Now that OBL is dead, can we just GTFO?

Status
Not open for further replies.

MayorOfAmerica

Senior member
Apr 29, 2011
470
0
0
I would like to see a prompt withdrawal from Afghanistan now that OBL is dead. Why risk more American and Afghani lives and spend more (much needed) money? If we leave now, will it leave a power vacuum to be filled by the Taliban (or similar type group), or is that a tired excuse? Would staying incite more anti-american sentiment, now that there is no perceived reason to stay? Just curious as to what you guys think.
 

cganesh75

Elite Member | For Sale/Trade
Super Moderator
Oct 8, 2005
9,540
33
101
No, before we leave we have to exploit their natural resources and award oil and mineral contracts.

Either we are going to get their natural resources, or china will - take your pick.

you mean opium?
 

MayorOfAmerica

Senior member
Apr 29, 2011
470
0
0
No, before we leave we have to exploit their natural resources and award oil and mineral contracts.

Either we are going to get their natural resources, or china will - take your pick.


Afghanistan is not all that rich in oil, but according various articles online there are about $1 trillion in mineral deposits. Let's face it though, it belongs to the Afghani people and I think we need to respect that. If Afghanistan's government is ever going to be able to run its country effectively, it needs industry and exports (other than opium).

If the Chinese are a player like you say (I don't doubt that they are), they'll probably help to develop Afghanistan to the point where the minerals can tapped and distributed to their benefit. Why couldn't we do the same? That does NOT require a ridiculously costly military presence to achieve. If the risk was worth it, wouldn't it be in the best interest of some private US companies to undertake that effort, such that they can lock down the "Afghanistan mineral" market? Why wouldn't they undertake that effort in that case? If they don't, can we assume that the mineral deposits aren't worth it? I still don't understand why we need to keep military there, in this case.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
34,779
8,882
136
We should have gotten out before and you need to appreciate that OBL isn't the reason to leave. Its the fact that the ONLY accomplishment our troops achieve over there is dying.

Its a meat grinder with no objective. Either you're killing the enemy, or you're not. Oh yes, they suffer casualties. So do we. That doesn't mean anything has changed. Afghanistan still belongs to those who kill our people.

Their numbers continue to replenish because there is still a population to replenish them from. We're not there to genocide the population, we're not there to 'win'. There's no winning while your killers move freely. It's nothing more than a trap for us to lose lives and money.

Why NOT leave? Do we pride ourselves on getting our soldiers murdered? Do we enjoy spending hundreds of billions? My answer to that continued presence is HELL NO. It was time to leave years ago.
 

MayorOfAmerica

Senior member
Apr 29, 2011
470
0
0
To the victors go the spoils. Since we are the victors, we get those natural resources.

You said victors, right? While we finally got OBL (a great achievement in itself and one of our initial stated objectives), I wouldn't exactly call Afghanistan a victory since we destroyed ourselves in the process.
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
197
106
You said victors, right? While we finally got OBL (a great achievement in itself and one of our initial stated objectives), I wouldn't exactly call Afghanistan a victory since we destroyed ourselves in the process.

Didnt we replace the government of Afghanistan with a bunch of puppets?

I would call that a victory.

Now its just a matter of getting the people to accept their new puppet government.
 

jackstar7

Lifer
Jun 26, 2009
11,679
1,944
126
Question was already asked: http://forums.anandtech.com/showthread.php?t=2162664

My response remains the same:

I thought crushing the Taliban was part of our reason for hitting Afghanistan due to the ties to 9/11, then responsibly try and set up a regime that won't lead to future attacks being spawned from their land.

If you thought the scope of the mission was just OBL... how do you reconcile 10 years and billions of dollars to kill one man?
 

Texashiker

Lifer
Dec 18, 2010
18,811
197
106
And that's exactly why this will just be another endless cluster f&#k.

After a few generations the Gauls finally accepted the idea that they were Roman. Same thing might happen here.

We need to build a few wal-marts, open some liquor stores, get Afghanistan a football, baseball and basketball team,,,,,, introduce them to the American way of life.

Get them more focused on getting a job, working 60 hours a week to buy a new house and car, watching football on the weekend, having bar-b-q's,,,,,, before long they will stop all of this fighting.
 

MayorOfAmerica

Senior member
Apr 29, 2011
470
0
0

Sorry I missed that.

I thought crushing the Taliban was part of our reason for hitting Afghanistan due to the ties to 9/11, then responsibly try and set up a regime that won't lead to future attacks being spawned from their land.

If you thought the scope of the mission was just OBL... how do you reconcile 10 years and billions of dollars to kill one man?

I'm not sure if that was directed toward me or if it was a general comment but I never thought OBL was the only objective. Even with that in mind how can one reconcile 10 years, billions of dollars and thousands of lives toppling a regime and putting in place another that is so weak, hated and corrupt, while our presence is creating so much ant-american fervor around the arab world that future attacks are at least as likely as they were before.

The point being is that we failed on that particular objective. I dont think anyone can honestly say otherwise. Staying there longer is not going to help, and in fact will only make things worse. Its time to cut and run, why throw good money after bad and waste more life?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.