SHARE THIS SHOW:
RELATED CONVERSATIONS:
RECENTLY ON TOL:
TOL Our Town
- A tumblr site dedicated to the people and places that make up Oregon and Southwest Washington.
TAGS:
President Obama has said he wants to "finish the job" in Afghanistan and he made his plans public with a nationally broadcast speech from West Point on Tuesday night. He announced that he wants to begin withdrawal from Afghanistan in July 2011, but in order to get to there 30,000 more troops will need to be deployed over the next six months.
At this point the 162 Engineer Company based in Dallas, Oregon, are in Fort McCoy, Wisconsin, preparing for deployment to Afghanistan at the beginning of next year. Their mission will be to make sure roadways are safe for travel. Currently, 70 17 Oregonians are deployed in Afghanistan with Oregon's Air and Army National Guard. And a number of local battalions are on alert, and might be deployed in the future.
That's all on the military level. At the same time, local organizations like MercyCorps are working to improve living conditions for people in Afghanistan. Polls are revealing that many Americans are losing confidence in the way Obama is handling the war. And critics (like Michael Moore) have lined up to comment on the speech President Obama should make.
Is sending more troops the best way to stop Taliban insurgents who are trying to regain control of Afghanistan? Is the Obama Administration moving too quickly — or not quickly enough — with this plan? What affect will increased troop demand have on this state, and on families in it? Would you be willing to fight to end the war in Afghanistan?
Tagged as: afghanistan · military · national guard · obama · war
Photo credit: Chuck Holton / Creative Commons
-
Whatever happened to the original mission: Get Osama Bin Laden?
-
"Whatever happened to the original mission: Get Osama Bin Laden?"
Rumsfeld let him fly out of Tora Bora, remember.
-
One word explains why we will fail in Afghanistan if we are counting on warriors to win the battle.
Terrain.
It is all fine and good from a military standpoint to go chase the bad men around in the relatively flat terrain of the sandbox that is Iraq. But Afghanistan is nothing like a sandbox and especially the border region with Pakistan.
There are basically no roads. The terrain is all up or down. You could nuke an entire valley and the valley a half-mile away would be basically unaffected. So would the next valley a half-mile the other way. So would the additional 1000 little valleys in each direction for the next 200 miles.
Lots of armies have tried to take on this region. It is a logistics nightmare. Think of diesel fuel at $400 a gallon by the time it is delivered. Think of every meal and roll of toilet paper and tampon and round of ammunition that can only be delivered to the fight with a helicopter.
Think about paying a million a year to fill a single pair of boots on the ground. Some say that is what it is going to cost.
There is no government. There is no infrastructure. There is no economy save the drug trade. None of the people that live in the border region want us there or have any reason to trust us. The bad men sit on the mountain ridges and shoot mortars and small arms fire down into the remote American military outposts where there is literally no cover from above. And if we rally and try to chase them they disappear into the woods just like an Oregon Coast Range Blactail Deer.
We had a good chance to change things after we helped the people in their war against the Russians. We had some friends and we could have opened some schools and showed them how to mine marble and maybe could have built some water treatment and a few hospitals but we just walked away.
Now our only option is to put a price on the heads of the bad men. A bounty if you will. For what it is going to cost us to fill a thousand sets of boots with precious young Americans we could have a billion dollars to use for a bounty.
Only the people that live there can catch the bad men.
-
Yes, Mr. Obama has improved our international reputation---which was necessary. But, how much of that improvement was symbolic or even physical, rather then a result of his actions, this is yet to be seen. Gays are not closer to equal rights, if anything they are perhaps further as a result of his election---at least in some places. Health-care is essentially a no-go, and when it goes, it will be so watered down, through trade-off after trade-off, what will it resemble? It won't be a health-care revolution, it will only be a tiny bit better. 'The lesser of two evils' has become America's tag-line. Yet, it isn't the only way, but it seems to be all we are willing to fight for---the nation of second-bests.
It is astute to think and deliberate, and maintain a civil tone (in politics)---to take all the time you need, to hear all the voices that need to be heard. But, being a compelling leader is not about kowtowing and trading-off so many of your principles that you are left with no clothes. Mr. Obama was in the right place at the right time. And, he has left us clutching at symbolism, hoping in hope while we look at our watches, but there is no actual bread in our baskets. Yes, it is early in his presidency, but it is late in Afghanistan---and how will we (he) ever know when to leave the party? When will enough be enough? What metric is 'mission accomplished?' When are we going to have our last dance? And at what point, will it still be worth dancing?
-
I try not to get emotionally involve in matters of politics because I would be breaking the basic rule, "don't take it personal, it's just politics." But how in the world can one not feel anything when your stomach tightens when you hear that the president you gave your vote too, is about to send more troops to what seems an endless invasion (aka war) to a remote place! I just can't imagine why our government would continue on the legacy of the previous corrupt administration!
As I heard Obama's speech today on my way home, many things ran through my mind, but more so flashbacks on what it seems repetitive rhetoric on why we must continue military operations on a country that has been ravaged by occupations--from the British, Soviet Union, and now the US. He was careful however, not to mention the British as invaders at one point, but fast to highlight the Russians as occupiers in Afghanistan---pretty bias if you ask me.
The other part of his speech that made my forehead wrinkled in anger was, his announcement that the people of Afghanistan are in danger of extremisms and Taliban expansion in regions across their country, and that our intervention would bring peace, security, freedom, and opportunities for the advancement of the Afghan people. Now...I don't mean to be cynical on this, but my concern on this part of his speech is that for months, the people of Afghanistan have been the victims of brutal and vicious bombardments from unmanned drones that scout the skies of their country; and as a result, many innocent people have died due to these cowardly operations done from abroad with our tax dollars! Now, how in the world can the allies and our country bring security to Afghanistan when we continue to bomb the hell out of them resulting in increased numbers of deaths of children, women and men who could otherwise, have taken part of the political process to lay the foundation for Democracy? NO WONDER THEY SEE US AS MURDERERS.
For politicians to take our most precious investment, our young men and women, and put them in harms way for what seems to be more and more a political stunt, and corporate requests to access foreign natural resources in the name of "Freedom" and "Democracy," it's one of the most despicable, and inhumane thing in my book, our country can have as a legacy. I hope our children look back at this and condemn what has happened in the last eight years.
-
I appreciate the President's manner in gaining information about Afghanistan. I support the continuing of the mission there. The region is unstable and Pakistan is not doing so well. Plus Pakistan has nuclear weapons. I do not want the Taliban (who recently staged a major attack on the Pakistani military HQ) to gain more ground.
I object to the political grandstanding of former V.P. Cheney. If Americans are losing faith in the war in Afghanistan it is because we've been there for several years and not the fault of the current administration that inherited it from the last.
I object to Michael Moore's opinions as well. He is as bad at politicizing and making a name for him self as Cheney and others. I don't trust him, Limbaugh, Cheney, or many others that have something to gain from their tirades for/against the war. Point is the elements that attacked us are growing in strength in Afghanistan. When you enter into a fight you do so with the intent to win a fight, not slap around and hope things work out as we've done with the past administration.
As far as the comments from the Right that this administration is too slow in acting, it would have been nice if they'd been a bit slower in rushing to Iraq. I'll fight alongside my comrades in arms anywhere in the world, but I would appreciate a little less flippant attitude about spending the lives of our troops for ill thought out wars as Iraq.
Semper Fi
Eddie Black
-
Are we creating another "nanny state" in Afghanistan? When does it become the responsibility of the Afghan people to step up and take control of their own country? Who's going to pay for our continuing occupation Afghanistan? Conservative war supports seem unequipped to answer these vital questions. Until they can, should we pull out and let the Afghans sort out their own priorities?
-
President Obama’s speech last night to a large extent relied on the infantilism of political discourse in the United States today. It is striking that for all the time he spent collecting “information” about the situation in Afghanistan, he declined to mention the fact -- widely and openly acknowledged by political elites -- that U.S. interests there go far beyond fighting the Taliban and “extremism.” Central Asia is an oil-rich region, and there are competing interests over various pipelines there, both those that have already been build and those that corporate interests would like to build and/or control. If this were not true, it is highly unlikely we would be sending troops into a country described as one “where empires go to die.” The Taliban was not behind the 9/11 attacks; al-Qaeda was, and the two are not the same. Obama is now every bit as culpable in war crimes as Bush/Cheney are. This is a purely imperialistic enterprise, it will bring more devastation and grief to the Afghan people, and it will result in many more dead, maimed and paralyzed American soldiers who do not deserve that fate.
-
For a second, let's leave the moral issues aside. Let's address the situation in Afghanistan in a PRACTICAL way, with WHAT WORKS!
1. Military and adminitration alike know that a military solution won't work (not to mention the historical evidence). In fact, the military response has increased terrorism in both Iraq and Afghanistan;
2. Most Afghans don't hate us (yet), but the Taliban gets stronger as we bomb Afghan civilians (and wouldn't most Americans have the same defiant response to an invasion of our country?);
3. The vast majority of Afghans want what we want: security and opportunity. People who see futures for their children don't become terrorists;
4. We want SUCCESS in Afghanistan. Let's define success meaningfully: "the purpose of living is to relieve the suffering" (Allen Ginsberg). And many military people know this better than the rest of us: these practical ideals drive the military: See Captain Paul Chappell's recent book, Will War Ever End: A Soldier's Vision of Peace for the 21st Century;
5. We can "relieve the suffering" (and reduce terrorism much more effectively--and cheaply, with HUMAN CARE.
6. There are alternatives to reliance on a military solution, devised by both military strategiests and peace activists. These include
a. opening schools in Afghanistan (especially for girls: "Educate a boy and educate an individual; educate a girl and educate a community");
b. developing jobs for Afghanis. Most Afghans want to help their families; they work for the Taliban because it pays $8 a day; for a lot less money than our military costs, we could actually do what everybody understands must happen, that Afghans move toward normalcy. We could help fund a set of FDR-like programs that would help them rebuild their own country;
c. Health care for a country and a people that have been devastated for the last 40 years;
7. We will think more clearly about these issues if we call "counterinsurgency" what it is: a nonviolent alternative to war (or at least an emphasis on strategies that actually change and help people).
8. These practical ways of thinking about Afghanistan are consistent with our American ideals.
-
This is the problem---in eight years, surely, the perpetrators of the attacks have been reconstituted. Al-Qaeda won that battle, it is over. The line has had too many curves to say we are seeking justice for nine-eleven with the current shape of the war in Afghanistan. We made too many missteps that can't be corrected. It seems, we are still in Afghanistan because if we leave, things will be worse then when we began. We perhaps should not leave the country in a mess; and we might be required to clean up after ourselves---but, to suggest that the original justice seeking mission of the war, to punish those responsible for the loss of three-thousand lives, is still our mission is disingenuous. That is not the war we are currently fighting. This was made evident last night by Mr. Obama who certainly did not commit enough troops to accomplish the original mission. So what is this new mission? To placate the mass public with a compromise between right and left. Aim for the middle, sir! Well, sometimes half the ingredients won't make the same cake.
-
The real reasons for this war are to secure a pipeline route in Helmand Province, and if possible gain a foothold in the Asian heartland.
These wars will eventually destroy the United States. Right now China is letting us bleed, but when andif we get too close to their neighborhood they will pull the plug on our economy.
-
I listened very carefully to President Obama's speech last night, skeptical about the idea of an increase in troops but confident that he has given all options careful consideration and is more aware than any of us of the human and financial costs of war.
It was a thoughtful, informed speech, and as much as I can't stand the idea of continuing this or any other war, I have to recognize that this is a terrible situation caused by the Bush administration. It's a lesson we teach our children - you don't just walk away from what you've started because it's difficult.
I'm relieved to know that all options have been considered - and that Obama's plan includes BOTH military and civilian elements. Both are critical if we are to be successful in stabilizing the situation now and for the long-term.
I hope others will set aside their personal and political views long enough to think through the situation honestly. I think if they do, they'll realize this is a reasoned, thoughtful, careful approach that offers an opportunity for success without committing us forever.
-
I am an Afghan American who has spent the last five years in Afghanistan, working with Afghans in remote villages who get ignored by all our efforts in that war torn country. US efforts are concentrated in Kabul city, including the efforts of Zaher Wahab, who has never gone into any of the villages where more than 80% of Afghans live. Our presence does not benefit the villagers. Why would they support us so those in the city can get their university set up, while the kids in the village can't even leave their homes to go to the mosque to read the Koran?
Another thing we need to remember, the insurgents go around the villages telling people that the Americans are only there temporarily and when the US leaves, the taliban will come around and punish all those who sided with the US. Now, imagine how what we just did by announcing that we will be leaving by 2011 will do to the support that our soldier will get on the ground??? We just made our soldiers' lives so much harder and we might even have endangered them by leaving them all alone in the remote villages, where the villagers are too scared, with good reasons, to provide protection.
-
Should we say we are not leaving, even though we intend to, to garner more support from the public and then let the public deal with the aftermath after we leave. Doesn't seem particularly fair to our Afghan friends. That view is also predicated on the assumption that when we leave it will be in defeat. Because, if it is successful they wouldn't need to worry about the Taliban. Anyway, it could have an opposite effect by letting the public know we are not there forever, that we are not eternal occupiers.
-
A cost of a million US dollars per soldier? Who is profiting from that? Halliburton?
How about following the money trail? Why does this remind me of the German Corporations like Krupp and IG Farben who made so much money from Hitlers wars?
Cui Bono, Who Benefits?
I have to suspect that Cheneys' privatization of so much of the US military functions is one of the worst mistakes we have seen.
Those soldiers sure as hell are not getting paid anywhere near a million US dollars per year.
-
I did not find that the President's speech presented a compelling reason to send more troops. It makes one ponder the "real" reason we are compelled to build up the Army in Afghanistan, which seems to be pretty much the Soviet Army tried to dominate the country.
Why aren't we eradicating the opium fields?
Are we staying in Afghanistan just to have our army on Iran's eastern border? We already have the army on Iran's western border.
Why is this administration backing the fraudulent Karzi government?
-
There is an old saying in business, "Failing to plan is planning to fail".
Bush/Cheney failed in Afghanistan by failing to plan.
President Obama has planned, has set up goals and deadlines to strive for and so now our soldiers have an idea of what their mission is and what and when they can strive for.
Prsesident Obama has rejected the Bush/Cheney idea of neverending vague nebulous wars draining our military and our treasury only to benefit a very few Military-Industrial Complex Corporations.
We finally have a logical and rational President and Administration.
-
I respectfully disagree that it is reasonable to finish something that we started 8 years ago and now finish it in three years. We are assuming that we have made progress in those 8 years, when the reality on the ground is that we have lost ground to the taliban. We were ahead in local support and the desire to support construction efforts 8 years ago then we are today. How can we expect our soldiers to achieve the original goal (does anyone remember what that was?) and to gain back the ground we have lost to taliban in the last couple of years.
Things are very different in the villages than in Kabul city. Our NGOs go to Kabul, Jalalabad, Herat, Helmand and some of the Northern Afghanistan, and we all think that we are benefiting Afghans. That is not correct as far as the perceptions of Afghans are concerned.
-
I expect more out of professional and respected journalists from OPB than to let the college professor to rant and rant about how innocent the Taliban are without you challenging anything he says. Poor form you two. I am going to Afghanistan next year and I love the way OPB reports and addresses issues that affect us, but come on, you gave that guy a free opportunity to whine and complain and blame the US for all of Afghanistan's problems, as if the Taliban have not turned the areas they occupy into a complete hell hole for everyone. Show some courage and challenge ridiculous rants like that next time.
-
Yeah, don't allow any dissenting voices, OPB, people might get the idea that things are not what the official propagandists say they are.
Stomp out Free Speech whenever it raises its' ugly head!
Sheesh, I thought the professor was interesting, it is all too rare for a voice like his to slip through and be heard on any mainstream media. Oh, and I don't take what he says at face value.
-
For the first time in a long time I heard a Taliban commander interviewed by the BBC on OPB last night. How seldom we hear the views, complaints and rants of the opposition. I applaud OPB and TOL for airing opposing views.
The commander said that the Taliban will never negotiate with the Karzai government until every U.S. troop is gone. The only outcome the Taliban will accept is an Islamic state.
This war isn't going to end any time soon is it?
-
Win or lose, the outcome will still be an Islamic state. Even if we win, 'we' and 'they,' will be no better for it. Religions hold the power, they rally the people. We are attempting to bring democracy to a group of people that have already abandoned it. Their freedom will always be lost to faith, no matter what we do.
-
My question for NGOs and Mercy Corp is, what are you doing to involve the biggest ethnic group, the Pashtuns, in your reconstruction efforts?
Again, having spent the last five years in the Pashtun parts of Afghanistan, I have not seen many signs of reconstruction going on in those areas.
I do want to comment that Mercy Corp has a couple of schools in Helmand, or used to have them, but if there is no security and the kids are afraid to leave their homes, the schools are empty and a lot of the times used by insurgents for training their soldiers.
-
The problem is with Pakistan and 50 nuclear weapons that they control. The west is afraid these bombs will fall into the hands of Islamic extremists The Pakistan government is not strong and the risk is real. The solution is not clear and Obama’s speach was smoke and mirrors and vague statements of what, why, and for how long. There is no military solution and our tax dollars should be spent within the borders of the USA. Spending outside our borders just weakens our economy as we have seen in the last ten years and is just what the Islamic extremists want.
-
Again, the reality on the ground is that it looks like you are siding with the Northern Afghans when all your efforts are in those areas. To think that you can involve the "community" without understanding the tribes and the ethnical dynamics is naive. We are pushing the Pashtun away from us when we decide to build the "safe" communities in the North first and wait for things to get stable before we attack the destruction going on in the Pashtun areas.
-
I'm disappointed Obama stepped further into the Afghanistan quagmire. He places too much emphasis on a military solution. A Mercy Corps representative asked: what would happen if we sent Afghanistan 30,000 teachers; 30,000 technicians to rebuild infrastructure; or 30,000 agriculture consultants to help the Afghans feed themselves?
If the U.S. has not succeeded in achieving its objectives in eight years, what hope do I have that 30,000 more troops will make a difference? Especially when many Afghans are saying, "We don't know why the Americans are here and we want them to leave now. We have no faith in the America-backed government."
-
I expect more out of professional and respected journalists from OPB than to let the college professor to rant and rant about how innocent the Taliban are without you challenging anything he says. Poor form you two. I am going to Afghanistan next year and I love the way OPB reports and addresses issues that affect us, but come on, you gave that guy a free opportunity to whine and complain and blame the US for all of Afghanistan's problems, as if the Taliban have not turned the areas they occupy into a complete hell hole for everyone. Show some courage and challenge ridiculous rants like that next time.
Torrent
-
One reason America became a nation after the Civil War is because no foreign outsiders were able to invade and dominate one of the factions. Had the English used their military might to keep the South viable, the US may have been Balkanized.
The Afghans had their civil war after the Soviets left. The winners were the Taliban. They were beginning to create an Afghan nationalism when the US destroyed it with their invasion and deposition of the legitimate rulers, a legitimacy earned through civil war.Documentary torrents -
Our presence does not benefit the villagers. Why would they support us so those in the city can get their university set up, while the kids in the village can't even leave their homes to go to the mosque to read the Koran? by rapidshare
-
Comments are now closed.
Just what is "the job" in Afghanistan? We chased out Al Qaeda, so the reason for the invasion has been accomplished and that job is done, so now what has "the job" been morphed into?