Solution of Afganistan quagmire!!!

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
quite right/ back to square one as it was one absurd an idea.
I would re-think that!!!

But, If you have a better one I would like to hear, assuming you are thinking about getting out of this Quagmire!!!!
 

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
Also,
If every single person becomes an entrepreneur where will the companies go ? You do realize that majority of populace of any country are in the service class and they need a place to offer them work.
Where are those places in Afghanistan ?
Typical Liberal as I have said before, let me tell you a secret, those corporations where created by some Entrepreneur!!!!! The other Secret I would you to know, that large amount of employments in US happens based on new entrepreneurship or Entrepreneruship business...

Even though we are going out of the subject, to create a stronger economy, the key is to create greater enviroment for entrepreneruship, which basically means less gov't involvement in your business........
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
I would re-think that!!!

But, If you have a better one I would like to hear, assuming you are thinking about getting out of this Quagmire!!!!
That i gave right in the beginning. The solution is not in Afghanistan right now but in Pakistan. Solve Pakistan (I wish the Americans did carry out their threat to bomb them to stone age)
 

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
That i gave right in the beginning. The solution is not in Afghanistan right now but in Pakistan. Solve Pakistan (I wish the Americans did carry out their threat to bomb them to stone age)
This is very interesting, Who is going to solve Pakistan????? India, China, or Even the Great US!!!!!

US cannot even control/solve the problem of North Korea, which is more bankrupt then Pakistan!!!! What are you talking about!!!!

Pakistan plays a proxy war based on there fears, which is all they have.. There capabilities are very limited and so sponsering the good talibans, which basically means no NATO or Indian Control in Afganistan. Mind you the progressive Pakistanies hate the ideology of these Talibans, but they love it Afganistan.

So Back to my Point again, the feeding ground for the Talibans and even Al queda is Religion, and only Religion. If you stop the fuel to the fire, you stop the fire.

Thanks..
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
So Back to my Point again, the feeding ground for the Talibans and even Al queda is Religion, and only Religion. If you stop the fuel to the fire, you stop the fire.
if that were true than there should be more talibanesque organizations in the muslim world.
Indonesia, India, Bangladesh make up over half of the Muslim world by population and but we do not see levels of extremism which even comes close to what we see in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
 

Singh

Phat Cat
Super Mod
Joined
Feb 23, 2009
Messages
20,311
Likes
8,403
Country flag
Even though we are going out of the subject, to create a stronger economy, the key is to create greater enviroment for entrepreneruship, which basically means less gov't involvement in your business........
I would disagree, India's entrepreneurial boom occurred during the days of License Raj and "Socialism".
 

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
I would disagree, India's entrepreneurial boom occurred during the days of License Raj and "Socialism".
I will answer this first, and my answer is such a full of CRAP!!!! It looks like I made you more Angrier....
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
499
Lastly, why are you mixing religion with extremism. If Hinduism/Christianity or any other religion does take hold in A'stan, will all the violence suddenly cease to exist ?

Are there no Hindu extremists ?
Religion and extremism(and consequently terrorism) are closely related when the extremists(or terrorists) themselves use religion to justify their extremism(or terrorism).
You ask a good questions: if Hindusim takes root in Afghanistan, will violence come to a halt? Will the violence levels decrease atleast?
Afghanistan is conservative religious society. People there strictly adhere to their beliefs. So, those beliefs will have to take the blame or praise for the prevailing socio-cultural situati on in Afghanistan. This applies to all the places.
Are there no Hindu extremists? Sure, there are. But what is their percentage in the hindu population? What have been their acts so far? At the most, they will indulge in some honour killings or even worse, they will indulge in low-caste discrimination. But do you see them organising and relishing in a 'kafir' killing ideology?

To brush aside a religion's role in the evolution of a society is like ignoring the elephant in the room and this applies even more to countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan.
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
This is very interesting, Who is going to solve Pakistan????? India, China, or Even the Great US!!!!!

US cannot even control/solve the problem of North Korea, which is more bankrupt then Pakistan!!!! What are you talking about!!!!

Pakistan plays a proxy war based on there fears, which is all they have.. There capabilities are very limited and so sponsering the good talibans, which basically means no NATO or Indian Control in Afganistan. Mind you the progressive Pakistanies hate the ideology of these Talibans, but they love it Afganistan.

So Back to my Point again, the feeding ground for the Talibans and even Al queda is Religion, and only Religion. If you stop the fuel to the fire, you stop the fire.

Thanks..
I think you will have to think of wiping out Islam altogether from the planet.
By saying that Islam is a cause for terror you are blaming the entire religion and not those who are extremist minded and use religion as a tool to further their cause.
 

Soham

DFI TEAM
Senior Member
Joined
Mar 22, 2009
Messages
1,972
Likes
91
Country flag
Religion and extremism(and consequently terrorism) are closely related when the extremists(or terrorists) themselves use religion to justify their extremism(or terrorism).
It is an excuse. The extremists contradict their religion everytime they embark on a new bloody endeavour. Sura 2, verse 195 and Sura 4, verse 29-30 of the Koran explicitly forbid suicide bombing.

This is what they state -

"Cast not yourselves to destruction with your own hands."
"And do not kill yourselves "¦ Whoever does so in enmity and wrong, verily, we shall let him burn in Fire."



Do the terrorists adhere to it ? Then how is their Jihad, jihad at all ? It isn't. And nor is their war in accordance with Islam.
Any religion is open to independent interpretations.

The fault of extremism(in the region) does not lie within Islam. It lies within the centuries of constant inter-clan feuds which ceased only under the threat of external invasion. Their "Pakhtunwadi" may/may not be in accordance with Sharia.
The extremists need something to win over (peacefully/by force) the common populace and religion comes out as the most convenient. Even more so, because the common people don't know enough about Islam to argue back.

The Al-Sauds of S.A. have kept these ideologies alive to maintain themselves at the helm of the Islamic world. This has nothing to with religion. Its pure greed for power.

You ask a good questions: if Hindusim takes root in Afghanistan, will violence come to a halt? Will the violence levels decrease atleast?
Afghanistan is conservative religious society. People there strictly adhere to their beliefs. So, those beliefs will have to take the blame or praise for the prevailing socio-cultural situati on in Afghanistan. This applies to all the places.
You did not answer directly. Will the extremism cease with advent of Hinduism/Christianity ?

If some idiot starts killing people under the name of Hinduism and envisages himself as Arjun on a campaign of exterminating "Adharm", you'll call him a retard, won't you ?

To brush aside a religion's role in the evolution of a society is like ignoring the elephant in the room and this applies even more to countries like Afghanistan or Pakistan.
That room has now become a stadium. While the Elephant's presence is significant, it no longer dictates life around it.

As Singh has already pointed out, if it was all because of Islam, shouldn't the Indian sub-continent(not just A'stan) have been sprouting similar organizations ?

Do you not see Turkey, and the way they've come up ?


The solution, as I stated in my first post, lies within Islam.

The best way to tackle this issue on the religious front would be a large scale infiltration of sensible and moderate Muslim clerics and preachers. If I'm not wrong, the moulvis and the Imam can be challenged to debates on the righteousness of their preachings in accordance with the Koran. In the past, Wahabism has been severely weakened by such collective endeavours. These debates are often held in mosques amidst a reactionary audience and is capable of significant change in thought.

The problem is, that any person who dares to try any such stunt will probably end up with a bullet in his head. This is why it needs to be overtly supported by the Afghan Govt. and covertly by NATO/US/India.
Conversion is not an option, so use Islam against them. Try to woo them with more moderate interpretations.



I think you're over-weighing the power of religion.
Today, people don't care about whats written in the scriptures. They care about having a good life and blowing money. We know too well that religion is often made an excuse for gaining power.

Create conditions of prosperity within A'stan. Give them ways to become rich. Very rich.
Change of faith is not the solution. Secularism is.
 

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
if that were true than there should be more talibanesque organizations in the muslim world.
Indonesia, India, Bangladesh make up over half of the Muslim world by population and but we do not see levels of extremism which even comes close to what we see in Afghanistan and Pakistan.
I think the perception of my Discussion is taken wrong.. I am not advocating That Muslim religion is advocating extreminism, but because of prevailing Wahabism ideology is prevelent in the region (Afgan and Pakistan border), and alternative religion teaching would subside this ideology.

If you read my orginal post, I never mention of converting people, but what I do mention is that there should be some form of teaching of alternative religion in the young class room, as well as Islam. As these children grow-up there views would certainly change of how extreme can they become or not. And my Theory is, They would not because of learning other religion.
 

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
I think you will have to think of wiping out Islam altogether from the planet.
By saying that Islam is a cause for terror you are blaming the entire religion and not those who are extremist minded and use religion as a tool to further their cause.
"Extremist Minded and use Religion as a Tool," Yes it's happening all over the world today, from Hinduism to judism, what is new. Religion is a TOOL, and that is my point in these areas that I am pointing out, they are using religion and to stop the whole cirlce, alternative relgion teaching is the key....
 

Yusuf

GUARDIAN
Super Mod
Joined
Mar 24, 2009
Messages
24,324
Likes
11,757
Country flag
"Extremist Minded and use Religion as a Tool," Yes it's happening all over the world today, from Hinduism to judism, what is new. Religion is a TOOL, and that is my point in these areas that I am pointing out, they are using religion and to stop the whole cirlce, alternative relgion teaching is the key....
hinduism,judism all are using religion as a tool. So we need an alternative religion to all of this. I think you need to start your own religion and spread it.
 

johnee

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2009
Messages
3,473
Likes
499
It is an excuse. The extremists contradict their religion everytime they embark on a new bloody endeavour. Sura 2, verse 195 and Sura 4, verse 29-30 of the Koran explicitly forbid suicide bombing.

This is what they state -

"Cast not yourselves to destruction with your own hands."
"And do not kill yourselves "¦ Whoever does so in enmity and wrong, verily, we shall let him burn in Fire."



Do the terrorists adhere to it ? Then how is their Jihad, jihad at all ? It isn't. And nor is their war in accordance with Islam.
Any religion is open to independent interpretations.

The fault of extremism(in the region) does not lie within Islam. It lies within the centuries of constant inter-clan feuds which ceased only under the threat of external invasion. Their "Pakhtunwadi" may/may not be in accordance with Sharia.
The extremists need something to win over (peacefully/by force) the common populace and religion comes out as the most convenient. Even more so, because the common people don't know enough about Islam to argue back.

The Al-Sauds of S.A. have kept these ideologies alive to maintain themselves at the helm of the Islamic world. This has nothing to with religion. Its pure greed for power.
Soham, every ideology needs support from someone in power and people in power will support ideology with self-interest in mind. Its a mutual cooperation. The same happens with wahhabi islam. Now, how many religious heads of islam have condemned outright the jihad(which involves suicide bombing) being carried out by taliban or like minded groups? Do those religious heads also believe that jihad against kafirs(like India, US or Israel) are wrong according to islam? How many religious heads have spoken out against such unislamic(according to your interpretation) jihad? Obviously, if you are aware of it, then many more would also be aware of similar verses to simply brand jihad carried out by terrorist groups as unislamic especially because these groups are giving a lot of negative rep to islam.

You did not answer directly. Will the extremism cease with advent of Hinduism/Christianity ?

If some idiot starts killing people under the name of Hinduism and envisages himself as Arjun on a campaign of exterminating "Adharm", you'll call him a retard, won't you ?
Well, it depends from religion to religion and person to person. There are extremists within every religion, there is anger, frustration and despondency in every person. It is the degree that matters and differentiates one from the other. A terrorist cannot be equated with someone who beat his wife after getting drunk, or can we? The same way, we must differentiate ideologies...

I cant answer about christianity. As for Hinduism and arjun: He was not killing people from another belief system. He did not do a dharam yudh to kill unbelievers. He was fighting a war forced upon him by opponents. So, I cant understand how you can equate this with an ideology that teaches its followers to kill those who do not follow the said ideology. I could give you verses to prove it, but it would be inappropriate here.

Anyway, the point is not what I would call him but what would he be called by the religious heads of hinduism.

That room has now become a stadium. While the Elephant's presence is significant, it no longer dictates life around it.

As Singh has already pointed out, if it was all because of Islam, shouldn't the Indian sub-continent(not just A'stan) have been sprouting similar organizations ?
You mean there are no other similar terror orgs in Indian sub-continent?!!! The only difference is, and I may be wrong, that while India has a strong governmental system and pakistan has a semi-controlled environment, Afghanistan lacks it. So, whenever, there is enough misgovernment, these forces will try to rise.

Do you not see Turkey, and the way they've come up ?
Is it an exception or norm? BTW, what I have heard, it seems the islamic forces are on rise there again?

The solution, as I stated in my first post, lies within Islam.
It lies with muslims(specifically the religious heads). That is, whether they want to accept your interpretation or not.

PS: Since you have such good islamic knowledge, I had a doubt: Does Islam sanction killing kafirs just because they are kafirs?
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
In so far as Kufr is concerned, maybe this would help:

Surah 2:256: la ikraha fi d-dini
Tolerance or Resignation?

by Rudi Paret (Tübingen)

The Qur'anic passage la ikraha fi d-dini ("there is no compulsion in religion") is generally understood to mean that no one should use compulsion against another in matters of faith. There is much to commend this interpretation. As it is understood here, the statement represents a principle which has gained a recognition of international dimensions: the principle of religious tolerance. Historically also the alleged meaning of la ikraha fi d-dini appears to be warranted. "The People of the Book", i.e., the members of the older revealed religions, particularly the Jews and the Christians, were in principle never compelled to accept Islam. They were obliged, while residing in territory under Islamic domination (dar al-Islam), only to recognize the supremacy of Muslims and, at the same time, as an external indication of this recognition, to pay a separate tax. In all other matters they could maintain their inherited beliefs and perform their practices as usual. They even were allowed to establish their own internal administration.

To be sure, however, the situation was different for members of the pre-Islamic pagan Arab society. After the community which the Prophet had established had extended its power over the whole of Arabia, the pagan Arabs were forcefully compelled to accept Islam; stated more accurately, they had to choose either to accept Islam or death in battle against the superior power of the Muslims (cf. surahs 8:12; 47:4). This regulation was later sanctioned in Islamic law. All this stands in open contradiction to the alleged meaning of the Quranic statement, noted above: la ikraha fi d-dini. The idolaters (mushrikun) were clearly compelled to accept Islam - unless they preferred to let themselves be killed.

In view of these circumstances it makes sense to consider another meaning. Perhaps originally the statement la ikraha fi d-dini did not mean that in matters of religion one ought not to use compulsion against another but that one could not use compulsion against another (through the simple proclamation of religious truth). This seems even more likely in the light of surah 10:100, 101:

And if thy Lord willed, all who are in the earth would believe together. (Or "if thy Lord had willed, all who were on earth would have believed together".) Wouldst thou (Muhammad) compel men until they are believers (a-fa-anta tukrihu n-nasa hatta yakunu mu'minina)?

It is not for any soul to believe save by the permission of Allah. He has set uncleanness upon those who have no sense (and therefore remain hardened).
 

Ray

The Chairman
Professional
Joined
Apr 17, 2009
Messages
43,132
Likes
23,834
Types of Kufr (Disbelief)-Adapted from 'Tafseer ibn Katheer[3] The Qur'an uses the word kufr to denote a person who covers up or hides realities, one who refuses to accept the dominion and authority of Allāh. There are several types of Al-Kufr ul Akbar:

1. Kufrul-'Inaad: Disbelief out of stubbornness. This applies to someone who knows the truth and admits to knowing the truth and admits to knowing it with his tongue, but refuses to accept it and refrains from making a declaration. The Qur'an states: "Do ye twain hurl to hell each rebel ingrate?" [Soorah Qaaf (50), Ayah 24] [4]
2. Kufrul-Inkaar: Disbelief out of denial. This applies to someone who denies with both heart and tongue. The Qur'an states: "They recognize the favor of Allah, yet they deny it, and most of them are ungrateful."[Soorah Nahl (16), Ayah 83] [5]
3. Kufrul-Kibr: Disbelief out of arrogance and pride. The disbelief by the devil (Iblees) is an example of this type of Kufr.
4. Kufrul-Juhood: Disbelief out of rejection. This applies to someone who acknowledges the truth in his heart, but rejects it with his tongue. This types of kufr is applicable to those who calls themselves Muslims but who reject any necessary and accepted norms of Islam such as Salaat and Zakat. The Qur'an states: "And they denied them, though their souls acknowledged them, for spite and arrogance. Then see the nature of the consequence for the wrong-doers!" [Soorah Naml (27), Ayah 14][6]
5. Kufrul-Nifaaq: Disbelief out of hypocrisy. This applies to someone who pretends to be a believer but conceals his disbelief. Such a person is called a MUNAFIQ or hypocrite. The Qur'an states: "The Hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire: no helper wilt thou find for them." [Soorah An Nisaa (4), Ayah 145] [7]
6. Kufrul-Istihlaal: Disbelief out of trying to make HARAM into HALAL. This applies to someone who accepts as lawful (Halal) that which Allah has made unlawful (Haram) like alcohol or adultery. Only Allah has the prerogative to make things Halal and Haram and those who seek to interfere with His right are like rivals to Him and therefore fall outside the boundaries of faith.
7. Kufrul-Kurh: Disbelief out of detesting any of Allah's commands. The Qur'an states: "And those who disbelieve, perdition is for them, and He will make their actions vain; That is because they are averse to that which Allah hath revealed, therefor maketh He their actions fruitless."[Soorah Muhammed (47), Ayah 8-9] [8]
8. Kufrul-Istihzaa: Disbelief due to mockery and derision. The Qur'an states: "And if thou ask them (O Muhammad) they will say: We did but talk and jest. Say: Was it at Allah and His revelations and His messenger that ye did scoff; Make no excuse. Ye have disbelieved after your (confession of) belief. If We forgive a party of you, a party of you We shall punish because they have been guilty." [Soorah Taubah (9), ayah 65-66] [9]
9. Kufrul-I'raadh: Disbelief due to avoidance. This applies to those who turn away and avoid the truth. The Qur'an states: "And who is more unjust than he who is reminded of the communications of his Lord, then he turns away from them and forgets what his two hands have sent before? Surely We have placed veils over their hearts lest they should understand it and a heaviness in their ears; and if you call them to the guidance (Qur'an), they will not ever follow the right course (Islam) in that case." [Soorah Kahf (18), Ayah 57] [10]
10. Kufrul-Istibdaal: Disbelief because of trying to substitute Allah's Laws. This could take the form of: (a) Rejection of Allah's law (Sharee'ah) without denying it, (b) denial of Allah's law and therefore rejecting it, or (c) Substituting Allah's laws with "artificial" (i.e. non-Muslim) laws. The Qur'an states: "And if Allah had pleased He would surely have made them a single community, but He makes whom He pleases enter into His mercy, and the unjust it is that shall have no guardian or helper." [Soorah Shuraa(42), Ayah 8] [11] The Qur'an says: "Truly, Allâh is with those who fear Him (keep their duty unto Him), and those who are doers of good and righteousness." [Soorah Nahl (16), Ayah 116] [12]
 

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
Types of Kufr (Disbelief)-Adapted from 'Tafseer ibn Katheer[3] The Qur'an uses the word kufr to denote a person who covers up or hides realities, one who refuses to accept the dominion and authority of Allāh. There are several types of Al-Kufr ul Akbar:

1. Kufrul-'Inaad: Disbelief out of stubbornness. This applies to someone who knows the truth and admits to knowing the truth and admits to knowing it with his tongue, but refuses to accept it and refrains from making a declaration. The Qur'an states: "Do ye twain hurl to hell each rebel ingrate?" [Soorah Qaaf (50), Ayah 24] [4]
2. Kufrul-Inkaar: Disbelief out of denial. This applies to someone who denies with both heart and tongue. The Qur'an states: "They recognize the favor of Allah, yet they deny it, and most of them are ungrateful."[Soorah Nahl (16), Ayah 83] [5]
3. Kufrul-Kibr: Disbelief out of arrogance and pride. The disbelief by the devil (Iblees) is an example of this type of Kufr.
4. Kufrul-Juhood: Disbelief out of rejection. This applies to someone who acknowledges the truth in his heart, but rejects it with his tongue. This types of kufr is applicable to those who calls themselves Muslims but who reject any necessary and accepted norms of Islam such as Salaat and Zakat. The Qur'an states: "And they denied them, though their souls acknowledged them, for spite and arrogance. Then see the nature of the consequence for the wrong-doers!" [Soorah Naml (27), Ayah 14][6]
5. Kufrul-Nifaaq: Disbelief out of hypocrisy. This applies to someone who pretends to be a believer but conceals his disbelief. Such a person is called a MUNAFIQ or hypocrite. The Qur'an states: "The Hypocrites will be in the lowest depths of the Fire: no helper wilt thou find for them." [Soorah An Nisaa (4), Ayah 145] [7]
6. Kufrul-Istihlaal: Disbelief out of trying to make HARAM into HALAL. This applies to someone who accepts as lawful (Halal) that which Allah has made unlawful (Haram) like alcohol or adultery. Only Allah has the prerogative to make things Halal and Haram and those who seek to interfere with His right are like rivals to Him and therefore fall outside the boundaries of faith.
7. Kufrul-Kurh: Disbelief out of detesting any of Allah's commands. The Qur'an states: "And those who disbelieve, perdition is for them, and He will make their actions vain; That is because they are averse to that which Allah hath revealed, therefor maketh He their actions fruitless."[Soorah Muhammed (47), Ayah 8-9] [8]
8. Kufrul-Istihzaa: Disbelief due to mockery and derision. The Qur'an states: "And if thou ask them (O Muhammad) they will say: We did but talk and jest. Say: Was it at Allah and His revelations and His messenger that ye did scoff; Make no excuse. Ye have disbelieved after your (confession of) belief. If We forgive a party of you, a party of you We shall punish because they have been guilty." [Soorah Taubah (9), ayah 65-66] [9]
9. Kufrul-I'raadh: Disbelief due to avoidance. This applies to those who turn away and avoid the truth. The Qur'an states: "And who is more unjust than he who is reminded of the communications of his Lord, then he turns away from them and forgets what his two hands have sent before? Surely We have placed veils over their hearts lest they should understand it and a heaviness in their ears; and if you call them to the guidance (Qur'an), they will not ever follow the right course (Islam) in that case." [Soorah Kahf (18), Ayah 57] [10]
10. Kufrul-Istibdaal: Disbelief because of trying to substitute Allah's Laws. This could take the form of: (a) Rejection of Allah's law (Sharee'ah) without denying it, (b) denial of Allah's law and therefore rejecting it, or (c) Substituting Allah's laws with "artificial" (i.e. non-Muslim) laws. The Qur'an states: "And if Allah had pleased He would surely have made them a single community, but He makes whom He pleases enter into His mercy, and the unjust it is that shall have no guardian or helper." [Soorah Shuraa(42), Ayah 8] [11] The Qur'an says: "Truly, Allâh is with those who fear Him (keep their duty unto Him), and those who are doers of good and righteousness." [Soorah Nahl (16), Ayah 116] [12]
What does the Haditha say about this subject is more interesting!!!!
 

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
hinduism,judism all are using religion as a tool. So we need an alternative religion to all of this. I think you need to start your own religion and spread it.
If I had one I would be a billionarie by now!!!

Infact, aren't there bunch of these guys around in the world... I mean who are these special people teaching you what the book says!!!!!

Anyways back to the subject, the taliban and Al queda creation has more to do with brotherhood then actual Shira law now... So when you have general population following, how would you divert there focus? As Afganistan being 4 or 5th world , where do you start from as basic as religion?
 
Last edited:

Jeypore

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2009
Messages
148
Likes
3
Does anybody know, What exactly was the policy difference between McCrystal and Obama administration?

I get the feeling the Americans lost the war when they announced their date of withdrawal, the taliban (and their ISI sponsors) realised that they had weakened the US resolve and that its only a matter of time before they win.
I really want to know what was the difference!!!
 

Neil

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2010
Messages
2,818
Likes
3,546
Country flag
Clinton to seek signs of progress in Afghanistan

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton heads to Afghanistan next week for a crucial conference that U.S. officials hope will clarify the long-term goals of an expensive, unpopular and increasingly uncertain war.

Clinton will join dozens of other foreign ministers in Kabul on July 19-20 when Afghan President Hamid Karzai will detail plans to boost governance, security and economic opportunity in the face of relentless attacks by Taliban insurgents.

U.S. officials want the meeting to highlight Afghanistan's drive to take on more responsibility for its future, one key to President Barack Obama's pledge to begin drawing down U.S. forces in July 2011.

But it is also likely to underscore the breadth of the administration's challenge and deepen doubts among U.S. lawmakers before November's congressional elections that -- after nine years and $345 billion -- the Afghan war is lurching in the wrong direction.

"The conference may help give a sense, not only to America but also to its allies, of what the cost of completion will be in Afghanistan and what the roadmap is going forward," said Brian Katulis, an Afghan analyst at the liberal Center for American Progress, a Washington think tank.

"The key question is how does Afghanistan stand on its own. This could take us forward on how we define success."

Clinton will also hold talks in Pakistan, which is playing a key but mercurial role in Afghanistan even as it battles its own home-grown Islamist militants. She then heads to South Korea for talks on rising tensions with North Korea.

The White House said Obama's national security advisor, General Jim Jones, was in Kabul for talks with U.S. Ambassador Karl Eikenberry and General David Petraeus, named by Obama as the new top field commander for Afghanistan last month.

At the Kabul conference, aid packages and spending plans will top the agenda as officials seek to intensify civilian projects intended to buttress Obama's December decision to send 30,000 additional soldiers, bringing total U.S. troop presence in the country to almost 100,000 by this summer.

U.S. officials also expect progress in Karzai's campaign to woo Taliban fighters off the battlefield and to explore talks with more senior Taliban members aimed at finding a political settlement to the conflict.

Clinton and other U.S. officials support outreach to "reformed" Taliban who renounce violence, cut ties to al Qaeda and pledge allegiance to the government -- which would appear to rule out hardline Taliban leaders.

But how the process unfolds, and what political offers are made, could have a huge impact on what sort of state eventually emerges in Afghanistan and whether it is one the United States can live with.

DOUBTS GROW IN CONGRESS

Clinton's visit to Afghanistan follows a grim couple of months in the conflict, which has seen the U.S.-led international force of some 150,000 suffer increasing casualties and deteriorating security.

Obama also sacked his chief commander in Afghanistan, General Stanley McChrystal, over comments he made disparaging civilian leaders, and replaced him with Petraeus, the head of U.S. Central Command who is credited with helping to turn around the war in Iraq.

While Petraeus' appointment was widely welcomed, a sense of gloom has enveloped the U.S. Congress as lawmakers press for clearer answers on what the U.S. goals are in Afghanistan and when it intends to leave.

"Many people are asking whether we have the right strategy. Some suggest this is a lost cause ... This is the time to ask hard questions," Senator John Kerry, the powerful head of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said at a hearing.

Those questions will multiply as Obama's Democrats gird for November 2 congressional elections facing voters already angry over high unemployment and halting economic recovery.

"The war is certainly going to be a big campaign issue. The hope is that before the election the troop surge will be rolled out and there will be results to show," said Scott Worden, an Afghan analyst at the U.S. Institute of Peace.

"They are going to be looking hard for opportunities for optimism."

The Kabul conference follows a London meeting in January at which Karzai and his overseas partners agreed that Afghan forces should take the lead role in providing security in a number of provinces by late 2010 or early 2011.

It also committed foreign countries to support Afghanistan's efforts to develop the country -- although plans remain vague and dogged by charges of official Afghan corruption.

As U.S. casualties rise, some liberal Democrats are demanding a clearer exit plan. Republicans, meanwhile, have criticized the 2011 target date as a dangerous sign that the United States is not committed to victory in the war.

"The July 2011 withdrawal date has done tremendous damage to U.S. strategy and has undermined our position," said Lisa Curtis, an analyst at the conservative Heritage Foundation. "They can recalibrate the withdrawal proposal. There is room to redefine it."

U.S. officials already appear to be doing that, promising that the scale and pace of any U.S. drawdown will be dictated by conditions on the ground -- a sign to both Karzai and the Taliban that the United States is ready to keep fighting.

http://www.reuters.com/article/idUS...ters/PoliticsNews+(News+/+US+/+Politics+News)
 

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top