Why Are We In Afghanistan?

[rhett o rick]

a. Are we punishing them for their involvement in the attack on 9/11?
b. Trying to ultimately get control of Pakistan and their nuc’s?
c. Maybe prove that Afghanistan isn’t the Empire killer after all.
Or d. good ole fashion American imperialism?

I vote for b. and c.

[think]

1. lithium & opium

I think

[WingDinger]

2. Why did we EVER go there?

We could have simply accepted the terms of the Taliban, to charge Bin Laden in Saudi court. But georgie Porgy wanted to go all badass. thereby ruining the good will we gained. We morphed getting rid of Bin Laden, to saving the little girls from the Taliban. What horseshit. We boosted Pakistan, and Musharref, loosed nukes on much of the world, and will soon have to deal with them.

[TBMASE]

10. Had we not gone in, Bin Laden wouldn't be dead today

This was the war we were supposed to be fighting, remember? Iraq was the distraction.
This was about getting Bin Laden.
Of course, now that he's gone, I don't see why we're continuing a presence

[WingDinger]

14. Bogus. He would have lost his head.

And NO, I dont remember.

[TBMASE]

15. If you don't remember that, you must not

have been paying attention to the 2004 and 2008 Presidential Elections or every argument against being in Iraq since 2003 when Bushie decided to give up looking for Bin Laden to go after the man that tried to kill his daddy.
Furthermore, from where would we have launched the attack that killed Bin Laden, if not from Afghanistan?

[WingDinger]

23. The Taliban were willing to hand over Bin Laden, but, he would be tried under Sharia law.

We didnt need to spend even one american life there.

As far as I am concerned, they wanted to PUNISH the Taliban, fro reneging on the pipeline deal. That is why they blew up the buddha's. To protest our ambitions on their land and liberty.

[TBMASE]

26. Of course...they attacked the symbol of an Eastern religion

because of a pipeline proposed by a Western Country

And what "liberty" did the people of afghanistan have under the Taliban?

[WingDinger]

27. Um, mostly none of our business.

They blew up ancient relics. We were sickened. If we are to SPREAD democracy, we will be broke soon.

[TBMASE]

28. We didn't invade because they blew up ancient relics

we did it because they were harboring the man who was the head of Al Qeada as well as many of his underlings

However, had we abandoned them as we did after the fall of the USSR we'd have been repeating a mistake of the past. We shouldn't be nation building anywhere but we shouldn't just abandon a country after we go in an remove the government

[WingDinger]

30. How does an offer to turn him in, equal harboring?

We invaded, for revenge, pure and simple. We felt that anything but shock and awe, would be judged as weak. We feared we would reenter the Vietnam funk where we feared foreign entanglements. Instead of initiating the PNAC goals. Had we allowed it, Bin Laden would have been beheaded, and his underlings would have been exiled, and then chased by us till dead.

The whole removing a government thingie, should not be a goal, unless an official act of war is drawn up.

[TBMASE]

31. Shock and Awe was Iraq

Bin Laden hadn't been beheaded in the previous 8

[WingDinger]

32. Well, it certainly wasnt awe shucks.

And WEEEEEEE beheaded Saddam. There was a CLEAR offer, to give Bin Laden over to Saudi Arabia, for trial. We concluded that the sight of that trial, would embarass us as we like to have the last word. I for one, would have much preferred a simple trial, and beheading, to all the blood and treasure we consumed. We likely wouldnt be dealing with Bushes bullshit now, had we retained a cushion.

[TBMASE]

39. There was no offer to hand him over to anyone

[WingDinger]

40. UM, yes yes there was.

http://articles.cnn.com/2001-10-07/us/ret.us.taliban_1_abdul-salam-zaeef-surrender-bin-taliban-offer?_s=PM:US

The White House on Sunday rejected an offer from Afghanistan's ruling Taliban to try suspected terrorist leader Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan under Islamic law.

The offer came as the United States massed forces in southwest Asia for a possible strike against Afghanistan if the Taliban refuse to surrender bin Laden. A Bush administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, rejected the Taliban offer and repeated U.S. demands that bin Laden be turned over unconditionally.

--------------------------------
Same tactic as in WW2 Japan. Insist on unconditional surrender of Emperor, then, when they agree, up the ante and demand more, till they balk.

[TheDebbieDee]

3. I think we're in Afghanistan still because it's in close proximty to Pakistan.......

And Pakistan is ruled by religious nuts that have access to nukes! That's my story and I'm sticking to it.........

[theaocp]

4. Two reasons

a. to feed the MiC, and
b. see a.

[rhett o rick]

7. I should have included that of course. nm

[paulk]

36. correct answer.

[sad sally]

5. It needs enemies to wage wars

Afghanistan had nothing to do with 9/11. It never threatened America and wouldn't now if US occupation ended. America's war is lawless. Neither the Security Council or Congress authorized it.

International law is clear. No nation may attack another except in self-defense. America hasn't fought a legal war since WW II. It hasn't either won one since then.

Al Qaeda is a US creation. Forces were recruited to fight Soviet troops in Afghanistan. Thereafter, it's served strategically as enemy and ally. Hillary Clinton acknowledged their elements supporting Washington's anti-Assad insurgency.

The longer fighting continues in Afghanistan, Yemen, and other US war theaters, the stronger its ranks grow. Washington likely prefers it. It needs enemies to wage wars. Peace, calm and stability prevent them.

Bay Area Indymedia, May 3, 2012


Read more: http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2012/05/03/afghanistan-permanent-occupation-planned.html#ixzz1u6oThH3S

[RC]

12. I'm glad someone still gets it.

Al Qaeda is a US creation. Forces were recruited to fight Soviet troops in Afghanistan.

There was no sane, realistic reason for either Iraq or Afghanistan.

[TBMASE]

17. The problem with this argument

Al Qeada wasn't created by the US forces. Bin Laden has always maintained he never worked with or received any Western Aid in his Jihad in Afghanistan

I guess we can stop talking about how Shrub dropped the ball in Tora Bora if we're going to argue we never should have been in the country to begin with.

[rhett o rick]

35. Tell us more about how alqaeda was created.

And I dont think quoting bin Ladin holds much weight.

Your logic evades me when you say we cant complain about Tora Bora if we dont believe we should have been there. Bushy went there to avenge 9/11, to capture/kill bin Ladin, or so he said. But he failed. His failure has nothing to do with anyone's opinion re. whether we should be there.

But the OP was intended to be about why are we still there? Is it imperialism?

[unhappycamper]

6. I vote for c, d, and the M-I-C.

War is good for bidness.

[kenny blankenship]

8. Someone needs to look "tough on Islam"

[saras]

9. Afghanistan has rare-earth minerals. Follow the money.

http://www.livescience.com/16315-rare-earth-elements-afghanistan.html

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=afghanistan-rare-earth-elements-could-beat-taliban

http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=2936&from=rss_home

[rhett o rick]

22. So do we call that imperialism? nm

[rhett o rick]

24. Reason I asked above it that I am studying imperialism in my West. Civ class.

And I had this question: Is imperialism ever justifiable? For example in this case, if we allow a foreign power to gain access to these minerals would we be placing ourselves in jeopardy?

[Vattel]

11. One rationalization

is that we need a stable and strong Afghanistan to ensure that dangerous extremists do not use Afghanistan as a base of operations. Another is that we want to promote democracy wherever we can. But the real reason is that the MIC benefits from war.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

13. PR for politicians who are afraid to admit we lost the war.

Better more blood than embarrassment and a loss at the polls.

[MadHound]

16. American imperialism

We want control of their resources.

Also, Afghanistan provides an excellent way for the MIC in this country to be well fed and cared for.

[rhett o rick]

18. I agree with a touch of "we want to be close to Pakistan". nm

[mmonk]

19. TAPI pipeline.

[sarcasmo]

20. The CIA funds it's operations on that fine Afghan poppy

[RZM]

21. At this point I think it's all about leaving the semblance of a pro-American central government

It's the same thing as with Iraq. I think the CW is done with the war, but there's a significant lag time between public opinion and the actual withdrawal.

Part of that is because there's always a long delay between what people want and what happens. But it's also because wars themselves never work that way. There's a strong antipathy in military/governmental cirlces to just pulling out overnight if you haven't won a decisive victory, mainly because it gives the appearance that you've lost.

[ieoeja]

25. e. It did not work out so well when we abandoned them last time.

The democratically elected government was overthrown. Thousands of women unfamiliar with Sharia law were then tortured to death. The theocratic government provided a base for terrorists acting throughout the world. Al Qaeda was setting up a Taliban-style network in Afghanistan's northern neighbors. Russia was pleading for American assistance to contain this monster. Russia viewed the situation as so serious, they began supporting the very military leader whom they spent a decade fighting against previously.

[rhett o rick]

29. So you seem to be saying that imperalism is for their best interest?

I think I've heard that rationalization. Nice that our taxpayers are willing to help but apparently Russia cant afford to take care of the problem.

[ieoeja]

33. I'm saying that when the Afghan government requested our assistance last time...

... we should have given it.

A disaster occurred when we failed to do so. This led to horrible consequences for those Afghans who requested our assistance. Those horrible consequences were spreading to other countries.

In the meantime, other foreigners another group of Afghans requested to assist them were there doing just that. As payment for that assistance they were given a safe base to attack the United States.

And THAT is why we got into Afghanistan. To eliminate that base of operations.

The OP question was why we are still there. I am saying we are still there because we do not want to make the same mistake we made last time. Do you think Karzai and his supporters want us to leave them to the mercies of the Taliban?

And, yes, I am saying it is better for them, for their neighbors, and, most importantly, for us.

And that is not imperalism. It would be imperalism if we meant to rule Afghanistan. We do not.

[Selatius]

37. Afghanistan isn't even a functioning country. The last elections were marred by widespread fraud.

If dubious elections and not clean elections are what keep our man Karzai in power, a man who has trouble extending his authority beyond the cities of Kabul and Kandahar without running into organized Taliban resistance, we're no better than the Russians or the British who tried to conquer the mountainous country in years past.

If we're going to be in the business of policing entire nations, we need to seriously dispense with this sophomoric, feel-good talk and idiotic rationalizations that it's better for them and simply recognize that in the long-run, it's really better for us, and by "us" I mean American financial and military interests.

[TheKentuckian]

38. Bullshit, we set up puppet/client states to facilitate exploitation of resources

They play ball whether they want to or not and we are not above installing the bloodiest of tyrants to be certain of it as possible.

When folks are playing ball there is no reason to waste resources and effort "ruling" them, they open up themselves to for profit squeezing of their people, lands, waters, air, and wildlife by the moneychangers and hewers of the earth.

[Prometheus Bound]

34. Here's the Canadian government's bold answer.

Our mission in Afghanistan

Why are we there?

Because the Afghan government asked for our help

Because what’s good for Afghanistan is good for us all

Because it’s a tough job, and we have the right people to do it

http://www.cefcom.forces.gc.ca/pa-ap/ops/fs-fr/afg-eng.asp