Afghanistan - Why Are We There?

[Tez3]

Because we've been told that imperialism is a bad thing?

Cue the "no blood for oil" protests.

Imperialism? And if the American Virgin Islands were invaded by someone and the islanders said well actually we'd like to stay 'American' so can you come and help us you'd ignore that then? Or would you expect us as allies to go to war along side you?

 

[dancingalone]

If we are allies why when Argentina is making warlike noises again has America said it won't support us?
http://momento24.com/en/2010/02/24/the-us-wont-support-british-claims-on-the-falklands-sovereignty/

Because Obama is the president. You can bet that Bush would have sided with the UK on this and so would have McCain if he had won.

Here is a Telegraph opinion piece stating much the same.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...ands-is-a-symptom-of-us-foreign-policy-drift/

The left here in the US are fond recently of saying 'elections have their consequences'. True enough.

 

[Tez3]

Nothing helps though when the bodies arrive at Brize Norton. Nothing helps when the maimed have to try to find a life again. We need to get out, now.

 

[Tez3]

Because Obama is the president. You can bet that Bush would have sided with the UK on this and so would have McCain if he had won.

Here is a Telegraph opinion piece stating much the same.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/j...ands-is-a-symptom-of-us-foreign-policy-drift/

The left here in the US are fond recently of saying 'elections have their consequences'. True enough.

The government here that took us into the Afghan war was a 'left' (socialist) one and so far up Bush's bum you couldn't even see it's feet.

 

[dancingalone]

The government here that took us into the Afghan war was a 'left' (socialist) one and so far up Bush's bum you couldn't even see it's feet.

Sir Tony Blair is generally admired here in the US. Time will tell what his legacy is in the UK. The people I talk to think he'll go down in the history books as one of your most respected premiers.

 

[CoryKS]

Imperialism? And if the American Virgin Islands were invaded by someone and the islanders said well actually we'd like to stay 'American' so can you come and help us you'd ignore that then? Or would you expect us as allies to go to war along side you?

Well, this isn't exactly a case of defending a protectorate against a hostile party, is it? This is about a claim of ownership of the natural resources around the islands - the sort of thing that the US was accused of during the Iraq War, though we never went so far as to claim sovereignty over the area as the British are doing in the Falkland Islands. I dunno, that's a pretty long damn way from London. So is it only imperialism, colonialism, whateverthehellism when we do it?

 

[Sukerkin]

Looks like a genius is never appreciated in his homeland then, Dancingalone :lol:.

He was a lying, slimy, PR hack, who was no more a Labour PM than Thatcher was. You won't find many British people who think any differently of him than that. Of course, that description is a synonym for any politician, Blair just turned the smarm-ometer up to eleven .

It's off tack so I won't go on about it but I do find that American's seem to approve more of the PM's we like the least - not that we've had any in my life-time of which I have had particular admiration.

 

[Sukerkin]

Meantime, does anyone have any insight into my original question?

 

[dancingalone]

Looks like a genius is never appreciated in his homeland then, Dancingalone :lol:.

Did you know GW Bush is very popular in certain parts of Africa thanks to the AIDS relief efforts he pushed? Say what you want about Iraq, but it would take a true cynic to say that Bush didn't have his heart in the right place with regard to humanitarian efforts.

He was a lying, slimy, PR hack, who was no more a Labour PM than Thatcher was.

Yeah, I don't know that calling Blair socialist is an accurate label.

You won't find many British people who think any differently of him than that. Of course, that description is a synonym for any politician, Blair just turned the smarm-ometer up to eleven .

It's off tack so I won't go on about it but I do find that American's seem to approve more of the PM's we like the least - not that we've had any in my life-time of which I have had particular admiration.

Really? That's interesting to know. Is Blair as unpopular in Britain as Bush is here?

 

[dancingalone]

Meantime, does anyone have any insight into my original question?

You really want to know the real answer? You won't like it.

It's because withdrawing from Afghanistan at this point would be very damaging publicly and this would be true whether you had a Conservative coalition government or a Labour Party one. The UK will be among the last countries to leave. Heck, you'll see the Canadians wave goodbye to the Taliban before you Brits will.

 

[CoryKS]

Meantime, does anyone have any insight into my original question?

Trying to keep the region from reverting back to what it was post-invasion. I don't think it's possible. From here it may look like these people are bugshit crazy, but it's a way of life they're used to and that's a hard thing to change. But the first politician to admit that it won't work will own the failure. And so it continues.

 

[Sukerkin]

Aye, it's not just Tories who call him "B-liar", Dancingalone . I really don't want to veer this thread off-topic tho', so I sha'n't say anymore than "never has one man, disappointed so many, so quickly" :lol:.

 

[dancingalone]

May be a new thread then, Sukerkin, but how on earth did Blair manage to last so long as PM then if he was so unpopular? 10 years right? That's incredible longevity in a parlimentary system.

 

[Sukerkin]

A very simple, short, answer - we didn't want the Tories back at any price and, despite what people felt and said in the pubs and clubs, when election time came around Labour was seen as the only choice.

 

[chrispillertkd]

If we are allies why when Argentina is making warlike noises again has America said it won't support us?
http://momento24.com/en/2010/02/24/the-us-wont-support-british-claims-on-the-falklands-sovereignty/

Ask Obama, he's in charge of setting foreign policy.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Archangel M]

Will you really need help with Argentina anyways? Seems like ya'll made swift work of them the last time.

 

[Big Don]

If we are allies why when Argentina is making warlike noises again has America said it won't support us?
http://momento24.com/en/2010/02/24/the-us-wont-support-british-claims-on-the-falklands-sovereignty/

"Smart Diplomacy"

 

[Big Don]

Part of the reason that we are all in Afghanistan, is to show, that ALL IDEAS ARE NOT EQUALLY VALID. You know, like not letting women drive, or learn...

 

[Bruno@MT]

Part of the reason that we are all in Afghanistan, is to show, that ALL IDEAS ARE NOT EQUALLY VALID. You know, like not letting women drive, or learn...

Be that as it may, that is not a reason to invade a sovereign country.
The US had valid reasons to invade Afghanistan imo. Mullah Omar refused to hand over the man who admitted planning the 9/11 attacks. There was really no moral justification he could make and he should have seen that one coming.
The fact that women and gays had no rights was irrelevant. If that was a consideration, then Uganda and similar countries might be a far better choice.

But your choice of words is interesting though. Iran for example was a fairly progressive nation in the 50s, where women apparently had rights and the ability to learn. Only the US didn't like their democratically elected leadership so they pulled the rug from under it, had the CIA instigate a revolt and then nursed the current fundamentalist lunatics into place. Incidentally, under that regime, women and gays do not have any rights at all, except the right to die at the whim of a council. It mustn't have been an important consideration then.

 

[Bruno@MT]

Part of the reason that we are all in Afghanistan, is to show, that ALL IDEAS ARE NOT EQUALLY VALID. You know, like not letting women drive, or learn...

I probably shouldn't, but if you really believe what you just said, then I would like to point out the irony of US soldiers dying and fighting for an idea that they themselves are not allowed to express: the idea that being openly gay is not wrong.