Afghanistan

Raoul said:
What would you propose for a solution in Afghanistan ?
Click to expand...
I said in an earlier post that 14 years down the line, it's time to accept that what the US are doing there is going nowhere. The situation is worse and there is no clear plan or strategy in place to resolve it. The conflict is spreading to Pakistan and further destabilisation is inevitable. It's time to negotiate.
 
Uzz said:
I said in an earlier post that 14 years down the line, it's time to accept that what the US are doing there is going nowhere. The situation is worse and there is no clear plan or strategy in place to resolve it. The conflict is spreading to Pakistan and further destabilisation is inevitable. It's time to negotiate.
Click to expand...

The US are nearly out of Afghanistan. The question now becomes how the current Afghan government will fare going forward. Much like Iraq (with Iran) Afghanistan involves Pakistan, so both countries are going to have to sort something out and Afghanistan will have to reach a peace deal with the post Mullah Omar, Afghan Taliban.
 
Raoul said:
How many wars have been fought without civilian deaths ? Try thinking things through a bit before bestowing us with your half thought out mobile phone text speak.
Click to expand...

I misspelt 1 word. Very few wars are fought without civilian deaths but America isn't really at war. They are just out there killing, American is in very little danger so there is very little incentive to resolve these conflicts. Civilians deaths only matter so far as they create work for a spin team.
 
Raoul said:
The US are nearly out of Afghanistan. The question now becomes how the current Afghan government will fare going forward. Much like Iraq (with Iran) Afghanistan involves Pakistan, so both countries are going to have to sort something out and Afghanistan will have to reach a peace deal with the post Mullah Omar, Afghan Taliban.
Click to expand...
C'mon - them being nearly 'out' is just a form of lip service. They still exert a huge swathe of influence, and have a tangible real presence in day to day affairs there. They're about as out as Iran are 'out' of Syria.
 
Uzz said:
C'mon - them being nearly 'out' is just a form of lip service. They still exert a huge swathe of influence, and have a tangible real presence in day to day affairs there. They're about as out as Iran are 'out' of Syria.
Click to expand...

Not really, as you may (or may not) know, I just left Afghanistan in 2014 after 18 months there. I was also there for a year from 2002-03. The US is mainly relegated to their bases and not actively involved unless the Afghan forces seek their help as in this instance. The Ghani government needs to take the lead and start behaving like a sovereign government in dealing with these situations since the US's time there is very limited.
 
Once the USA leaves the country will crumble in few years. No way the central government can defend their territory. The only questions are, if they can hold onto Kabul and who takes over the country.
 
PedroMendez said:
Once the USA leaves the country will crumble in few years. No way the central government can defend their territory. The only questions are, if they can hold onto Kabul and who takes over the country.
Click to expand...

That will likely precipitate the need for the US to stay then, by Afghan invitation of course.
 
Raoul said:
That will likely precipitate the need for the US to stay then, by Afghan invitation of course.
Click to expand...
that is eventually going to happen, but it doesnt lead us anywhere. Nobody has a solution for the current problems. Afghanistan will continue to be a powerless construct, where regional leaders hold the real power, while europe/the USA finance it and preserve it right on the edge of collapse.
 
Uzz said:
I said in an earlier post that 14 years down the line, it's time to accept that what the US are doing there is going nowhere. The situation is worse and there is no clear plan or strategy in place to resolve it. The conflict is spreading to Pakistan and further destabilisation is inevitable. It's time to negotiate.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think they've accomplished a lot in a short period of time.

http://www.telesurtv.net/english/ne...-Production-in-Afghanistan-20150416-0028.html
 
Shaker Aamer - an innocent man held in Guantanamo Bay for 14 years was released earlier this year. He was the last British detainee held in Guantanamo. These are the first interviews he's done. I have a lot of time for this guy.


A 5 min video on his torture and the British involvement, and how the people who caused him this grief shouldn't be punished.

This is an interview with the BBC, over an hour long but it's broken down. I urge you guys to give it a watch.

Here's a sorta paraphrased / transcript of the interview:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35049397

Aamer says his first words to his wife were "I'm back" and they both cried. His four children are now teenagers. He had never seen his youngest son who was born the day he was transferred to Guantanamo.

"Even though it was a happy moment, it was sad in the same time. Because it was happy that I've seen my kids again, but it was so sad that the feeling is not that they are my kids. They look at me and they're just trying to know who is this person? But through their eyes, I feel like they are just looking at a stranger.
Click to expand...

It's why others and I were arguing about the credibility and reliability of intelligence in another thread.

Here's a Guardian article which is a good summary:

Can we really make even a tentative character assessment of someone we don’t know by watching them on the easily manipulated medium of television? I pondered this one again yesterday when checking out Shaker Aamer, Britain’s recently released last detainee held by the Americans in Guantánamo Bay.

The record of that still-open facility remains a major blot on the largely triumphant modern history of the US. A shameful episode, it will always be there to remind Americans – much as the Donald Trump saga does now – just how much they lost their nerve and moral compass after the 9/11 attacks, launched by a mere handful of medieval obscurants from the deserts of Arabia.
One day the US supreme court will declare the whole episode unconstitutional. The detention centre’s existence has been fought by brave lawyers and unbowed media – the New York Review of Books has been consistently robust – from the day of its opening in 2002. But not even Barack Obama has managed to face down the military/intelligence apparatus and close it. Truly a chilling saga.

Where does that leave Saudi-born Aamer, who is married to a British woman but not (key detail) a UK citizen, only a UK resident? He was held for 14 years, tortured, albeit in a non-lethal way, abused and beaten up, his wife and children threatened, neither charged nor put on trial, nor released despite being cleared by the US government for release, the allegations against him dropped, as long ago as 2007. Under duress he did make a false confession as any of us might.
Click to expand...

Full article here: http://www.theguardian.com/world/bl...er-guantanamo-bay-very-bad-man-simply-wronged
 
LeChuck said:
Shaker Aamer - an innocent man held in Guantanamo Bay for 14 years was released earlier this year. He was the last British detainee held in Guantanamo. These are the first interviews he's done. I have a lot of time for this guy.
Click to expand...

Just because they never charged him does not mean he was innocent.

We'll probably never be told what he was really up to over there but its obvious to everyone it was not charity work.
 
RedTiger said:
Yes, yes it does. The fact they didn't charge him DOES mean he's innocent, if he wasn't innocent they wouldn't of let him go.
Click to expand...

It means they couldn't gather enough evidence to try and prove he did anything. It doesnt mean he did nothing.

Guantanamo Bay existed for those people, the ones they knew were a threat but couldnt gather enough evidence to stand up in a court.
 
11101 said:
It means they couldn't gather enough evidence to try and prove he did anything. It doesnt mean he did nothing.

Guantanamo Bay existed for those people, the ones they knew were a threat but couldnt gather enough evidence to stand up in a court.
Click to expand...

Innocent until proven guilty, so he was innocent
 
11101 said:
It means they couldn't gather enough evidence to try and prove he did anything. It doesnt mean he did nothing.

Guantanamo Bay existed for those people, the ones they knew were a threat but couldnt gather enough evidence to stand up in a court.
Click to expand...
Guantanamo Bay is one of the worst cases of human rights abuses. The man was innocent. Did you read the article / watch the video? It was the US hoovering up whatever to make it look like they were doing something, and 14 years later they still don't know what they're doing. If anything the case of Shaker Aamer just reinforces the idea that the US went into a situation with no real strategy or long term plan and there has been no better outcome. They've gained nothing, and it's another stain on their already pathetic foreign policy.
 
milemuncher777 said:
1) Innocent men have been placed in Guantanamo tortured and abused for almost 15 years under no charge. It's not surprising to suggest they might take up arms post release.

2. Even if some returned to fight this doesn't justify the existence at Guantanamo in the first place. They should be tried in a court.
Click to expand...
Not disputing that, but the language on this page might lead people to think it's a place they hold people without reason. The people making the decision to send them there will be fairly convinced they're doing the right thing, and are not picking up people based on the size of their beard (otherwise, I'm nearing trouble).
 
Last edited:
Silva said:
Not disputing that, but the language on this page might lead people to think it's a place they hold people without reason. The people making the decision to send them there will be fairly convinced they're doing the right thing, and are not picking up people based on the size of their beard (otherwise, I'm nearing trouble).
Click to expand...

779 prisoners have been held at Guantánamo since the prison opened on January 11, 2002. Of those, 662 have been released or transferred, one was transferred to the U.S. to be tried, and nine have died, the most recent being Adnan Latif, in September 2012. 107 men are still held, and 48 of these men have been recommended for release by high-level governmental review processes.

As noted above, 107 prisoners now remain in Guantánamo, although it is important to remember that 37 of these men, like the majority of the men released in the last two years, were cleared for release over five years ago by President Obama's Guantánamo Review Task Force, and they are listed below. The identities of 56 men cleared for release by the task force were made available in a document released by the Department of Justice in a court case in September 2012, and this information is also included. 15 more men, recommended for ongoing detention by the task force, were cleared for release between January 2014 and October 2015 by Periodic Review Boards, convened to reassess the cases of those recommended by the task force for ongoing detention, or, in some cases, for prosecution. Two of them, Fawzi al-Odah and Muhammad al-Zahrani, were released in November 2014, a third was released in September 2015, and a fourth in November 2015, so 11 of these men are still held, making a total of 48 cleared prisoners in total who are still held.
Click to expand...
 
LeChuck said:
Guantanamo Bay is one of the worst cases of human rights abuses. The man was innocent. Did you read the article / watch the video? It was the US hoovering up whatever to make it look like they were doing something, and 14 years later they still don't know what they're doing. If anything the case of Shaker Aamer just reinforces the idea that the US went into a situation with no real strategy or long term plan and there has been no better outcome. They've gained nothing, and it's another stain on their already pathetic foreign policy.
Click to expand...

Again, he was not charged. That doesn't mean he was innocent. In a place like Afghanistan it is not black and white.

This is a guy who turned up in an active warzone, working for a charity that he has absolutely no proof ever existed, openly rubbing shoulders with the worst of the world's terrorist figures. Whatever he was up to, his story has long since proven to be lies.
 
11101 said:
Again, he was not charged. That doesn't mean he was innocent. In a place like Afghanistan it is not black and white.

This is a guy who turned up in an active warzone, working for a charity that he has absolutely no proof ever existed, openly rubbing shoulders with the worst of the world's terrorist figures. Whatever he was up to, his story has long since proven to be lies.
Click to expand...
Do you think there is such thing as a Registrar of Companies or a Charity Commission in Afghanistan? Charity over here is distinctly different to over there. There isn't any 'by the book' criteria that satisfies what a charity is or how it should be (unless they are the international ones). And when was it a warzone? From Oct-Nov 11. He was in there before that time, where he said it was peaceful. And I'd like to see a shred of evidence from yourself that it is lies. I mean, you obviously have some concrete evidence that the US with all their lawyers, government officials etc couldn't find, so please feel free to share.
 
LeChuck said:
Do you think there is such thing as a Registrar of Companies or a Charity Commission in Afghanistan? Charity over here is distinctly different to over there. There isn't any 'by the book' criteria that satisfies what a charity is or how it should be (unless they are the international ones). And when was it a warzone? From Oct-Nov 11. He was in there before that time, where he said it was peaceful. And I'd like to see a shred of evidence from yourself that it is lies. I mean, you obviously have some concrete evidence that the US with all their lawyers, government officials etc couldn't find, so please feel free to share.
Click to expand...

Right, so to be valid the evidence he has done wrong has to be absolutely watertight in a Western court of law, but we'll just take his word on his charity work, even though he could never provide any proof it ever existed.
 
11101 said:
Right, so to be valid the evidence he has done wrong has to be absolutely watertight in a Western court of law, but we'll just take his word on his charity work, even though he could never provide any proof it ever existed.
Click to expand...
Again - what do you want? A letter from the Charity Commission of Afghanistan? Do you think these things exist? People do humanitarian work all the time, it's only in developed countries do we have a register or a higher form of record to check these things. I've done charity work, but aside from a few pics of me doing it surrounded by kids, how else would anyone know?

There is no evidence to convict. Because you 'don't trust him' is definitely not going to hold up in a Western court of law. Literally, there is not a shred of evidence, so I really don't know what you want me to say. You think he's guilty but don't have anything to show for it.
 
LeChuck said:
Again - what do you want? A letter from the Charity Commission of Afghanistan? Do you think these things exist? People do humanitarian work all the time, it's only in developed countries do we have a register or a higher form of record to check these things. I've done charity work, but aside from a few pics of me doing it surrounded by kids, how else would anyone know?

There is no evidence to convict. Because you 'don't trust him' is definitely not going to hold up in a Western court of law. Literally, there is not a shred of evidence, so I really don't know what you want me to say. You think he's guilty but don't have anything to show for it.
Click to expand...

I don't think he is guilty, i dont know if he is or not. But its clear as day he wasnt doing what he says he was.
 
LeChuck said:
Do you have anything to support that other than a gut feeling?
Click to expand...

Pretty much every piece of evidence/information released so far....

And for what its worth he himself has admitted he has met senior AQ figures. Could be coincidence, could not be.
 
11101 said:
Pretty much every piece of evidence/information released so far....

And for what its worth he himself has admitted he has met senior AQ figures. Could be coincidence, could not be.
Click to expand...
To the bolded - could you show me? I haven't seen anything.

To the latter, you're purposely misquoting the information. He attended public lectures by one radical cleric in London. Wholly different to meeting senior AQ figures.
 
Last edited:
Personally I recommend reading the last edition of Rory Stewart's The places in between for his take on the country, he's also got som interesting talks on youtube. Seems pretty obvious that the Nato/American approach never was going to work, and you'd need to get deep into the local customs and ways of life in order to get anything done over there - in like a 100 year perspective.

In retrospect it almost seems like Afghanistan would have been better off left alone after Al Qaida was kicked out, foreigners have never been able to control it.
 
Vooon said:
Personally I recommend reading the last edition of Rory Stewart's The places in between for his take on the country, he's also got som interesting talks on youtube. Seems pretty obvious that the Nato/American approach never was going to work, and you'd need to get deep into the local customs and ways of life in order to get anything done over there - in like a 100 year perspective.

In retrospect it almost seems like Afghanistan would have been better off left alone after Al Qaida was kicked out, foreigners have never been able to control it.
Click to expand...

Trouble is, AQ would've returned immediately if the US left after booting them out. They tend to relish setting up shop in failed states.
 
Raoul said:
Trouble is, AQ would've returned immediately if the US left after booting them out. They tend to relish setting up shop in failed states.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately the West then went out and created more failed states, starting with Libya.
Mistakes will always happen, the way forward is learning from them.
 
PedroMendez said:
what is your plan for Afghanistan?
Click to expand...

Same as it's always been, as well as a reconciliation / peace deal with the Afghan Taliban, that is tied to the removal of foreign troops. The Taliban need reassurances that foreign troops are leaving in order to participate, therefore the removal of troops has to be contingent on Taliban participation in the peace process. Short of that, we will be trapped in a feedback loop of violence.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.