The Watering Hole

Could someone explain to me why 60,000 troops are still fighting in Afghanistan and exactly what it is we're fighting for? Please?

I'll give you reasons.

Are you asking why we went in there or why we can't leave in an instant?  

What have the Generals been saying?  When has BamBam promised we'd be "out of there" by?

We've always been at war with Eastasia.

http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html

BINGEWOOD — Nov 29, 2012Are you asking why we went in there or why we can't leave in an instant?  

What have the Generals been saying?  When has BamBam promised we'd be "out of there" by?

Didn't your mother teach you that you don't answer a question with a question?

We're supposedly "leaving" on a schedule.

Are you asking what that means or why we haven't left yet?  There are many forces at play, as usual, and as many views/motives as well.

Hookbender — Nov 29, 2012[quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1354157342/0#2 date=1354179404]Are you asking why we went in there or why we can't leave in an instant?  

What have the Generals been saying?  When has BamBam promised we'd be "out of there" by?

Didn't your mother teach you that you don't answer a question with a question?


tip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method

ironsheep — Nov 30, 2012[quote author=Hookbender link=1354157342/0#4 date=1354229790][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1354157342/0#2 date=1354179404]Are you asking why we went in there or why we can't leave in an instant?  

What have the Generals been saying?  When has BamBam promised we'd be "out of there" by?

Didn't your mother teach you that you don't answer a question with a question?


tip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method
Yeah what sheep said.  Hooky you just got ass raped.

"socrateased"

I don't know about rape.  I try to figure out where a not simple to answer question is coming from, I don't know of Socratic method.  


It appears to me that we are still in Afghanistan because of the two things mentioned already, resources and the MIC, as well as political motives in a larger area that we feel we need to regulate in some way.  We are propping up a government that is more likely to do business with us and our partners than the Taliban in the future.  We also want to "leave" on our own terms.


As Sheep said, "We've always been at war with Eastasia."  This 1984 concept has come to reality in the form of "war on terror(ism)", ie. a war on a concept/tactic as opposed to another country with organized government.  That is a never ending war as terrorism isn't going away and the definition seems to be malleable.

Fenderbender — Nov 30, 2012[quote author=ironsheep link=1354157342/0#6 date=1354245950][quote author=Hookbender link=1354157342/0#4 date=1354229790][quote author=BINGEWOOD link=1354157342/0#2 date=1354179404]Are you asking why we went in there or why we can't leave in an instant?  

What have the Generals been saying?  When has BamBam promised we'd be "out of there" by?

Didn't your mother teach you that you don't answer a question with a question?


tip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socratic_method
Yeah what sheep said.  Hooky you just got ass raped.

In what way? I simply asked a question with no implications. No suggestions. Not sure my pants were even down.  :D

BINGEWOOD — Nov 30, 2012I don't know about rape.  I try to figure out where a not simple to answer question is coming from, I don't know of Socratic method.  


It appears to me that we are still in Afghanistan because of the two things mentioned already, resources and the MIC, as well as political motives in a larger area that we feel we need to regulate in some way.  We are propping up a government that is more likely to do business with us and our partners than the Taliban in the future.  We also want to "leave" on our own terms.


As Sheep said, "We've always been at war with Eastasia."  This 1984 concept has come to reality in the form of "war on terror(ism)", ie. a war on a concept/tactic as opposed to another country with organized government.  That is a never ending war as terrorism isn't going away and the definition seems to be malleable.

Hmmm. Resources? Like oil etc? They do have many of those type resources. But so does Iraq, and we aren't 60,000 deep in Military there. How would we ever expect to get back the investment we have in Afghanistan? We borrow the money, to start with, and then have to pay interest on that money. All that in hopes of doing business with one of the most poor places on earth, not to mention uneducated. Seems like a losing proposition to me.

Hookbender — Nov 30, 2012Hmmm. Resources? Like oil etc? They do have many of those type resources. But so does Iraq, and we aren't 60,000 deep in Military there.

They have minerals, including Lithium, which we like in the form of tech (through China).  Poppy production has been way up since we have been there (see Vietnam)  Iraq's deals have been made and as far as I've heard the oil companies and China have those resources tied up.  We had many more troops in Iraq until we "pulled out" which is what we are supposedly doing next in Afghanistan. I say supposedy because we built huge bases in these countries and we will continue to have mil there after our pull out date.  What do you think about the contractors who are there?  

The Generals requested a larger number of soldiers than we have there now.

Hookbender — Nov 30, 2012How would we ever expect to get back the investment we have in Afghanistan? We borrow the money, to start with, and then have to pay interest on that money.

Who's "we"?  Investment?  The people spending the money aren't worried about how "we" will pay for it.  Those that stand to profit are willing to let the initial "risk"/cost go to us and the profits will go to them.  It will continue to be a risky place after we "leave", look at it's history.

Hookbender — Nov 30, 2012All that in hopes of doing business with one of the most poor places on earth, not to mention uneducated. Seems like a losing proposition to me.

Well, we supposedly went in to get the leader of a group of mainly non-Afghans after a bunch of mostly non-Afghans flew planes into buildings in NY.  We let that leader "get away" and shifted to invading a country that had nothing to do with the attack on our soil.  During this time we ignored Afghanistan, for the most part, and the Taliban was able to rebuild.  Now we are propping up the "democratically elected" leader of Afghanistan who is the brother of a major drug kingpin there.  We are supposedly training the government forces to be able to deal with their own security when we leave.  We ,supposedly, didn't go in for business reasons.  On the surface we went in because we were attacked and Afghanistan was where we were going in because the Taliban wouldn't turn over Bin Laden and it seemed to serve as a jumping off point for invading Iraq which had been a goal of the administration at the time for a looooooong time.


There are many reasons given for us still being there.  A bleeding heart would say we're still there because they throw acid on the girls...

Which goes back to my initial question, why are we there?

We borrow the money, have to pay it back plus interest, and the countries we borrow the money from get the pile of gold after we do the work. Then, eventually, the country will go back to shit and our work and lost lives will be for nothing. Why? Because of what you said. Look at the history of this country.

So, it kinda gets back to our government making stupid decisions with our money.

Hookbender — Dec 01, 2012Which goes back to my initial question, why are we there?

We borrow the money, have to pay it back plus interest, and the countries we borrow the money from get the pile of gold after we do the work. Then, eventually, the country will go back to shit and our work and lost lives will be for nothing. Why? Because of what you said. Look at the history of this country.

So, it kinda gets back to our government making stupid decisions with our money.

Did you back those wars at the time?  Were ya down for tax cuts during wartime?

No, and yes. We were lied to by Bush and the WMD thing. The ole boy in Iraq needed to be killed. Plain and simple. But he had nothing to do with Binny. We did not need to take over a country to kill Hussein. We didn't need to take over Afghanistan to get Binny. I agree with out military going after Binny, but we were lied to during that time by Bush.

You can say what you want about tax cuts, but the economy was kicking ass until the housing mess blew up. Revenues to government were good, but as always, we spent to much money. We had wars started based on lies and speculation. Complete fucking mess.

Hookbender — Dec 01, 2012No, and yes. We were lied to by Bush and the WMD thing. The ole boy in Iraq needed to be killed. Plain and simple. But he had nothing to do with Binny. We did not need to take over a country to kill Hussein. We didn't need to take over Afghanistan to get Binny. I agree with out military going after Binny, but we were lied to during that time by Bush.

I'd say lying to the country/congress goes beyond "gov making bad decisions with our money."  After 911 I'd say most of the country was in favor of going into Afghanistan, there were some who weren't.  When Powell gave the powerpoint presentation with the 3d mockups of weapons of mass destruction and the entire administration kept talking about mushroom clouds, I think more people went "Hungh?  What the fuck is this shit?"  Of course it's interesting that we did business with both Hussein and the Taliban in the past but I guess we will work with anyone who is semi-feasible for the task we require at the time (see current Afghanistan)

I guess you're saying that you backed the wars when they started but now that you see the truth of war in cost vs achievement, it doesn't seem worth it.

Hookbender — Dec 01, 2012You can say what you want about tax cuts, but the economy was kicking ass until the housing mess blew up. Revenues to government were good, but as always, we spent to much money. We had wars started based on lies and speculation. Complete fucking mess.

When you cut taxes during wartime you increase the borrowed spending.  This has been no WWII where we all feel it everyday.  They don't even cover Afghanistan anymore...it'll come back.  What is it, 1% serving over and over again, no draft for the most extreme attack on our soil in our lifetime.  War bonds?  Rationing?  Nothing.  Full service consumer society at full tilt credit cards all around.  Our economy was fucked up, I remember stratman kept saying it was doing great and others here saying it wasn't.  He was following the narrative coming from administration which they held to until a couple of weeks before Bush and Company inc. left the white house.  Do you really think it just collapsed at that moment, that they didn't understand what had been going on for a long time.  Do you believe a small number of people bought houses they couldn't afford and that threw the world economy down the shitter?  You get that the last thing B&C inc. did was enable the  throwing of insane amounts of "money" to the perps who caused the crash, with no string attached.  You remember how the business community came together when the news came out and dropped large amounts of workers, real helpful.

The Bush tax cuts gave a decrease to everyone but the decrease ballooned incredibly for the ultra-rich, many of which made plentee money over the last 10.

"I guess you're saying that you backed the wars when they started but now that you see the truth of war in cost vs achievement, it doesn't seem worth it. "

What I might have backed is us going into Iraq and securing WMD's that Saddam had. However, they didn't have any. And it seems our intelligence was wrong or just lied about. I don't think I ever favored taking over Iraq as we did. Same with Afghanistan. Fine to go after Binny if he was their, but I don't think I ever could justify taking over the country as we did.

I don't think taking over any country just to give it back and it end up in the same shit boat it was in to begin with will ever be "worth it".

Lets face it. The fighting, killing, and war over there is the norm. We won't ever change that. No sense in wasting lives, time, and money over them. Thats just the way it is.

We are in Afghanistan still because there's no real measurement that shows we're winning, and we don't like to leave places where we are fighting without achieving victory.  There are lots of other reasons, but I think behind them all is that fact.  We can't point to Afghanistan and say anything concrete about how it is better now than it was 11 years ago.  We went in there with a naive goal to install democracy, and ended up learning what every invader in Afghanistan has learned in the last 1000 years--that Afghanistan is an unwinnable hellhole with insane geography, horrific weather, and people who don't, in the end, want to be liberated, saved, or to gather around a single government.

I think Obama should have ended the war the minute he stepped into office, and Iraq too.  Of course, I also think Bush should have ended that war 8 years ago, and he never should have started the one in Iraq.

On the plus side, heroin has dropped radically in price since the Taliban were removed from the central government--those nuts really don't like drugs.