Plentyoffish dating forums are a place to meet singles and get dating advice or share dating experiences etc. Hopefully you will all have fun meeting singles and try out this online dating thing... Remember that we are the largest free online dating service, so you will never have to pay a dime to meet your soulmate.
     
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >      Home login  
 AUTHOR
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 400
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS ReportingPage 18 of 19    (1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19)
Sure it is relevant, shows the difference between life post Taliban controlled and when it was controlled by the Taliban. :

{QUOTE "Let me see if I've got this straight - this comes from the guy who refuses to give citations for his information


It's quite obvious that you didn't get it...straight or not! But then, you should be use to it by now.
You based the post above on what someone else wrote which by the way rarely makes sense 90% of the time unless he copied and pasted news.

I had one post where I forgot to mention the dates, where they were from and who wrote them and suddenly it's what I always do?" Quote Ends.

Now you on the other hand are the one who quoted a link the day after 9/11 , then claim that the FBI had never " postitively identified the 9/11 hi jackers" . Tried to base a conspiracy theory on it as well. Like mentioned,. I am trying to show that there is good news from Afghanistan, since the Taliban was disposed . I have seen nothing, to show that good things have not happened there since the overthrow of the Taliban.

Absolutely nothing at all that shows things were better before than after!
 roughpoet
Joined: 7/5/2006
Msg: 401
view profile
History
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/2/2007 11:49:29 PM
It all looks good on paper, and spreadsheets...but in the field it's a bit
of a different story. The Taliban are resurgent in many areas, they haven't gone away for the winter like they usually do.
They have built alliances with many clans and people.. They will be there in force in the spring, perhaps even some winter attacks.
Any ideas?

 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 403
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/3/2007 5:13:55 AM
Good point Rough Poet.

So much depends on what happens in Pakistan , we need to pressure them more from that side of the border, I am convinced. So much depends on what happens to the leadership there.

The Afghan army is starting to come along rather well though, with 1,000 a month graduating . Pretty near all the magor fights there lately have been Aghan fought , with us supporting.

I will not be surprised to see troop strengths raised over the winter, possibly a big push by American/ Canuck and Afgahns in Feb or March. The Dutch voted to extend their mission, that is an encouraging sign and they are planning to stay in the South as well, not put caveats on their troops.

That is real encouraging for me, shows support is still there for the mission .
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 404
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/3/2007 7:17:05 AM
{QUOTE "By Karen Deyoung, Washington Post

Last update: December 01, 2007 – 11:43 PM

WASHINGTON
A White House assessment of the war in Afghanistan has concluded that wide-ranging strategic goals that the Bush administration set for 2007 have not been met, even as U.S. and NATO forces have scored significant combat successes against resurgent Taliban fighters, according to U.S. officials.

The evaluation by the National Security Council followed an in-depth review in late 2006 that laid out a series of projected improvements for this year, including progress in security, governance and the economy. But the latest assessment concluded that only "the kinetic piece" -- individual battles against Taliban fighters -- has shown substantial progress, while improvements in the other areas continue to lag, a senior administration official said.

This judgment reflects sharp differences between U.S. military and intelligence officials on where the Afghan war is headed. Intelligence analysts acknowledge the battlefield victories, but they highlight the Taliban's unchallenged expansion into new territory, an increase in opium poppy cultivation and the weakness of the government of President Hamid Karzai as signs that the war effort is deteriorating.

The contrasting views echo repeated internal disagreements over the Iraq war: While the military finds success in a virtually unbroken line of tactical achievements, intelligence officials worry about a looming strategic failure.

"There is a key debate going on now between the military -- especially commanders on the ground -- and the intelligence community and some in the State Department about how we are doing," said one Afghanistan expert who has consulted with the National Security Council as it continues to "comb through conflicting reports" about the conflict.

Over the past year, all combat encounters against the Taliban have ended with "a very decisive defeat" for the extremists, Brig. Gen. Robert Livingston, commander of the U.S. task force training the Afghan army, told reporters last month. The growing number of suicide bombings against civilians underscores the Taliban's growing desperation, according to Livingston and other U.S. commanders.

But one senior intelligence official, who like others interviewed was not authorized to discuss Afghanistan on the record, said such gains were fleeting. "One can point to a lot of indicators that are positive ... where we go out there and achieve our objectives and kill bad guys," the official said. But the extremists, he added, seem to have little trouble finding replacements.

Although growing numbers of foreigners -- primarily Pakistanis -- are joining the Taliban ranks, several officials said the primary source of new recruits remains disaffected Afghans fearful of opposing the Taliban and increasingly disillusioned with their own government.

Overall, "there doesn't seem to be a lot of progress being made. ... I would think that from [the Taliban] standpoint, things are looking decent," the intelligence official said.

Private pessimism

Senior White House officials privately express pessimism about Afghanistan. There is anxiety over the current upheaval in neighboring Pakistan, where both the Taliban and Al-Qaida maintain headquarters, logistical support and training camps along the Afghan border. But "in all honesty, I think it is too early to tell right now" whether political turmoil will undermine what U.S. officials already consider lackluster counterinsurgency efforts by Pakistani forces, the senior administration official said.

NATO has 41,000 troops in Afghanistan, more than half of them from the United States, and its officers say they have eliminated Taliban leaders and fighters in higher numbers than in any previous year. But such claims of success reflect "a very tactical outlook in a game that is strategic," said a former U.S. senior commander in Afghanistan who shares many of the intelligence community's concerns. "I have a lot of respect for [Taliban] strategy," he said. "These guys are not cowardly by any stretch of the imagination."

While U.S. and other NATO forces have maintained a firm hold on major cities, they have been unable to retain territory in the vast rural areas where 75 percent of Afghanistan's population lives, several sources said. Ground hard-won in combat has been abandoned and reoccupied by Taliban forces, which establish dominance over local governmental bodies.

Heavy losses

There is widespread agreement among administration officials that the Taliban has suffered heavy losses this year. But the U.S. military has also suffered losses, with deaths already past the 100 mark, compared with 87 over all of last year -- making this the deadliest year for U.S. forces in Afghanistan since the war began. Afghan civilian deaths also reached an all-time high of 5,700 this year, according to an Associated Press tally.

The strategy is "clear, hold and build," said Seth Jones, an Afghanistan expert at the Rand Corp. "You clear the Taliban out, then you hold it for a period of time. You keep forces there, including Afghan forces, then you begin to build, then expand and go into neighboring districts. The problem has been that when you move troops into neighboring districts, you don't have enough to hold what you just cleared."

Although the competence of the Afghan army is improving by all accounts, U.S. military officials acknowledge that the goal of turning captured territory over to Afghan forces has been hampered by training delays and insufficient numbers.

Northern Afghanistan, ethnically separate from the Pashtun-dominated Taliban, is still considered relatively peaceful, although officials regard a Nov. 6 suicide bombing in northern Baghlan Province that killed mostly children as an ominous sign. Though U.S. intelligence officials initially questioned the Taliban's denial of responsibility, they now believe the bomb was the work of Hezb-e-Islami, a Taliban ally, even as suspicion has grown in Afghanistan that most of the deaths were caused by Afghan police officers responding to the explosion.

The former senior U.S. commander said suicide attacks are a "hugely effective tactic" that has been imported from Iraq to Afghanistan, terrorizing the population and convincing Afghans that the coalition cannot protect them. "The idea that [suicide bombs] are a sign of desperation, that's ludicrous," he said.

In Washington, Afghanistan policy has often seemed to be on the back burner since the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Republican presidential candidates rarely discuss it, while Democrats generally bring it up to criticize the administration, saying officials are paying too much attention to Iraq at the expense of a "forgotten" war.

President Bush seldom mentions Afghanistan. In White House remarks last month asking Congress for an additional $200 billion for both wars, he noted that "our troops, NATO allies and Afghan forces are making gains against the Taliban," then offered an extensive recounting of progress in Iraq.

© 2007 Star Tribune."QUOTE ENDS}


The abpve article sums up pretty well the problems we are facing in Afghanistan. For me there are 3 very important factors affecting progress in Afgahnsiatn .

- The situation in Pakistan : Musharaf has not been active in bringing pressure to bear on his side of the border. In fact, I would go so far as to say he is playing both sides of the fence. It would very nice I think to be rid of him, perhaps the new leader would be the same, but I think Bhutto does have the courage to go after the extremeists .

- Iraq is still the focus of Bush , has been from day 1 . I get a kick out of the ones here to have all these conspiracies on how Bush wanted to invade Afghanistan prior to 9/11. Every indication the man has ever made, was that Iraq was his priority , never Afgahnsitan . There is aUK general who has come out openly and claimed the same thing, Iraq has cost us a lot when looking at Afgahnistan, if I remember right I think he claimed 4 years of progress at least ( will try and find the article on him, and quote it later. read it in the Guardian I think last month). Also the American press has been down right negligent in reporting on Afghanistan. Even last fall, when American troops were 4 times more likely to be wounded or killed in Afgahnsiatan than Iraq , all the press generally ignored Afghanistan and concentrated instead on Georges preoccupation with Iraq.

- Last but not least, fellow NATO countries who have caveats on their troops keeping them from where they are needed . More pressure has to beput on France and Germany to pull threir share , in the south. All very well to seek to do the humanatrian deeds, but with out stopping the Taliban, creating a secure enviroment for that work to be done, it will be for nothing I am afraid. If we could get action on all these areas, I believe the troubles will be over a lot sooner in Afghanistan, if we dont, it will be a very long time.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 407
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/3/2007 8:13:55 PM

diplomacy is like a chess game

I've worked with diplomats from Britain, the Philippines and Canada in the past, dealing with a sticky situation a friend had gotten himself into while overseas - pool is way too tidy a description. I would go with that only if pool involved hiding the balls, grabbing the table and tilting it way up so all the balls fall to one side, stealing the cues....all done of course while smiling at the other guy.
 get_mad_baby
Joined: 4/9/2005
Msg: 408
view profile
History
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/3/2007 11:27:38 PM

I've worked with diplomats from Britain, the Philippines and Canada in the past, dealing with a sticky situation a friend had gotten himself into while overseas - pool is way too tidy a description. I would go with that only if pool involved hiding the balls, grabbing the table and tilting it way up so all the balls fall to one side, stealing the cues....all done of course while smiling at the other guy.


Great description.

Which is why it's good to be skeptical when one tries to paint a rosy picture of a war. Such a dirty playing field in this game.
 motownmaniax
Joined: 8/13/2006
Msg: 409
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 4:57:15 AM
War is never rosy. It's a tough, dirty, soul deadening experience. But that doesn't mean it should be avoided at all costs, in every situation. I have an uncle who fought in the Pacific as a US Marine and you wouldn't believe the things he saw and had to do to stay alive, but he still thinks it was a just and necessary war. Practically every allied veteran from that war believes the same, even though it was one of the nastiest ever. It left deep scars on all that participated, vets and civilians alike. But our vets and home front willingly paid the price for the better good.

Maybe people don't remember just how isolationalist America was before our involvement in WW2? We had an active and vocal "America First" movement that leveled the same kind of charges I see repeated about Afghanistan, that we shouldn't get involved in European or Asian wars to further the economic and territorial aspirations of others and should avoid war at all costs. The movement was even against giving aid to Britain because most thought they'd lose to Germany anyway, so why waste the effort? Pearl Harbor changed all that. Even the movement's leading spokesman, Charles Lindbergh, switched positions and fought clandestinely in the Pacific against the Japanese.

The biggest problem in Afghanistan isn't a corrupt government but an active insurgency with sanctuaries in places we can't get too and who terrorizes locals into forced allegiance. The Taliban may never be completely routed. The Afghan government's road to respectability is still a long way off, but no one said it would become a model of efficiency and fairness overnight—it will take much more time. But it's still "way" too early to give up.

As far as a plan for success, I think we need to refocus our energies and make Afghanistan our #1 priority. Too bad Iraq is draining so much resource and attention, but it's a mess we'll have to deal with.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 410
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 5:06:13 AM
{ QUOTE from My message "Afghans can see progress since fall of Taliban
By Mark Memmott, USA TODAY
ISTALIF, Afghanistan — The simplistic way to look at what's been happening here since the Taliban regime was vanquished a little more than 19 months ago is to focus on the broken promises, the lack of progress and regular warnings that at any moment Afghanistan could again be torn apart. " End of Quote


Here is the first sentence of the quute that I used , notice in English ,it refers to the Taliban falling just 19 months earlier. Then we have Gentalltheway , an individual who doesnt even say who he is quoting from on his posts, claim I hid the date on purpose ? If I was trying to hide the date, I would have deleted the first sentence , done what so many here have, just quote the sentence I want even if it may take things out of context.

Notice how all the posters here on this thread including my self , who support the mission over there admit there are difficulties, will be a long time till the mission is "accmpolished ". Then we have the other side, with the exception of Rough Poet, wont admit that progress has been made for the people of Afgahnistan. Garden girl who denies anyPSTD existed for woman under the Taliban, only goes on about the PTSD from our participation over there. Then gentalltheway, who likes to claim meetings between Unocal and Karzai is " proof" , that Karzai , the US , Canada , all the other NATO countries, the Uinted Nations countries who endorsed the mission, all doing it just to build a pipeline for Unocal ?


[ QUOTE FROM GENTALLTHEWAY ABOUT THE ABOVE QUOTE I had one post where I forgot to mention the dates, where they were from and who wrote them and suddenly it's what I always do?

Yeahhh you got it alright! QUOTE ENDS"}

Now, look at dunrich last post. That was written nearly 4 ½ years ago! You will notice that he removed the date which was “Posted 7/7/2003 8:38 PM QUOTE ENDS"}


The facts reamin and are indistbutable, the Afghan people are better off today than they were prior to the Taliban being toppled. Only pro Taliban think otherwise .

- PTSD was a factor prior to the Taliban being toppled , terrorist attacks where 3,000 civilians are muredered surely causes PTSD

- Our military are volunteer forces, they sign up to serve , and the great majority of them do and still support the mission

- The people with their boots on the ground over there, do tell us great progress has been made

- The polls taken by the CBC and ABC ( it was them who conducted the poll for the States media right?} all show massive approval for our being over there, and results of those polls showed similiar results that the Afghans people do think they are better off today than under the Taliban

So what if someone wants to build a pipeline? That is good news, be great for the Afghan economy, be great for Pakistan and India who require natural gas. The fact they are talking about it , shows that some are willing to invest, indicative that there is hope for the future economic situation over there.

So far , I have yet to see one valid argument that things were better for the Afghan when they were ruled by the Taliban .

I have yet to see one person claim its all 'rosy " ( to quote Garden ) , over there. The other side of the debate though, with the exception of Rough Poet, cant acknowledge at all that things are better now and good work is and has been done.

- Removing mines, is good.

-Building schools is good.

-democracy while flawed for sure, is good

- providing health care is good

-taking out the Taliban is good

-Yes , building pipelines is good
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 411
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 10:24:04 AM
Dunrich - what you're missing here is that the liberal/democrat side cannot abide the thought that the right wing just might be right, that our tactics might prevail, that we might even win, not just in Afghanistan, but in Iraq. Personally, and I can hear the laughter in my left ear now, I believe that one day, perhaps 20 or 30 years down the road, we'll look back at Bush and say that, despite the mistakes he's made, he started the process that brought the Middle East into the 21st century and ended the tribalism and warfare that has been a staple there for centuries.
Motown, a good point about US isolationism - came across an interesting tidbit today - in 1907, Roosevelt had 16 new US battleships painted white, and sent them around the world to announce America's entry onto the world scene. The fleet was known as the 'Great White Fleet'.
Nonetheless, it goes without saying that if the US involves itself, the left wing will demand to know what business we have there, or ascribe motives such as commercial gain - oil, or whatever.
If the US stands aloof, the left wing will say 'People are dying, someone has to help, why isn't the US doing anything?'
The US can't win.
A few days ago, a woman emailed me, asking what the purpose of the US armed forces was. Because I didn't look at her profile, I answered somewhat philosophically. Then I discovered she was from Britain - a country that owes its very life to the US involvement in WW2, as does most of Europe.
I still cannot believe that anyone could be so dense as to be unable to understand the debt that is owed, not just to the US but to every single country that stepped in to save Europe from Hitler - and the blood debt that is owed to every soldier who fought, and especially to those who were injured or died in that war.
And liberals/democrats say we have no compassion. At least we're not stupid.
 get_mad_baby
Joined: 4/9/2005
Msg: 412
view profile
History
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 10:34:38 AM
Will you please stop bringing up WW2 and Hitler. It's apparent that you have some obsession. So stop.

Also, when you say "the left wing will demand to know..." You're predicting the future, which no one can do.

"At least we're not stupid."
What a child you are.

There's so much tragedy happening in Afghanistan right now, because the forces were split and sent to that illegal occupation in Iraq.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 413
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 10:59:41 AM

It's apparent that you have some obsession.

It's apparent that you cannot handle anyone making points you don't agree with. Adolf Hitler was a significant issue in terms of the discussion I was having with this British woman - if you can't see its relevance, you're even dumber than the average left wingnut.

Also, when you say "the left wing will demand to know..." You're predicting the future, which no one can do.

Gee, do you think that the left wing will change its usual practice, just to make my prediction wrong? Predictions based on historical precedence are pretty common fare.
Yup, like I noted, some posters are even dumber than the average left wingnut.
 motownmaniax
Joined: 8/13/2006
Msg: 414
Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media IS Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 11:13:26 AM
One thing I will agree with critics. US foreign policy needs a complete overhaul, with much less emphasis on the projection of American military power in the world. It's about time Europe, South Korea, Japan, and many other countries we have mutual defense treaties with started spending way more on their own security, and being more visible projecting that security. We need to get out of outdated Cold War defense alliances and this business of protecting everybody and their grandmother, and start spending more time, money, and effort on our own problems, both global and domestic. Afghanistan and Iraq being the most urgent, of course.

We simply don't have the military assets and bottomless resources for it anymore, and there's nothing wrong with owning up to it.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 416
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 5:02:22 PM
( QUOTE "One thing I will agree with critics. US foreign policy needs a complete overhaul, with much less emphasis on the projection of American military power in the world. It's about time Europe, South Korea, Japan, and many other countries we have mutual defense treaties with started spending way more on their own security, and being more visible projecting that security. " QUOTE ENDS}

Motown, I couldnt agree more with you on this statement. Unfortunatley though, many are willing to let others pull their weight, do their dirty work for them.

History has shown, that treaties are not worth the paper they are printed on to some countries. In ww2 , many treaties were broken, ignored . Today we have the same thing going on with NATO.

All members unanimously voted to remove the Taliban from power. However very few member countries have actually done that. Sure they have all put troops there, made a good show of supporting NATO. However, with the ridiculous caveats put on their troops, very few have honoured the spirit of the coalitions willingness to get the work done.

Sorry, but last fall when Canuck and Brits were heavily out numbered, only the Yanks , Dutch ( some Poles if I remember right) came to help our guys.

France and Germany, refused to come help, staying in the relative safety of Kabul. Sorry pal, but in this day and age, it seems that it is up to the US , Brits ,Aussies , Canucks and Dutch to accomplish the dirty work OVER THERE. . With the exception of Britain and Holland, I wouldnt count on most European countries now days, to honour agreements, maybe make a show is the best we can expect?
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 417
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 5:15:21 PM
motown - excellent points....let's hope someone hears them!

MsSquirrly - I oversimplified the case re Britain - funny you called me on it because when I wrote it, I wondered if I shouldn't expand on the point. By no means did I mean to denigrate the efforts of the other Allies, and especially Canada, since both my parents were vets - Dad served in Europe as did my uncle, his brother and Mom was a WAC.
Yes, Britain had won the Battle of Britain before the US became involved, but ultimately, it was the presence of US money and arms which turned the tide - I'm not certain that the Allies could have managed without them. Certainly Europe was lost without the US, I can't see the Allies, without America, mounting D-Day. I'll have to think on that.
A point you didn' t raise is that the US was already, prior to Pearl Harbour, supporting Britain via the merchant marine and with munitions, etc. As a result of that, Germany sent subs to the US east coast and attacked US merchant ships. While it took Pearl Harbour to bring the US in, pressure was building against the isolationist elements in the US to join the fray.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 419
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 6:25:30 PM
I've got to respond to you on this MsSquirrly, before returning to our thread - Canada did far more than earn an honourable mention - their D-Day performance proved that, if nothing else.

The Canadian forces that landed on Juno Beach faced 11 heavy batteries of 155 mm guns and 9 medium batteries of 75 mm guns, as well as machine-gun nests, pillboxes, other concrete fortifications, and a seawall twice the height of the one at Omaha Beach. The first wave suffered 50% casualties, the second highest of the five D-Day beachheads. The use of armour was successful at Juno, in some instances actually landing ahead of the infantry as intended and helping clear a path inland.[23]

Despite the obstacles, the Canadians were off the beach within hours and beginning their advance inland. The 6th Canadian Armoured Regiment (1st Hussars) and The Queen's Own Rifles of Canada achieved their June 6objectives, when they crossed the Caen–Bayeux highway over 15 kilometres (9 mi) inland.[24] The Canadians were the only units to reach their D-Day objectives, although most units fell back a few kilometres to stronger defensive positions. In particular, the Douvres Radar Station was still in German hands, and no link had been established with Sword Beach.

By the end of D-Day, 15,000 Canadians had been successfully landed, and the 3rd Canadian Infantry Divisionhad penetrated further into France than any other Allied force, despite having faced strong resistance at the water's edge and later counterattacks on the beachhead by elements of the German 21st and 12th SS Hitlerjugend Panzer divisions on June 7 and June 8.

(Dieppe was a failure due to poor planning by Lord Mountbatten, amongst other reasons).
Furthermore, Canada was the leading force in the disastrous raid on Dieppe -
3,623 of the 6,086 men who made it ashore were either killed, wounded, or captured.
- a battle which proved the feasibility of the later D-Day operation.
Canadian forces were also instrumental in the fights in Italy, Holland and Belgium - the battle of Ortona, Italy is to this day considered to be one of the war's most fiercely fought battles.
This doesn't even begin to touch on the efforts of our navy and merchant marine, or the troops in the Pacific theatre - what happened to Canadian troops at the surrender of Hong Kong is one of the more brutal stories of that war.
So, more of a leading role MsSquirrly, not an honourable mention.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 420
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/4/2007 6:34:57 PM
{ quote " Now back to the topic....Afghanistan LOL " quote ends }

You know, there are a lot of similarities between ww2 and Afgahnistan, similar in the sense of motives, philiosphical similarities. Would like to point out that yes Squirrley you are correct about Russia. How ever with out our support, the tremendous effort to get supplies to the Russinas , it could be argued that Russia wouldnt been half as effective.

My Grand Dad was on the 'Murmansk Run", escorting convoys up to Russia . They had a 2 convoy life expectancy, some ships would sink just from the weight of the ice. Up north where the air was so cold and clear, the convoys could be spotted many miles away and the Luftwaffe had bases within striking distance all the way up the Norwegian coast line.

My Dad mentioned something a while back to me, he was musing after seeing Jack Layton on the news wanting the troops brought back home the day after we had lost 2 of our soldiers. He mused whether we would have been at D Day , if ww2 happened today? We would have been screaming for the return of our troops after Dieppe for sure , loss almost 3,000 wounded and killed in one day. Probably, would have called for the troops to be brought home the evening of D Day . As a vet, and Grand father of 2 serving in Afghanistan at the time, he is not one to count any casualties as of no consequance . Especially him , as his regiment The Essex Scottish was at Dieppe although he him self was at a training couse that day, he loss many great freinds, family that terrible day.

What would happen today? Our soldiers have proved they are as brave, determined today as they were back then. But the public, press, Jack Laytons would be screaming murder if we took casualties at the rate they did back then. Hitler would have won for sure, our politicians would all be hurt falling over each other in their rush to capitulate.

We could learn a lot from studying the bravery of the generation that fought ww2. Dont give me the public only supported the war because of propaganda crap either. Almost every family in the Dominion of Canada loss members during WW2 , yet they didnt lose heart want to give up.

If this generation had to fight ww2, we would have all sorts claiming it was an "inside job". Roosevelt had American planes painted like Japs and flew one him self. Churchill, had stocks in Vickers, so he mfg the war with Hitler who had stocks in Fokkers. Then we would have someone screaming when we liberated the concentration camps, dont stop the Germans from taking Jews to the ovens, the trauma might cause them to have PTSD! Then of course there would be the the ones saying its about the oil, its about the oil!

When I think about it, kind of funny someone here hasnt blamed Bush for ww2 yet, lol, maybe I shouldnt be giving them ideas? Afghanitsan is a dirty little war, no question about it. But to give up now, leave ? Maybe we should take a long hard look at ww2 , check what that generation did to overcome their adversaries. the evil of the Taliban regime, had many similarities with Nazi Germany.

Both were run by fanatics who thought anyone thinking different from them, deserved to die. Wipe them out , stay the course like our parents did in ww2 with the Nazis.
 gottobeme
Joined: 4/2/2006
Msg: 422
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/5/2007 10:34:35 AM
I think, msSquirrly, on this one we'll have to agree to disagree - and Dunrich, good point about how wusses like Layton would scream and cry over the casualties of Dieppe - interestingly enough, Canada got the lead role because, up till then, they hadn't been seeing much action - and had been complaining about it!
Boy, have things changed. And where has the left wing gone during this discussion? I've noticed that, when the facts become incontrovertible, or difficult for them to handle, they seem to make like mice and go quiet.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 423
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/5/2007 11:01:54 AM
{ QUOTE " troops in Afghanistan: report
Updated Wed. Nov. 21 2007 10:33 PM ET

CTV.ca News Staff

A new report is calling on NATO to double its troop levels in Afghanistan to 80,000 soldiers.


The report by the Senlis Council -- an international think tank with an office in Ottawa -- also argues that resurgent Taliban now have a presence in about half of Afghanistan and could threaten Kabul in 2008.


"We can't defeat the Taliban just by fighting (with a) small army in Kandahar," Almas Bawar, a Senlis Council spokesperson, told CTV Newsnet's Mike Duffy Live.


"We need more troops so we can stop the bombing (of) villages. It will decrease civilian casualties. In the meantime, we'll have more forces to fight insurgents (such as the) Taliban on the ground in Kandahar, where they are taking district after district each week."


Senlis's new security assessment report is based on field research conducted over the past month.


The group called for the following:


Doubling NATO troop levels to 80,000
Remove all caveats constraining troop deployment
Expand the fight by moving into Pakistan and attacking insurgent bases there -- with the Pakistani government's permission
"The Taliban have established firm roots across the border in Pakistan. President Musharraf has been unable to deal with these bases, and as a result it is impossible to stop the growth of the insurgency in Afghanistan," said Norine MacDonald, president and lead researcher of the Senlis Council.


"NATO troops in Pakistan are therefore urgently required to quell this growing threat, and ensure that this area is closed down as a home base for the Taliban and al Qaeda," she added.


Musharraf has not allowed U.S. troops to enter Pakistan in pursuit of al Qaeda suspects.


He is fighting a growing insurgency in the so-called tribal areas like North and South Waziristan. The New York Times reported last week that despite Musharraf's declaration of emergency rule, the Taliban have increased the territory they hold in those areas and are expanding into new areas.


On NATO troop numbers, MacDonald told CTV Newsnet that "Canada is doing more than its fair share (in Afghanistan)" and praised the job this country's soldiers are doing there.


However, other countries have to both increase their troop numbers and allow them to fight, she said.


Defence Minister Peter MacKay dismissed the Senlis report, saying it was "not credible."


But Bob Rae, the Liberals' foreign affairs critic, said the report should be taken seriously.


With the porous border between Afghanistan and Pakistan -- and with a recent UN report indicating that suicide bombers were coming from Pakistan -- "the security situation is obviously very much a concern," he told reporters in Ottawa on Wednesday.


"I think it's important for Canadians to come to grips with just how tough the situation is."


Military analyst Col. Mike Capstick told Mike Duffy Live that the Senlis report is on the right track, although not entirely correct in its analysis.


"I think an extra 40,000 (NATO troops) may be too many, and I'm a bit concerned that they didn't talk very much in the report about training the Afghan national security forces," Capstick said.


'Combat aid', narcotics


Senlis wants to see "combat aid agencies" established in the south of Afghanistan, thus putting the British and Canadian militaries in charge of aid delivery.


"The delivery of food and development aid by the British and Canadian militaries would be a huge boost to the hearts and minds campaign of both governments in southern Afghanistan," MacDonald said.


"This would be an excellent counter-insurgency strategy -- strengthening ties with the local communities, which is the only viable way to defeat the insurgency in Afghanistan."


Senlis has long supported encouraging Afghan farmers to grow opium poppies but for the production of medical morphine, which it claims is in short supply globally.


As part of its Poppies for Medicine initiative, something the European Parliament endorsed last month, Senlis outlined specifications for a pilot project to test the benefits of legal morphine production by Afghan farmers.


The U.S. government wants to see the poppy crop controlled by aerially spraying herbicides -- something Afghanistan's President Hamid Karzai opposes.


"Chemical spraying of farming communities would mean we lose any hope of ever winning back the hearts and minds of the Afghan people. It would spell utter disaster for NATO's stabilization mission in the country," said Jorrit Kamminga, Senlis's Paris-based head of policy research.


Last week, the UN Office on Drugs and Crime said the value opium production in Afghanistan is equivalent to about 53 per cent of the country's legal economic output.


Antonio Maria Costa, the agency's executive director, called on NATO to take a more active role in counter-narcotics operations.


"Since drugs are funding the insurgency, NATO has a self-interest in supporting Afghan forces in destroying drug labs, markets and convoys. Destroy the drug trade and you cut off the Taliban's main funding source," he said.'QUOTE ENDS } From ctv news.

Found this report from the Selis foundation quite interesting and accurate. It is running today on ctv news net, check it out if you can. This report is dead on concerning what we have to do over there.

With Iraq still ongoing, the problem will be to get the troop numbers up. It is imperative that we get those slaggard countries with unrealistic caveats put on them, to remove them.

From every thing Bhutto has said, I am confident we could get her support and troops from Pakistan to assist. Perhaps we could persuade France and Germany to get out of the comfort of Kabul, move into Kandahar if we promised to take the pressure off a bit, by pushing on the Taliban in an offensive way.

If we cant get the required troop numbers to hold critical border crossing areas than at least we could do week long type incursions into pakistan, disrupt the at their safe havens there and pull back, do it agin after a bit to keep pressure on and relieve the Pakistanis.

My big concern is burning our troops out, its time for the US, Britain , Holland and Canada to get real tough on the slaggards, get them into the game plan. It will be interesting how close this report is to the one coming from the all party comitee report due soon.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 426
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/17/2007 2:30:22 AM
{QUOTE"I am looking forward to what the independant panel Harper has appointed has to say on what our future role should be. I am hoping this panel sheds unpartasian light on the situation and our government can be given a clear mandate by the voters on what direction we should be headed in after 2009. 'END OF QUOTE}

Yes , I agree .

Manley was a good choice to lead the panel I think , he was one of the better Chretienite cabinet ministers. I am confident he has the aility to put Canada above the needs and desires of the liberal party, one of the few sadly it seems at times.

It will be interesting how the liberals react to the committee report as well. Many of them support the mission, but with their leader Dion, swinging so far to the extreme left, it could be interesting how the centreist`s like Ignatief responds to it.
 Intimacy only
Joined: 6/2/2007
Msg: 427
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/17/2007 3:22:34 AM
When I see posts like this I wonder if you people are even reality based. The insurection in the South remains 150 years after the Civil War. Every battle flag of the Army of the Rebellion flying at every courthouse in Mississippi displays that the rebellion is not over here. We have lynched men in my state in my lifetime. And you have your army occupying Afghanistan for what -- 5, maybe 6 years? Talk to me in the year 2150.
Grow up.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 429
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 12/24/2007 6:36:09 AM
{ QUOTE"When I see posts like this I wonder if you people are even reality based. The insurection in the South remains 150 years after the Civil War. Every battle flag of the Army of the Rebellion flying at every courthouse in Mississippi displays that the rebellion is not over here. We have lynched men in my state in my lifetime. And you have your army occupying Afghanistan for what -- 5, maybe 6 years? Talk to me in the year 2150.
Grow up. " QUOTE ENDS}

There is no comparisan at all between what is happening in Afghanisatn and the US civil war. The Taliban are mostly foreigners , not Afghani . We are not there " occupying ", we are assisting the Afghanis right now , in keeping the Taliban out . The majority , even in the south , of Afghanis do not want the Taliban back in power .

Your comaparison of the 2 conflicts is quite funny actually, hillarious even. Having quite the vision of some of my southern freinds being associated and compared with the Taliban !

Like the smiling guy said, read the threads , none have claimed it is a quick fix over there.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 430
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 1/23/2008 5:30:12 PM
{QUOTE "Harper gives early approval of Manley report
Mike Blanchfield, Canwest News Service
Published: Wednesday, January 23, 2008
OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper has given his preliminary approval to the hard-hitting report on Afghanistan by former Liberal cabinet minister John Manley, Canwest News Service has learned.

But Harper still wants to consult with his cabinet and caucus before giving a more detailed public response, a source close to the prime minister said Wednesday.

Harper views the findings of the five-member independent panel headed by Manley as "a good and positive report" despite the fact it was critical of the Conservative government's handling of the Afghanistan file.


Former Liberal deputy prime minister John Manley (L) shakes hands with Canada's Prime Minister Stephen Harper after presenting him with the report from the Independent Panel on Canada's Future Role in Afghanistan, in Harper's office on Parliament Hill in Ottawa January 22, 2008.
Reuters

Email to a friend

Printer friendly
Font:****"We are under no illusions that the mission is not without its problems," the source told Canwest.

Harper is grateful to Manley and his panel for their work, the source added.

Harper will discuss the report's recommendations at a cabinet meeting later this week.

The prime minister is not expected to spend much time talking about Afghanistan at a speech scheduled for Friday in Ottawa.

"It's really going to set the direction and tone for the government for the second session," the source said of the speech, stressing that the prime minister is "not looking to drag out a response."

With the House of Commons due to reconvene Monday, Harper's speech on Friday had been planned before Manley bumped up the release of his report on Tuesday.

Harper's speech, in addition to laying out priorities for the next parliamentary session, was also intended to mark Wednesday's second anniversary of the Conservatives' federal election win.

The Manley report criticized the Harper government for not adequately explaining the importance of the military mission in Afghanistan directly to Canadians.

Manley urged Harper to "step up" and personally take the lead in a new diplomatic offensive to push NATO allies to provide at least 1,000 additional troops for southern Afghanistan so that Canadian troops there could focus more on training the Afghan army.

The report also suggested that Harper might want to delay his promised vote in the Commons until after the NATO leaders summit in Bucharest in early April.

Manley and his fellow panellists wanted to strengthen Harper's negotiating position going into the NATO summit. With the Liberals, Bloc Quebecois and NDP all calling for Canada to end combat operations by February 2009, it would appear likely that the Conservatives would lose a vote in the Commons on extending the mission.

The source said Harper has not yet decided whether to adopt the recommendation to delay the vote, and added that the prime minister wants to discuss the report with his full caucus, likely on Saturday.

Stanley Kober, a foreign policy scholar with Washington' Cato Institute, said NATO's divisions now run so deep that the fractures may be irreparable.

As a Cold War creation, the organization showed great solidarity in the face of threat posed by the Soviet Union, he said. But it has floundered badly in the post-Cold War era, especially in Afghanistan.

"The glue that holds it together - you don't have the same sort of feeling that you had back in the Cold War days," Kober said Wednesday.

Manley's proposal for the alliance to come up with 1,000 additional troops may prove too challenging for NATO planners, he said.

"I just don't see where they're going to come from, I don't see the support. As a consequence, I think we are really in difficulty.""END OF QUOTE}

Well the Manley report is in and I could not agree more with it. I expected nothing less considering the members of that panel. John Manley was the most impressive politician in Jean Chretiens governmnet and was one of the few liberals who showed courage following 9/11. (With talent like him and Ignatief in the liberal party, I will always wonder how they ended up with the likes of Dion to lead it).

Watched the view last night where they interviewed Pamela Wallin , General Lewis Mckenzie among others. I really think they nailed the problems with Afghanistan dead on the head, I con cur with their assessmnet completely .

Great job, and I am cautiously optimistic that Harper will take the report seriously. The whole report is available on line I am told, will have to check it out.
 whiskeypapa
Joined: 6/7/2007
Msg: 434
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 2/9/2008 10:22:28 AM
Good things and Good Intentions In Afghanistan

The Russians did good things in Afghanistan, built roads, schools, improved healthcare and where are they now?

The invasion of Afghanistan was a stepping stone for the neocons wet dream of controlling all the oil supply in the Middle East and Asia as outlined in their PNAC

The Taliban was the legal government of Afghanistan before they were overthrown by the US. The overthrow was based on the deception that Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the events of 911 and that the Taliban were complicit by harbouring him. The Taliban offered to turn him over to a neutral country if the US provided proof of his guilt, none was forthcoming because the US was aware that the plan for 911 was hatched in Germany and Spain and was carried out by mostly Saudis.

NATO invaded Afghanistan at the behest of the USs "if you ain't fer us, you are agin us" armtwisting. while NATO has done some good it has also killed a lot of civilians with indescriminate bombing. It has reopened the opium market that the Taliban had shut down. At it's worst it is operating as an arm for US foreign policy.

NATO is fighting to pacify the South of Afghanistan. The people they are fighting are Pashtuns (falsely labeled Taliban) the Pashtuns are doing what they have always done fighting invaders and driving them from their territory. This has incurred some blowback. It is destabilizing Pakistan and foreign fighters are assisting as in Iraq. the Pashtuns at over 20 million people are the worlds largest tribal group and it seems the height of arrogance that they can be pacified militarily.

It is no secret that the US needs the pacification of the south of Afghanistan for it's proposed pipelines. The US followed it's old pattern of overthrowing the government and installing a puppet. This worked well in the fifties and sixties when the populations of the offended countries were small and uneducated but that is not the situation now. It failed in it's attempt to corrupt the Taliban with it's offer of a carpet of gold, it failed morally and objectively by resorting to force of arms and now the occupation is failing. It never tried dealing honestly and honourably with the people of Afghanistan and, the good intentions of NATO notwithstanding, failure is stamped over the entire enterprise.
 dunrich
Joined: 5/13/2006
Msg: 435
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 2/9/2008 5:28:24 PM
( QUOTE" The Taliban was the legal government of Afghanistan before they were overthrown by the US. The overthrow was based on the deception that Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the events of 911 and that the Taliban were complicit by harbouring him. The Taliban offered to turn him over to a neutral country if the US provided proof of his guilt, none was forthcoming because the US was aware that the plan for 911 was hatched in Germany and Spain and was carried out by mostly Saudis.+ QUOTE ENDS}

- deception that it was Usama Bin Laden and Al Quadea? All the high jackers were trained at Al Quadea camps, Osama took responsibility for 9/11 , it was an Al Quadea operation run by Usama Bin Laden.

-The Taliban at the last moment, tried stalling tactics , that was all that was.

{quote " The invasion of Afghanistan was a stepping stone for the neocons wet dream of controlling all the oil supply in the Middle East and Asia as outlined in their PNAC= quote ends}

- Suggest you read the previous posts on this thread. The conspiracy theories have all been dealt with already. Here we go again with the 'neo con theories. Funny, it was a Liberal governmnet in Canada that sent our troops to Afghanistan, yet they didnt to Iraq. Guess all the Nato countries are run by the neo cons too? All the countries in the UN who voted unanimously to sanction NATO operatons in Afghanistan? Wow .

[QUOITE " NATO is fighting to pacify the South of Afghanistan. The people they are fighting are Pashtuns (falsely labeled Taliban) the Pashtuns are doing what they have always done fighting invaders and driving them from their territory. This has incurred some blowback. It is destabilizing Pakistan and foreign fighters are assisting as in Iraq. the Pashtuns at over 20 million people are the worlds largest tribal group and it seems the height of arrogance that they can be pacified militarily." END OF QUOTE}

- wrong again. Most of the Taliban organizers are actually sons of the Mujadeen, raised in Pakistan .

- the Russians were not there at all in a similar way as we are. Number 1, they were not there under UN sanctions as we are. Number 2, they had little support from the Afgan people, we do. Number 3, they were not there at the invitation of a democraticcly elected government.
 whiskeypapa
Joined: 6/7/2007
Msg: 436
Positive Things in Afghanastan- what Main Stream Media Is Not Reporting
Posted: 2/10/2008 10:01:26 AM
dunrich, According to the FBI there is no proof that the hijackers trained in Afghanistan. Apparently they trained in the US, Afghanistan having a dearth of airline training facilities.

According to the BBC people who listened to radio transmissions in Afghanistan regularly heard Osama until 14 December 2001 . The egyptian paper, Al-whafd, reported that Osama died of pulmonary complications bought on by kidney failure in December of 2001. Until he turns up alive I will conclude that all missives attributed to him are bogus.

Conspiracy theories aside, I think the proof of the neocons wet dream lies in the results.

There may be Taliban organizers who are sons of the Mujahadeen, raised in Pakistan but it is unlikely that they control 20 million independently-minded Pashtuns.

The Russians are gone.

Karzai formed an interim government 21 December 2001. Elections were not expected for at least two and a half years so it is unlikely that NATO is there at the invitation of a democaratically government.
Show ALL Forums  > Current Events  >