SUBSIM Radio Room Forums - New Afghanistan policy

SUBSIM Radio Room Forums (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/index.php)

- General Topics (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/forumdisplay.php?f=175)

- - New Afghanistan policy (https://www.subsim.com/radioroom/showthread.php?t=158795)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fincuan (Post 1216318)

Or it goes like the British withrawal from Aden in the 1960's: The local population doesn't really thinkg the government's forces up to the job, and correctly deduce that supporting the Brits now means a bullet in the head later-on when they've pulled out. As a result the support for the Brits plunged and outbursts and violence against them increased. They managed to hold the country together almost until the pre-designated date, but when they finally pulled out, a bit early, the People's Republic of South Yemen was declared the next day.

That's why I always think setting a fixed withrawal date is a bad idea if the local forces aren't in tip-top shap to handle the situation and the local government isn't in much better shape either.

Karsai has arranged himself comfortably with being suported and protected by wetsern soldiers. His own family is in the drug trade, and the leadership and poltical class in general is corrupt, with many warlords additonally cooking their own soup. So, setting up a date until they must have gotten their homework fixed sounds liike a good idea.

Unfortunately I think that the options and capacities of any central government in Kabul always will be overestimated. Sooner or later any government in the coming years probably will end like Nadjibullah after the Soviet era. Holding out a little time while his alliances get bought off (alliances never lasts long in Afghanistan), then getting overrun.

Did anyone catch Obama's Nobel acceptance speech? I found it very intruiging, and this piece covers some of the points.

Quote:

Thursday, at his Nobel laureate speech in Oslo, the president used an audience of European leftists to place himself smack-dab in the American center. He said, essentially: War is bad but sometimes justified, America is good, and I am an American. He spoke of Afghanistan as "a conflict that America did not seek; one in which we are joined by 43 other countries—including Norway—in an effort to defend ourselves and all nations from further attacks." Adroit, that "including Norway." He said he had "an acute sense of the cost of armed conflict" and suggested America's efforts in Afghanistan fit the criterion of the concept of a "just war." It continues to be of great value that a modern, left-leaning American president speaks in this way to the world. "The world" didn't seem to enjoy it, and burst into applause a resounding once.

He quoted Martin Luther King, when he received the Peace Prize: "Violence never brings permanent peace. It solves no social problem: It merely creates new and more complicated ones." But Mr. Obama added that "as a head of state sworn to protect and defend my nation," he could not be guided only by Dr. King's example. "I face the world as it is, and cannot stand idle in the face of threats to the American people." Evil exists: "A nonviolent movement could not have halted Hitler's armies. Negotiations cannot convince al Qaeda's leaders to lay down their arms."

He acknowledged Europe's "ambivalence" about military action, and "a reflexive suspicion of America, the world's sole military superpower." But the world should remember what America did during and after World War II. "It is hard to conceive of a cause more just than the defeat of the Third Reich and the Axis powers," he said—and he pointedly noted America's creation of the Marshall Plan and contribution to the United Nations, "a legacy for which my own country is rightfully proud. . . . Whatever mistakes we have made, the plain fact is this: The United States of America has helped underwrite global security for more than six decades with the blood of our citizens and the strength of our arms."

"Evil does exist in the world," he says. Yep, I think Mr. Bush made that case too. So, in this conservative's eyes, I have to say that his speech does add some merit to his winning the Peace Prize--essentially, he "discovered his inner Bush" and schools the world community on a muscular defence of just wars. :salute:

I agree in part with you Neal. In those times when I see him act this way, as a realist, I am reassured. At the least the guy isn't totally blind, and when he gets something right, I will say so.

In those comments - he was right. Well Done, Mr. President.

Just out of curiosity - anyone notice that after these coments - his approval rating had a slight rise?