-28

If you just defined "win" as establishment of a Western-style democracy, I don't know when or how we'd declare we had achieved that. There will probably be both corruption and active insurgents for the foreseeable future--telling us we aren't there yet.

But I'm pretty sure no US policy maker ever stated that establishment of such a system is our objective (whether or not they were thinking it is another question). But I suppose a system like that might be Karzai's objective.

_________________
I don't do it for the money, babe. I do it to entertain people.-- Susan Boyle

Would sufficient proof of a bullet through the head of Osama do the job?

_________________
Le bon sens est la chose du monde la mieux partagée; car
chacun pense en être si bien pourvu que ceux même
qui sont les plus difficiles à contenter en toute autre chose
n'ont point coutume d'en désirer plus qu'ils en ont.

Number of posts: 466 Registration date: 2009-06-22

Le Néant wrote:

Would sufficient proof of a bullet through the head of Osama do the job?

Ha! Excellent. And as long as the Right keep preaching that we can't leave until we have won or we will look weak in the eyes of the world, in the eyes of our enemy, then I suspect we wouldn't be leaving until USA has no more money to fund the insanity.

Number of posts: 466 Registration date: 2009-06-22

Le Néant wrote:

From my professional experience I know that we have quite a lot of people who fled from Afghanistan living here in Antwerp. I can only assume that a similar thing is happening in a lot of other european cities.

These peope came her to escape from violence and possible also to escape from poverty.
But they didn't come here because they wish to be a part of Europe - how the hell would they even be able to conceive what that even means. They live in an entirly different reality than the new world they are living in. It doesn't take an Einstein to figure out this will eventually lead to trouble.

As long as you haven't solved those problems - which will be a work for 3 or 4 generations - I don't think anyone should claim they have won the Afghan war. Except maybe the Taliban.

I sense if you someone said that about USA illegal alien problem, they would be cited as a racist. Of course comparing the two might be like comparing apples and oranges, for it isn't like the immigrants coming from south of USA border are members of a religion whose fundy side preach that strapping bombs on their person and walking into a public square and blowing up themselves and their enemy equals blessed martydom where they will receive a paradise where many virgins will be theirs for the taking. Tell me, do these virgins wear full body covering berkas as their earthly counterparts do? And, after the virgins have been deflowered, will they be replaced with new virgins? Or are these gals virgins in perpetuity?

Schrödinger's Hepcat Number of posts: 4486 Registration date: 2008-04-28

As a percentage of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP), military expenditures in Iraq and Afganistan have been trivial compared to WW-II (just look at the 1940s in that graph there).

The deficit in 2009 (not shown in the graph) has just shot way up, but that's because of the economic bail-outs, not military expenditures.

_________________
I don't do it for the money, babe. I do it to entertain people.-- Susan Boyle

Woo! wrote:

I sense if you someone said that about USA illegal alien problem, they would be cited as a racist.

Good point. I work as a social worker in a very multi-cultural suburb of my town. Meeting people from 10 different ethnical backgrounds per day is not exceptional for me. And still I get the racist argument every so often. I'm not really sure how far people expect other people to go before they can be cleansed of every suspicion of rascism. I know that's not what you meant to say though, and I think your reaction is very reasonable.

What I wanted to say is that a lot of these people never chose to be here.
That's of course a fundamental difference with those people crossing the US-border illegaly: at least they chose to be part of America.

Most Europeans countries are taking a lot of trouble to help immigrants integrate in our societies.
A lot of immigrants welcome these efforts.
But that's only true for people who chose to come to Europe, people who chose to give up the life they were leading in their native country in pursuit of a more prosperous future. And it's already quite hard for those people, because they tend to have a much too romantic idea of capitalism and have a hard time coping with an anonymous, careless mass-society where it's up to you to demonstrate your own values and merrits if you want to get somewhere. Once again, these are the people who chose to come to Europe.

So what can you really expect from someon who's only reason to be here is because they are fleeing violence that was instigated by Western countries? They don't want to give up on their fundamentalist islamic ways of life to embrace the fruits of capitalism. How could we possible expect them to? We (= The West) came to their country to start a war and when they come to us We are going to tell them they have to change their way of life in about every aspect thinkable. I don't want to be cynic, but that's bloody cynic. And dumb. And I think the world would benefit a lot from having a prosperous, peaceful and stable democratic Islamic Republic somwhere. Right now I believe Egypt comes clossest to that - a country that depends for 99,99% on Western tourism for its economy ...

_________________
Le bon sens est la chose du monde la mieux partagée; car
chacun pense en être si bien pourvu que ceux même
qui sont les plus difficiles à contenter en toute autre chose
n'ont point coutume d'en désirer plus qu'ils en ont.

Number of posts: 466 Registration date: 2009-06-22

I will respond your post, Le, after I've thought it over for awhile.

OK Pinz, so it doesn't cost much relatively speaking to wage and continue war time in the Middle East. I understand your point of view that we are going broke because of unwise spending by our leaders not the Middle East conflict. Let's say the debt we are going to incur because of the bail outs etc didn't exist--no financial collapse, no bail outs. We would still be spending money on that war that shouldn't be the way it is. And it's money that could be used here in the US. And even if there were no bail outs, tell me, is not the US running on borrowed money? Is China is some way the helping to fund our side of the war in the Middle East?

Schrödinger's Hepcat Number of posts: 4486 Registration date: 2008-04-28

Too many red herrings there to run down all at once.

For starters, saying the deficit just shot way up is not the same as saying we're going broke.

I was not stating a position on the war, I was just saying we spent much more in the 40s without going broke.

So don't say we're going broke, that's all.

_________________
I don't do it for the money, babe. I do it to entertain people.-- Susan Boyle

King of Pop Gender: Number of posts: 3131 Registration date: 2008-05-05

As President, I declare that we will have won the war in Afghanistan when opium production increases from $64 billion to at least $100 billion. Thank you for your support and God bless Hawaii.

_________________
The problem in defense is how far you can go without destroying from within what you are trying to defend from without.

Number of posts: 466 Registration date: 2009-06-22

pinhedz wrote:

Too many red herrings there to run down all at once.

For starters, saying the deficit just shot way up is not the same as saying we're going broke.

I was not stating a position on the war, I was just saying we spent much more in the 40s without going broke.

So don't say we're going broke, that's all.

Sorry about the herrings. So you won't be needing one to chop down a tree any longer will ya? And a shrubbery!...

Yeah, I know you weren't stating a war position, just showing me that my statement of going broke because of the war incorrect. I'm being serious. I would edit my post to reflect that, but won't.

Still, isn't borrowing more and more money from overseas, spending more on goods from overseas then we sell to folk overseas thus creating a trade deficit, a sign that we are broke?

Bloke A earns $30,000 dollars a year. Bloke A spends $60,000 dollars a year. Where did Bloke A get the extra $30,000? He borrowed it from someone else. He now owes $30,000 plus interest to his creditor. Tell me, is that where the USA is?