by: Kylie Bechdolt
On Monday November 30th, the New York Times ran an article outlining the preliminary details of President Obama’s plan to send 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan. Since then, the President has officially announced that the surge will be occurring to “reverse the momentum of Taliban insurgents.” The new troops are to be sent over the next year or year and a half and will bring the total number of American troops in Afghanistan to around 100,000. There has been a large amount of debate over the decision to go forth with the surge and President Obama’s statement that the troop drawdown will begin in July of 2011. Additionally, there is concern over whether or not U.S. allies will contribute more troops to further aid the efforts in Afghanistan. France and Germany have already expressed that they will not be committing more troops anytime soon and it looks like other U.S. allies will only be committing a very limited number of additional soldiers. The war is generally negatively perceived in Europe and many other countries who question whether or not this is a war that can actually be won. Do you think the war in Afghanistan is a lost cause? Also, what do you think this might mean for our international image?
29 comments:
Our international image is so shot anyway that in my opinion sending the 30,000 new troops will be just be perceived as another bone-headed American decision, following a string of such bone-headed decisions. In response to your other question, I don't think the war can actually be won because up til now all efforts to effectively categorize what winning is have failed. It's like waiting for several planets to all align at once, and may take about the same amount of time.
I think this is a good move. Yes, our international image has seen better days, but if we pull out now, we will leave the country worse off than it was initially. At least by making one final push, even if it fails, we will still be seen as making an effort. I know Europe and much of the world are less in favor of the Afghanistan war, but I recently read that 7,000 troops from other countries will be sent to Afghanistan alongside the 30,000 additional US troops. Overall, Afghanistan was at one point a flourishing society, and if somebody needs to restore order, it might as well be the richest and most powerful nation(s).
I agree with Harrison, that our image has quickly been spiraling downhill for the last 8 years. Most people in the US have no idea why we are even still fighting. What is our main object in even being there? We need to work on our issues at home and stop trying to get involved in other countries issues. I think it is poor choice and will only cause more issues than needed.
I do not think the war is a lost cause, but I do think we need to drastically shift the focus of our efforts. To win the war in Afghanistan we first need to win the minds of the Aghanis. Our troops need to stop carrying weapons and start sharing information. Doing so may help win the war and also shift our international perception.
I feel that the war is a lost cause and I agree that our image has been deteriorating. Continuing this war will not help our image or economy. Think of how much we could spend on helping people if we were not spending so much hurting others.
The people of Afghanistan have a real nack for thwarting super powers. They did it to Ghengis Kahn and to the Soviet Union, are we next to fail at making them accept our control?
I have talked to U.S. soldiers that have been fighting and they have told me the good they have been doing and I think we get a twisted idea of what is actually going on in the news here. As much as I am anti-war and think that this is just a fight for resources, I think it is a good move to continue putting troops in or else it will defeat the efforts we have been making. Change takes time...it always has.
I absolutely do not believe the war in Afghanistan is a lost cause, and we as the general public need to understand that this is a slow process, if we intend to do it right. We are trying to instill an entire political and military/police infrastructure. The people there do want a chance at freedom, but the resistance is strong because of the long reign of the Taliban and the views they expressed toward the Western world. So it is not going to happen overnight and I am confident in our military in their effort to hand the country back over to the people while eliminating a national security threat in the Taliban terrorist organization. I think Obama could care less about our international image because we are going to get the job done, no matter what allies are involved, and thinks we are going to show that we still are a beacon of freedom and justice in the world.
There was an article in The Economist on December 5th saying Obama is doing the right thing, but doing it in the wrong way. The article argues dispatching 30,000 troops was a good decision, but this will not help build up the Afghan security forces and that he might lack the "stamina to tackle America's foes". I think it will hard to help build up the Afghan forces and have troops come home in only a short amount of time. Obama said his goal wasn't to prop up the Afghan government, but when the U.S. leaves, it seems like there will be a chance of a resurgence of problems within the unstable government.
Funds should instead be spent on the investigation of where the money, and weapons come from. This strategy would cut the head off the snake.
Also, the taliban train young men to hate america for crushing the poor, and hating islam. Prove to the good people over there that that isnt our way (education, and spending money on bettering thier country) and we take the wind out of the taliban's recruiting sails.
Retask our troops for security for our peace-building operations, and spend the money for these new troops on country building, not country breaking.
Its kind of funny that Obama just accepted the Nobel Peace Prize yet is escalating the war in Afghanastain. That aside, I feel like Obama is making the right move. This is an incredibly tough decision and I believe sending more troops in now will expediate our departure from Afghanastain, hopefully by the dates outlined by Obama.
In general, I believe the world views the war in Afghanistan in a better light than our war in Iraq because of the 9/11 attacks. Although many are now making the connection between Vietnam and Afghanistan, I believe that war is not a lost cause yet. There is still a lot of hard work that needs to be complete, both militarily, and in building a new nation. If we don't do this, Afghanistan will be back to where it was a decade ago.
My question is: what will happen if July 2011 rolls around and there is more intense fighting and even more troops are needed for the security of Afghanistan? This land has always been a battle field, and there is no way to secure a "victory." Afghanistan is a corrupt government and a hostile nation that resists any western involvement. I do not think that there is any way America can win in Afghanistan because the American people have lost interest and the war is becoming too expensive.
I have a feeling that invading a country, overthrowing its government, and leaving without installing anything substantial will only further hurt our image. Sure, France and Germany are not going to send in more troops, but they did both publicly say they supported the move by the US. This means that the only people whose opinions would be against us with the people who are not with us in the first place. even if our allies don't help, it doesn't mean we're wrecking our image.
I fell that at this point we need to cut our losses and get out of there. We need to stop going after the source of the terrorist, and instead focus on why there is such great demand for it. Why is it that so many different groups of people hate us. Clearly we're doing some this wrong and need to try and fix that.
I think that if we look at past wars that are similar like the Vietnam war, a big part of troops leaving the ward was public demonstration. I am a firm believer that people can change the government. If it's such a big issue for everyone why are we talking about on a blog instead of rallying?
andrew sieving
ROBERT SEADER
Wow... I guess the class was a majority of environmental science majors. Al Qaeda and the Taliban trained to hate Islam? Anyway, in clarification... President Obama is sending 30,000 more troops in order to curb the current surge in the insurgency. The President has said we will try to pull out by July 2011, but that this is obviously going to depend on what the situation in Afghanistan is. A large goal of this pull out date is to motivate Hamid Karzai (current president of Afghanistan) to get some real work done on setting up a thorough government/security infrastructure. Winning in Afghanistan has been defined as helping the country set up a self sustaining security infrastructure so that they will allow the government to be able to protect and support itself. This is a winnable war. And we are not alone. The United Kingdom's Prime Minister, Gordon Brown, said, while telling his country that they were sending more troops, "For a safer Britain, we need a safer Afghanistan." Here is what I am getting at, since I am probably too frustrated to really articulate what I think: 1) These troops are needed to curb the insurgent's surge, and remember (or now learn) that this is 10,000 troops less then were originally asked for by Gen. MyChrystal; 2)There are many major powers that are pulling for the US in Afghanistan and committing troops because they have also been attacked at one time or another, and if the international community does not like what we are doing, then they can sit by and do nothing when a terrorist organization declares war on their country and see how well they fair; 3) THIS WAR IS NECESSARY: Have we been attacked since 9/11... No, and we have stopped attacks from happening. Osama bin Laden himself said that Al Qaeda's goal is to bring attacks to US soil; 4) We have a plan that has outlined what winning this war is defined as.... we are not trying to take over Afghanistan, rather, quell an insurgency. Remember (or read if you must) we were in a similar situation with Iraq’s insurgency... If you didn't know that, please continue to enjoy your right to an uninformed right of opinion, and please try to fit as many assumptions into your uninformed opinion as possible (don’t worry it sounds smart to everyone else with an uniformed opinion)... (http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2009/nov/30/britain-500-troops-afghanistan)
I do not think a pull out in July 2011 will happen at all. It is a good thought but just not feasible.
I do believe we need to focus our attention on Afghanistan instead of Iraq. I have NO idea if sending 30,000 more troops over there will do any good when they are just running over the boarders anyway. I feel like it's going to be a hard group to physically stop, I believe we need to pull ground troops out soon and do more intelligence missions as a focus.
Sending over more troops is not necessarily a bad idea. The problem with the troops we have already sent is not actually related to where these new troops would be headed. Obama has very carefully planned the strategy for his new troops which includes getting them out, unlike a certain former president of ours who ofter refused to set deadlines and when he did they never seemed to stick.
I agree that our image is damaged in the eyes of other nations, but that is not important. Our main goal with the war in Afghanistan should be to restore political stability and peace within the country. It sucks that we have to send more troops, but its better than backing out completely and leaving the fallen pieces in the arms of Afghan policy makers. If there is still a large threat of terrorism in this country, our work is not done. This war can most definitely be won, considering the entire United Nations is fighting a small number of terrorists with limited supplies. For the future, I think we should remain less involved in other country's problems unless they directly affect us. Think about how much money we spend on National Defense in contrast to public education. We must solve problems at the source. Bombs or books? I think our budget after this war needs to be completely rethought.
I do think the war in Afghanistan is a lost cause. How long have the Afghanis been fighting... thousands of years. Will the US presence with the extra troops change anything in the long run? The US will win the hearts and minds of the Afghanis no doubt. As soon as the US is gone, the Taliban will most likely come to power again. I agree with a lot of the posters that our international image is already suffering. I totally disagree with spending $1M per soldier year to stay in Afghanistan when the end probably won't come in 2011.
To be honest, I can't name off many countries that think of the U.S. as a good image. I also think that if we were to completely stop the war right now, then then we would leave Afghanistan in a worse position than we started. Granted, I do not think we should be added the number of troops Obama has stated. Maybe a gradual increase, but no where near the 100,000 he has promised.
I have mixed feelings... While I do think that we could do alot of good with all the money that is being spent on the war, I also feel that we need to leave responsibly and if their are real threats to the Afghans or us then we need to address those before leaving. We entered the country to eradicate the terrorist threat and by entering basically said that we were making a commitment to the Afghans and the world that we would stick it out until justice has been served. The key thing is that the Afghans have to be committed to that goal as well. Our military can no longer go on babysitting other nations at the expense of lives and our own massive deficit. Regardless of how we may look at the war we still need to support our troops who are over there and make sure they know their efforts are not in vain. I am thankful that someone else has bullets flying over their head for their job rather than me. I think as college kids it is easy to overlook that. Not having their efforts be in vain could also mean pulling the troops out as well.
Although I do not agree with this war, the reality is that we are in it. It will be a slow process to bring stability to Afghanistan. Unfortunately we cannot just pull out of the country at this point.
I agree with what Jordan said about winning the hearts and minds of the Afghans or yes it will be a lost cause. Sending more troops for the wrong reason is always a bad idea. If we are finishing what we started with good intentions I do not believe it is so bad.
The current war on terrorism is quite a sticky situation, but I agree that we can't back out now. We have already invested so much money, time, and human lives in this war. The overall objective is peaceful. We want to liberate citizens of the world who are oppressed. If we backed out now, we would be seen as a country that will invade another country, and just quit. That is not the American way. Vietnam was such a hard loss for America and the troops, I don't think President Obama wants that to happen again.
I believe this is the needed move we have been looking for. The original goal was to unseat the Taliban and find Osama. It will not be easy to "win" in this situation, but hopefully the region will be able to gain stability and peace in the future. Allies would help the cause.
I think that sending more troops is a poor decision and only perpetuates the war. America will continue to have a bad reputation globally and not much will be solved.
Post a Comment