AP: U.N. May Have to Abandon Afghan Effort

[GrGr]

UN May have to abandon Afghan effort

Hmm, is the Bush "liberation" of Afghanistan still going according to plan?

 

[miguel]

What a surprise. The UN would pull out of east LA if they deployed themselves there.

 

[DealMonkey]

Maybe if the U.S. would uphold its part by providing decent security the UN would stay?

 

[miguel]

Um, sure DM. The US Military is just not trying, are they?

 

[tnitsuj]

Its actually a US/NATO operation now. no one is really doing a good job. Last I heard all of NATO was having a hard time coming up with the requested 14 helicopters for Afghanistan.

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: miguel
What a surprise. The UN would pull out of east LA if they deployed themselves there.

They are unarmed humanitarian and civil affairs workers scattered throughout the country. Would it be better if they stayed to be slaughtered, besides this report is not confirmed and thier is no official statement from the secretariat.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: miguel
Um, sure DM. The US Military is just not trying, are they?

Trying's not good enough. If we're going to invade a country and occupy it, the least we can do is provide enough troops to ensure adequate security. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[sandorski]

Iraq is the "giant sucking sound" of the Mid-East.

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: miguel
Um, sure DM. The US Military is just not trying, are they?

Trying's not good enough. If we're going to invade a country and occupy it, the least we can do is provide enough troops to ensure adequate security. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

I don't think thier are that many troops.

 

[miguel]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: miguel
Um, sure DM. The US Military is just not trying, are they?

Trying's not good enough. If we're going to invade a country and occupy it, the least we can do is provide enough troops to ensure adequate security. The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

True. But if the US Military just wanted to secure the country, they could, but Human Rights and AI would go nutz. It's a delicate balance. The US Military is not best suited for police type protection. They are a seek and destroy tool.

 

[GrGr]

The US cannot provide security for all of Afghanistan. That is why this year we will see the second largest poppy harvest of all time in Afghanistan. The warlords (many of whom are allied to the US) and al-Qa'ida will share the profits.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Why does this not suprise me. The UN giving up? Nah...They are bright shining beacon of hope and "International Order"

CkG

 

[miguel]

Why can't the UN call on the security council to put together a "peace force" to go into Afghanistan and secure the area, since they feel the US isn't doing a good enough job?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: GrGr
The US cannot provide security for all of Afghanistan. That is why this year we will see the second largest poppy harvest of all time in Afghanistan. The warlords (many of whom are allied to the US) and al-Qa'ida will share the profits.

Actually the two largest warlords in afghanistan have turned intheir weapons. Farm crops have also doubled in the past 2 years. I dont think anyone claimed afghanistan would be turned around overnight.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: miguel
Why can't the UN call on the security council to put together a "peace force" to go into Afghanistan and secure the area, since they feel the US isn't doing a good enough job?

Because there is only a few countries interested in doing it.

 

[DealMonkey]

Originally posted by: miguel
Why can't the UN call on the security council to put together a "peace force" to go into Afghanistan and secure the area, since they feel the US isn't doing a good enough job?

They're asking for exactly that, but I guess no one cares about Afghanistan enough to send more troops.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: DealMonkey

Originally posted by: miguel
Why can't the UN call on the security council to put together a "peace force" to go into Afghanistan and secure the area, since they feel the US isn't doing a good enough job?

They're asking for exactly that, but I guess no one cares about Afghanistan enough to send more troops.

Yup, many complain, few help.

 

[sandorski]

Many are helping already, but you'd think a certain someone would be more willing to see this situation through. Iraq is the monkeywrench that could see Afghanistan become a failure, IMO. One reason for this is the US's preoccupation and near total force utilization in Iraq. Secondly, is the foreign policy and comments that keep irritating much needed Allies.

 

[Gaard]

Anyway we could possibly 'convince' others to help us?

 

[Red Dawn]

This can be directly attributed to the nefarious Neocons in the Bush Administration along with Halliburton's Cheney, may his sausage heart give out for the good of America and the world!

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: sandorski
Many are helping already, but you'd think a certain someone would be more willing to see this situation through. Iraq is the monkeywrench that could see Afghanistan become a failure, IMO. One reason for this is the US's preoccupation and near total force utilization in Iraq. Secondly, is the foreign policy and comments that keep irritating much needed Allies.

You mean Mr. Annan right?
I don't understand people's preoccupation with saying we have too many ...no wait.. too few troops in some such place. You don't know any better than the Pentagon or the Generals in charge. It's nice to sit back and say shoulda coulda woulda but the facts are - this is the now. Are you going to be a help or not? IF not then move out of the way and let people who are willing to - actually do it. We need to know who is at the table and ready to play.
Next- this supposed "foreign policy and comments that keep irritating much needed Allies." What a bunch of utter hogwash. Either you help or you GTF out of the way. This isn't the time for playing kiss ass - this is a time to stand bold and firm. Assuming you mean irritating Germany, France, and Russia - well fine, if they think that way - let them cry. They stood in the way of doing what was right and just - they have no place at the table because they CHOSE not to show up. This idea that we should go groveling back to them or the (near useless) UN is asinine - they should be begging US to let them in. They were the ones who CHOSE to keep themselves out - we didn't say they couldn't be part of the mission. Now that the the card shark is gone they think they can just pull up a seat - well ... they best ante up first. Their credit is no good anymore since they didn't back up what they said.
I get sick of hearing how we need to play nicey nice with these people - they are the ones who have done nothing but make things difficult. Yes it's hardball but what will we gain by allowing them to control us. Will things suddenly be better just because we appeased them or kiss their ass? Does that change the situation in either Iraq or Afghanistan? Heck -the UN got run out of Iraq and now they are thinking about doing the same in Afghanistan....why do we want to appease these people?

What happened to places that didn't take a hard stance against the terrorists - they still got their stuff blown up. Saudi - bomb, Turkey - bomb, UN - bomb, Red Cross - bomb. These people still got bombed even though they didn't actually "side" with us.

/rant

No place for ass kissing here. Lets get the damn job done. If you want to HELP then HELP - don't pussy foot around - it doesn't help and infact you are in the way.

CkG

Edit - yes I mixed the Iraq and Afghanistan issues together. sue me.

 

[miguel]

You see CAD, the UN and all the nations care so much about Iraqis and the Afghans that they want the US to kiss everyone's ass before they lift a finger to help. Plain as day.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY

Originally posted by: sandorski
Many are helping already, but you'd think a certain someone would be more willing to see this situation through. Iraq is the monkeywrench that could see Afghanistan become a failure, IMO. One reason for this is the US's preoccupation and near total force utilization in Iraq. Secondly, is the foreign policy and comments that keep irritating much needed Allies.

You mean Mr. Annan right?
I don't understand people's preoccupation with saying we have too many ...no wait.. too few troops in some such place. You don't know any better than the Pentagon or the Generals in charge. It's nice to sit back and say shoulda coulda woulda but the facts are - this is the now. Are you going to be a help or not? IF not then move out of the way and let people who are willing to - actually do it. We need to know who is at the table and ready to play.
Next- this supposed "foreign policy and comments that keep irritating much needed Allies." What a bunch of utter hogwash. Either you help or you GTF out of the way. This isn't the time for playing kiss ass - this is a time to stand bold and firm. Assuming you mean irritating Germany, France, and Russia - well fine, if they think that way - let them cry. They stood in the way of doing what was right and just - they have no place at the table because they CHOSE not to show up. This idea that we should go groveling back to them or the (near useless) UN is asinine - they should be begging US to let them in. They were the ones who CHOSE to keep themselves out - we didn't say they couldn't be part of the mission. Now that the the card shark is gone they think they can just pull up a seat - well ... they best ante up first. Their credit is no good anymore since they didn't back up what they said.
I get sick of hearing how we need to play nicey nice with these people - they are the ones who have done nothing but make things difficult. Yes it's hardball but what will we gain by allowing them to control us. Will things suddenly be better just because we appeased them or kiss their ass? Does that change the situation in either Iraq or Afghanistan? Heck -the UN got run out of Iraq and now they are thinking about doing the same in Afghanistan....why do we want to appease these people?

What happened to places that didn't take a hard stance against the terrorists - they still got their stuff blown up. Saudi - bomb, Turkey - bomb, UN - bomb, Red Cross - bomb. These people still got bombed even though they didn't actually "side" with us.

/rant

No place for ass kissing here. Lets get the damn job done. If you want to HELP then HELP - don't pussy foot around - it doesn't help and infact you are in the way.

CkG

Edit - yes I mixed the Iraq and Afghanistan issues together. sue me.

Get out of the way of what? There's nothing coming! Which is what the issue is about.

 

[Gaard]

What's best for Iraq? What's best for Afghanistan? If we (USA) can do the 'spite' thing without it affecting what's best for those we are 'liberating' than more power to us. If our spiteful actions and our bully attitude get in the way of doing what's best for them, then we should all watch what we say about others putting their interests before those we are helping and take a step back to think about why we are there in the first place. Words like deserve, earned the right, etc, don't belong in this issue. IMO.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: Gaard
What's best for Iraq? What's best for Afghanistan? If we (USA) can do the 'spite' thing without it affecting what's best for those we are 'liberating' than more power to us. If our spiteful actions and our bully attitude get in the way of doing what's best for them, then we should all watch what we say about others putting their interests before those we are helping and take a step back to think about why we are there in the first place. Words like deserve, earned the right, etc, don't belong in this issue. IMO.

I guess that's just a difference in perspective. IMO -we are not the bully. We tried to do it the so-called "right way"- they opposed their own words. Notice I didn't say "deserve" or "earned the right" -those are your words. This issue is about choices - Either you choose to help or you sit down and shut your yapper. Everyone has a choice - how they decide is not up to me or you - it is up to them. If they really want to "help" then I/we gladly welcome their support but we do NOT have to kiss anyones ass just to get them to help. IMO if they really wanted to help then they'd be willing to show some support - not just turn tail and run at the first hint of danger or expect or whine about it along the way.

People really need to examine how they view America - IMO, the ones who are saying we are the problem are the ones we are fighting...do you want to be part of the group(s) we are fighting? Al Qaeda thinks we are the problem, Saddamists think we are the problem....who else thinks we are the problem? Hmmm.... I wonder...

sandorski - It's get out of the way and STFU If you don't want to be part of the solution -then don't become a problem or distraction. Meaning don't hinder those that are actually doing something about the problem. If you want to help - fine - offer to help.

CkG