Its official

[Ram]

The world's biggest superpower, the mightiest military in the history of mankind, with its $400 bn dollar defence budget and an array of sophisticated equipment and well trained personnel has finally admitted it. They've simply thrown their hands up and said 'We CANNOT defeat the Taliban'. So, what next? If you cannot beat 'em, buy them. Reports from the recent Afghanistan Conference that was held in London recently suggest that the Afghani govt. is asking international donors anywhere b/w $150mn - $1bn to, in their own words 'lure away certain elements of the Taliban' or in the more plain words 'bribe them away from the insurgency'. Hamid Karzai wants to hold a tribal 'jirga' and hold wide-ranging talk with the Taliban. More here - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8485865.stm :hahaha:

[Sachinism]

what a fail. how much money was wasted on this?

[Ram]

what a fail. how much money was wasted on this?

The US has so far spent I think $150 bn on the Afghanistan war. The UK and the other allied/NATO forces must have spent an equal amount too. And this is just the war effort. In addition to this, they must have spent 10s of billions of dollars on relief and reconstruction aid money.

[yoda]

Well Mission is pretty much accomplished for the US. Taliban govt has been overthrown, a country supported safe haven for Al Qaeda has been crushed. If they hide in the tribal areas and in Pakistan, there isn't much any military can do except nuke the whole area.

[Desi Cartman]

from what I have seen on Tele, they have said that they are not leaving yet. In all honesty they look lost but at the same time I wont call this defeat YET. Its one of the newer tactics they plan to use. PS: I think half of pakistan is going to move to kabul to get a share .. maybe thats why afridi wanted to return home early.

[coffee_rules]

Well Mission is pretty much accomplished for the US. Taliban govt has been overthrown, a country supported safe haven for Al Qaeda has been crushed. If they hide in the tribal areas and in Pakistan, there isn't much any military can do except nuke the whole area.

Have they caught Bin Laden? Have they caught Omar Sheriff or whoever is the Taliban chief? All they did was to chase the rats to the caves and the rats are still engaged in war even after 8 years. Mission accomplished. Not.

[Ram]

Well Mission is pretty much accomplished for the US. Taliban govt has been overthrown, a country supported safe haven for Al Qaeda has been crushed. If they hide in the tribal areas and in Pakistan, there isn't much any military can do except nuke the whole area.

Either you're being sarcastic, or being completely ignorant.

[Clarke]

This was gonna happen anyways. The trouble is, Afghanistan is no Iraq. They never had a proper army like Iraq, and that sense of nationhood and discipline has been the single biggest stumbling block over training the so called Afghan Army. The taliban might not accept the bribes since unlike Iraqis, they are religiously motivated and would not generally make pacts with 'kafirs'. In all seriousness, the taliban could be playing a waiting game .. the patience of Americans will run out much before theirs. It happened in Vietnam, it shall happen here as well.

The US has so far spent I think $150 bn on the Afghanistan war. The UK and the other allied/NATO forces must have spent an equal amount too. And this is just the war effort. In addition to this' date=' they must have spent 10s of billions of dollars on relief and reconstruction aid money.[/quote'] That is the default US formula, when u cannot fix a problem, throw money at it. They did that in Iraq with the exploding gift baskets, they did that at the economic crisis with the stimulus and now it is the taliban. So far though its worked a bit.

Well Mission is pretty much accomplished for the US. Taliban govt has been overthrown, a country supported safe haven for Al Qaeda has been crushed. If they hide in the tribal areas and in Pakistan, there isn't much any military can do except nuke the whole area.

Not exactly .. Taliban has a good presence over 70-80% of Afghanistan, presence being defined as ability to launch attacks frequently. The ISAF troop strength is lesser than Iraq while the threat from Pakistan in terms of insurgency is big.

[Clarke]

Well Mission is pretty much accomplished for the US. Taliban govt has been overthrown, a country supported safe haven for Al Qaeda has been crushed. If they hide in the tribal areas and in Pakistan, there isn't much any military can do except nuke the whole area.

Reminds me of the time when Bush supposedly flew an F-18 to an aircraft carrier. His popularity was the highest then, Kerry could never achieve such a feat said Fox news :haha: And then this speech of his with the world famous banner in the background .. bushy won the election & then SH*T happened in Iraq.

[yoda]

Either you're being sarcastic' date=' or being completely ignorant.[/quote'] Clarify to me again - What was the US mission in Afghanistan and why exactly did the US go there?

[yoda]

Reminds me of the time when Bush supposedly flew an F-18 to an aircraft carrier. His popularity was the highest then, Kerry could never achieve such a feat said Fox news :haha: And then this speech of his with the world famous banner in the background .. bushy won the election & then SH*T happened in Iraq.

Exactly NOT the same. Iraq was a disaster from the beginning, achieved nothing except turn a once prosperous country into ruins. Afghanistan was infested with a barbaric regime acting as terrorist headquarters of Al Qaeda. It is neither anymore. There is a big big difference between the two. Of course problems will never go way in Afghanistan either, but at least the country is no longer a safe haven for Al Qaeda. So Mission Accomplished.

[Clarke]

Exactly NOT the same. Iraq was a disaster from the beginning, achieved nothing except turn a once prosperous country into ruins. Afghanistan was infested with a barbaric regime acting as terrorist headquarters of Al Qaeda. It is neither anymore. There is a big big difference between the two. Of course problems will never go way in Afghanistan either, but at least the country is no longer a safe haven for Al Qaeda. So Mission Accomplished.

Well, Iraq is a democracy now with periodic elections and the security scenario is much better than earlier, unlike Afghanistan. They even had a surplus in their budget. Afghanistan may not be a safe haven for AQ now, but the Taliban isnt dead and will never be. They are playing a waiting game, and u never know what happens when the ISAF presence is reduced over the years. Add to that the support from extremist elements in Pakistan :nervous: I just hope Afghanistan works out like Iraq has ..

[Ram]

Clarify to me again - What was the US mission in Afghanistan and why exactly did the US go there?

I dont even where to begin the rebuttal, but let me just say this. The Taliban are far from 'overthrown', but are infact gaining strength in most provinces of Afghanistan. I am not saying this. the Chairman of Join Chief of Staff Mike Mullen is (http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/taliban-influence-growing-us-military-chief-warns-20100203-nbe4.html) And not just that, 2009 was the bloodiest year in Afghanistan with reg. to coalition casualties since the war was launched in 2001. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6087327/Afghanistan-bloodiest-year-for-international-troops-since-2001.html) That is precisely the reason why the US President Barack Obama ordered a Iraqi style surge in Afghanistan that is too commence soon. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has recently said Afghanistan is simply not capable of defending itself without the US and NATO help for probably at least another decade to decade and half (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/28/uk-troops-afghanistan-conference). So, yes, it is FAAAAAAAAAAAAAR from mission accomplished in Afghanistan. The Taliban is resurgent and still hold the capacity to cause significant damage to the Kabul govt. Some of them still have close allegiances with Al-Qaeda and some of it affiliates and the Afghan-Pakistan border is still the world's most dangerous place. You think the President of Afghanistan would say he needs foreign troops for 15 more years if it was mission accomplished? You think the US govt. would actively consider using 100s of millions of dollars to bribe Taliban fighters from conflict if it thought it was 'mission accomplished'? You think Barack Obama would be ordering a surge of 30,000 troops this year in Afghanistan if he thought it was mission accomplished? I could go on for a 1000 pages more as to why your assessment is so wildly wrong, but I think the point has been made..

[yoda]

I dont even where to begin the rebuttal' date=' but let me just say this. The Taliban are far from 'overthrown', but are infact gaining strength in most provinces of Afghanistan. I am not saying this. the Chairman of Join Chief of Staff Mike Mullen is ([url']http://news.smh.com.au/breaking-news-world/taliban-influence-growing-us-military-chief-warns-20100203-nbe4.html) And not just that, 2009 was the bloodiest year in Afghanistan with reg. to coalition casualties since the war was launched in 2001. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/defence/6087327/Afghanistan-bloodiest-year-for-international-troops-since-2001.html) That is precisely the reason why the US President Barack Obama ordered a Iraqi style surge in Afghanistan that is too commence soon. Afghan President Hamid Karzai has recently said Afghanistan is simply not capable of defending itself without the US and NATO help for probably at least another decade to decade and half (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jan/28/uk-troops-afghanistan-conference). So, yes, it is FAAAAAAAAAAAAAR from mission accomplished in Afghanistan. The Taliban is resurgent and still hold the capacity to cause significant damage to the Kabul govt. Some of them still have close allegiances with Al-Qaeda and some of it affiliates and the Afghan-Pakistan border is still the world's most dangerous place. You think the President of Afghanistan would say he needs foreign troops for 15 more years if it was mission accomplished? You think the US govt. would actively consider using 100s of millions of dollars to bribe Taliban fighters from conflict if it thought it was 'mission accomplished'? You think Barack Obama would be ordering a surge of 30,000 troops this year in Afghanistan if he thought it was mission accomplished? I could go on for a 1000 pages more as to why your assessment is so wildly wrong, but I think the point has been made..

Answer two questions: 1. Is Afghanistan a safe haven for AQ? 2. Is the aTaliban in power or control of Afghanistan? Those were the the two missions of the US there. Of course everyone would like for the Taliban to be wiped out totally from the face of the earth, but keep in mind as to why the US went there in the first place. 9/11 was born from there. It was training ground for terrorists. There will be no more 9/11 born out of there and it is not a training ground for terrorists anymore. Ofc much of the action has shifted to Pakistan and that should be the US govt's next mission.

[Ram]

Answer two questions: 1. Is Afghanistan a safe haven for AQ? 2. Is the aTaliban in power or control of Afghanistan? Those were the the two missions of the US there. Of course everyone would like for the Taliban to be wiped out totally from the face of the earth, but keep in mind as to why the US went there in the first place. 9/11 was born from there. It was training ground for terrorists. There will be no more 9/11 born out of there and it is not a training ground for terrorists anymore. Ofc much of the action has shifted to Pakistan and that should be the US govt's next mission.

I'll answer the first question first. The Taliban is as much not in control of Afghanistan today, as it was in control before the 2001 invasion. You must not forget, the Taliban did not have official govts. and parliments in Afghanistan before the US invaded, they were just a rag-tag group of 15,000-20,000 ideologically crazed fanatics that controlled large parts of Afghanistan. They still do, not just in Afghanistan, but also in the neighboring NWFP province in Pakistan, as these maps show. When 70% of the country has significant Taliban presence, would you call that mission accomplished? If the Obama declares 'Mission accomplished' like his stupid predecessor and leaves the country, it'll be just a matter of months before the Karzai govt. in Kabul is overthrown. Now, to the 1st question; No, Afghanistan is not a safe-haven for Al-Qaede as it used to be, only because the US-NATO-Afghan forces are applying pressure from the West, while the Pakistani army is pushing them from the west. The minute any one of these two factors cease to exist, Taliban will be rampant again and its only a matter of time before all the Al-Qaeda operatives swarm back into the country and start plotting terror attacks again. So once again, your assessment that it is 'mission accomplished' for the US in Afghanistan is factually and fundamentally erroneous. If the US left now, it will lead to disastrous consequences in the region.

[yoda]

Guess depends on what you think the mission is. You seem to think mission is to make Afghanistan Taliban free, which will never ever be the case. For me the mission is to make sure AQ has no safe haven and that a barbaric regime isn't in power anymore. Everything else is post mission stabilization effort which is multi-national and will be ongoing for probably decades.

[seedhi]

The US is not leaving Af-pak any time soon. Already their presence has brought pakistan untold misery. Soon the Taliban will vie for more space withing pakistan as the drones keep pounding N Waziristan, and hopefully we should see lots of bloodshed (even more than last year) in pakistani cities. The US should start using B-52 bombers to really heat up the situation in pakistan. More the bloodshed in pakistan the better.

[yoda]

The US is not leaving Af-pak any time soon. Already their presence has brought pakistan untold misery. Soon the Taliban will vie for more space withing pakistan as the drones keep pounding N Waziristan, and hopefully we should see lots of bloodshed (even more than last year) in pakistani cities. The US should start using B-52 bombers to really heat up the situation in pakistan. More the bloodshed in pakistan the better.

You do realize that innocents civilians die when you just carpet bomb "cities" from a B-52 right or are you implying bomb the border? Yes innocent civilians died in NY and Mumbai, but that doesn't mean you go around killing innocents elsewhere.

[seedhi]

You do realize that innocents civilians die when you just carpet bomb "cities" from a B-52 right or are you implying bomb the border? Yes innocent civilians died in NY and Mumbai, but that doesn't mean you go around killing innocents elsewhere.

The civilians in pakistan are by and large complicit with their establishment in supporting terrorism and insurgencies inside India. Secondly, the more pakistan is in turmoil, the less is its ability to harm India - an empirically proven fact. I would rather the entire population of pakistan be slaughtered by the Taliban or by B-52s than a single Indian be harmed. Realistically speaking however, the US will never use B-52s to bomb pakistani cities, but the Waziristan region which harbors the Taliban may still be a potential target, I can only hope so. My guess is that the drone attacks will go on as by many accounts they are highly accurate and even welcomed by the non-Taliban residents of that area. Hopefully this will drive the Taliban into the interior and cause lots of havoc there.

[yoda]

The civilians in pakistan are by and large complicit with their establishment in supporting terrorism and insurgencies inside India. Secondly, the more pakistan is in turmoil, the less is its ability to harm India - an empirically proven fact. I would rather the entire population of pakistan be slaughtered by the Taliban or by B-52s than a single Indian be harmed. Realistically speaking however, the US will never use B-52s to bomb pakistani cities, but the Waziristan region which harbors the Taliban may still be a potential target, I can only hope so. My guess is that the drone attacks will go on as by many accounts they are highly accurate and even welcomed by the non-Taliban residents of that area. Hopefully this will drive the Taliban into the interior and cause lots of havoc there.

Don't you think your views are a bit extreme, more like the extremism we are trying to destroy? What about those civilians who might not support terrorism? Kill them too? What about innocent children who don't even know what terrorism means? Kill them too?