Leaving Afghanistan

[giblets]

So you admit then you were wrong. Thank you.

Here's a clue. Get your facts straight first about people before accusing them of stuff.

I wish I was wrong but it is scary how bloodthirsty Christians can be.

[notyoueither]

Academia must be full of marxists.

Or, Marx and Engels based their theories on historical observations.

[notyoueither]

And Marx et al. went off the rails by by turning history into some sort of Ouija board for the future.

[Zevico]

Ben's case is premised on the view that Pakistan can somehow be forced to play nice. That's been tried before. American aid came precisely on the premise that it would play nice. It didn't play nice before American aid was granted, and it won't start playing nice if American aid is withdrawn.

If the past decade of its behaviour is any indicator, Pakistan prefers having a Talibani ally to any kind of real (as opposed to smokescreen) alliance with the United States.

The only alternative is war with Pakistan--a war for which the United States is unprepared, psychologically and militarily.

Our continued presence in Afghanistan prolongs the state of civil war there between warring tribes. If the Taliban take power there, it is reasonable to say that Al Qaeda will have another base of operation. But the fact is that it already has plenty of bases of operation in Africa and the Arab world. Should each such base of lawlessness be invaded by the United States, only for new bases to arise with every fresh civil war in a region as stable as a lit tinderbox?

The broader problem is not Al Qaeda in any case but the broader ideological sway of Islamism, conspiracy theory, ignorance and authoritarianism in the Middle East. Al Qaeda is a symptom.

For the United States (and the West) to defeat Islamism, it must stand opposed against the threat of Iran and the range of Islamist movements throughout the region. Like the Communists, the Islamists may ally with each other but there is no one they hate more than rival Islamists. We do see a complex alliance and rivalry between Hezballah/Iran and Hamas, for example, and will soon see the full effect of the new Egypt-Hamas alliance (and the end of the Egypt-US alliance). The US must its military and diplomatic power to that end--though under Obama that is simply not happening.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

War with Pakistan... this the the real business... they actually have the dreaded weapons of mass destruction

[dannubis]

Can they fire them at the US ?

[Berzerker]

If the Taliban take power there, it is reasonable to say that Al Qaeda will have another base of operation. But the fact is that it already has plenty of bases of operation in Africa and the Arab world.

Why would AQ move back into Afghanistan where we could bomb them with virtual impunity? Dont get me wrong, I really hope they do move back in when we leave, the sooner the better. You're right of course, they can set up "base" just about anywhere in the islamic 3rd world.

For the United States (and the West) to defeat Islamism, it must stand opposed against the threat of Iran and the range of Islamist movements throughout the region.

the Islamists may ally with each other but there is no one they hate more than rival Islamists.

and your plan is to get in the middle of their hatred?

[C0ckney]

...Pakistan can somehow be forced to play nice. That's been tried before. American aid came precisely on the premise that it would play nice. It didn't play nice before American aid was granted, and it won't start playing nice if American aid is withdrawn.

If the past decade of its behaviour is any indicator, Pakistan prefers having a Talibani ally to any kind of real (as opposed to smokescreen) alliance with the United States.

The only alternative is war with Pakistan--a war for which the United States is unprepared, psychologically and militarily.

the real issue with pakistan is that it knows that the western occupation won't last forever and it is, and has been, preparing, for the post US era for some time. there are elements within the pakistani security services who are essentially fighting what they see as indian influence in afghanistan (the pakistanis in general, and in the security services in particular are extremely paranoid about india). so they give support to radical groups, hoping to use them as proxies in the post US/post karzai era. much the same as they've been doing in kashmir for a long time.

pakistan also has its own problems with islamic militancy, which it is really struggling to control. it faces enormous political, social and economic challenges and a long running insurgency in baluchistan. it is a country that is coming apart at the seams. needless to say one of the things making pakistan's situation worse is the western involvement in afghanistan. the idea of war with pakistan is utter madness. it would be like to trying to heal a cut finger by chopping your arm off.

The broader problem is not Al Qaeda in any case but the broader ideological sway of Islamism, conspiracy theory, ignorance and authoritarianism in the Middle East. Al Qaeda is a symptom.

For the United States (and the West) to defeat Islamism, it must stand opposed against the threat of Iran and the range of Islamist movements throughout the region. Like the Communists, the Islamists may ally with each other but there is no one they hate more than rival Islamists. We do see a complex alliance and rivalry between Hezballah/Iran and Hamas, for example, and will soon see the full effect of the new Egypt-Hamas alliance (and the end of the Egypt-US alliance). The US must its military and diplomatic power to that end--though under Obama that is simply not happening.

hmm so your idea for defeating 'islamism' is to concentrate our efforts on israel's biggest enemy. quelle surprise!

a better idea would be to withdraw from afghanistan and stop bombing libya. then cut off all aid to israel, which would certainly make them more reasonable and perhaps focus their minds on peace rather than settlement building. once this is done, i am sure the 'threat' from 'islamsm' will recede a great.

[Zevico]

the real issue with pakistan is that it knows that the western occupation won't last forever and it is, and has been, preparing, for the post US era for some time. there are elements within the pakistani security services who are essentially fighting what they see as indian influence in afghanistan (the pakistanis in general, and in the security services in particular are extremely paranoid about india). so they give support to radical groups, hoping to use them as proxies in the post US/post karzai era. much the same as they've been doing in kashmir for a long time.

pakistan also has its own problems with islamic militancy, which it is really struggling to control. it faces enormous political, social and economic challenges and a long running insurgency in baluchistan. it is a country that is coming apart at the seams. needless to say one of the things making pakistan's situation worse is the western involvement in afghanistan. the idea of war with pakistan is utter madness. it would be like to trying to heal a cut finger by chopping your arm off.




hmm so your idea for defeating 'islamism' is to concentrate our efforts on israel's biggest enemy. quelle surprise!

What a joke! I gave one example. There are plenty throughout the region. Shall I name them?

Syria--in the Islamist camp for realpolitik reasons; has its own MB.

Jordan--has its own MB.

Iraq--Islamist Shia militias, funded by Iran. Other ethno-religious militias also in play.

Libya--the rebels are composed at least partly of Al Qaedaists returned from Iraq. This portends well for the rebels' intentions and future alignment vis-a-vis the United States.

Iran--funding, or at least providing a haven for, Al Qaaeda; funding the Taliban.

Pakistan--see Iran.

a better idea would be to withdraw from afghanistan and stop bombing libya. then cut off all aid to israel, which would certainly make them more reasonable and perhaps focus their minds on peace rather than settlement building. once this is done, i am sure the 'threat' from 'islamsm' will recede a great.

Wow. It all comes down to the settlements, huh? The threat from Islamism recedes once the "Israel problem" is resolved? Very wrong.

Such groups openly declared war on the US. For example, the Muslim Brotherhood did that a while ago. They actively recruited and call for the recruitment of anti-US fighters in Iraq. This is because their only interest in the region is attacking Israel. And Iraq. And Jordan. Oops! Not so interested in peace and stability anymore.
Or, Hezballah. Resistance against the Israeli enemy! Plus, killing Syrian opposition groups, opposing other Lebanese ethnic groups; killing the Lebanese Prime Minister (blaming Israel, naturally); killing Iranian protesters during their protests; killing Americans in Iraq; killing them in Lebanon; ruling Lebanon by fiat (including via the "central" government); openly declaring war on the United States. No, nothing to see here. If we cut off aid to Israel the Hezballah problem will go away. There's clearly no reason to think they would ever target the United States or act against its interests, like it has done for the past two decades. It's all Israel, baby.
Or Iran--so fixated on Israel it's had time to fund Iraqi militias, a Lebanese militia, and anyone else it favours. Who wants an Iranian proxy in Iraq? One guess--Iran!

Shall I go on? This is all just jewish opinion anyway, centred on concentrating our efforts on "israel's biggest enemy." Nothing for you to worry about.

[Zevico]

Berzerker--
I don't propose to get in the "middle", I propose that the US should oppose Islamist groups if and where possible, because they are usually a greater threat than any other group to American interests.

[dannubis]

You conveniently brush over the fact that it is exactely the continued support of the US for Israel that has provided a focal point for hatred and made the rise of many of these islamist groups if not possible then surely a lot easier.

Not saying that the US should or should not withdraw support for Israel and also not making any comment son how and where to fight these terrorist groups but a long lasting solution to the ME problem needs to include the consideration that Israel has to be de coupled from US support.

[BeBMan]

Let India care about Pakistan. War with Pakistan will achieve nothing; the religious fundis and AQ types can always fall back into the tribal areas, what they already do when the gov does something against them (as half-assed it may be). The part of the normal pop that doesn't like them will probably not greet foreign forces as liberators either.

In a regular war vs. Pakistan (leaving nukes out for a moment) the west could destroy their conventional forces, only to get bogged down again in the follow up - how do you pacify the whole damn thing? If that can't be done the whole op would be doomed from the starrt. In the tribal areas Western forces would encounter the same or even worse probs than they have in Afghanistan. So it would mean another long time engagement in a time of increasing unwillingness by the public, resource concerns etc..

As for Afghanistan, I don't think for a minute that leaving the country will solve anything vs. islamist terror or that it will make life there any better for the pop, but after a decade with at best questionable results I doubt that it would be the solution to just go on with more of the same, and with no end in sight.

[dannubis]

[Ben Kenobi]

long lasting solution to the ME problem needs to include the consideration that Israel has to be de coupled from US support.

So the solution is to give your enemies what they want rather than sticking up for your allies. Why would anyone want to work with the US?

[Ben Kenobi]

a better idea would be to withdraw from afghanistan and stop bombing libya. then cut off all aid to israel, which would certainly make them more reasonable and perhaps focus their minds on peace rather than settlement building. once this is done, i am sure the 'threat' from 'islamsm' will recede a great.

No, it won't, and hopefully you'll get a first hand taste of sharia.