Afghanistan, Do we stay or do we leave?
- Thread starter Bermshot
- Start date
wespelarno
Likes Dirt
I read a really interesting perspective on this a couple of years back. The idea was that if we pull out now, the current extremist movement will take control again and we will be right back where we started. To prevent this, we can only really pull out when that movement is gone. Which prevents pulling out in the next 10 or probably even 20 years. Instead, expose a generation of young people and specifically women to education, equal rights and honest government and suddenly the west doesn't look so decadent and impure. Likewise, the weaknesses in the fundamental deliberately twisted interpretation of the Qur'an start to become apparent and extremism starts to die out. At that point Armed forces can pull out without the nation reverting back to where it was before the US army landed.
At huge expense, the way I see it is we are stuck for a generation at least. Because until the mindset is changed, we haven't achieved anything. I don't think we should have been there in the first place, but now we are this far in we need to stick it out.
At huge expense, the way I see it is we are stuck for a generation at least. Because until the mindset is changed, we haven't achieved anything. I don't think we should have been there in the first place, but now we are this far in we need to stick it out.
scuba05
Likes Dirt
Am currently reading many a books on recent wars (Vietnam onwards, mostly Afghanistan at the moment) written by the soldiers, or upon interviews of soldiers. Many of the reports from soldiers give the impression that they, the people who are fighting on our behalf and, most importantly, for the Afghani population, believe that the worlds support is needed in the way of security for the mean time, and a large-scale training section to allow the Afghan people to be governed effectively and also have a non-corrupt police and military to provide security and peace.
I distinctly remember one high ranking officer from UK's 3 para, the outfit responsible for Helmand province in the south, saying that it must be done in 3 stages. (May not be word for word, but the gist is there)
1)UN security force responsible for all security, whilst training of local forces
2)Transition to support the Afghan forces, taking a back seat so to speak
3)Full control given to Afghan forces
In about late 08 early 09 (when the book was written), he said they were finally starting, albeit slowly, to enter stage 2.
Many of the accounts from soldiers say that they are well received in many a town, as (most of the time), peace and security is brought along with the soldiers, as well as a symbol of things to come. Many of the locals will stop and have coffee with them etc (weather this is for politeness or actual thanks is not known), but i think the majority of Afghani people want a better standard of living, away from the Taliban and away from selling opium to make ends meet.
So, my thoughts. I think that we should stay committed, as pulling out too early will be both bad for us, as the Taliban will treat it as a victory and continue to reign terror and essentially run Afghanistan, and even worse for the people of Afghanistan, with death, destruction and essentially governed by an extremist group. I do believe that it is going to take quite a long time (probably another 10 years, possibly more) to build the infrastructure and training necessary to allow the Afghan people to govern and protect themselves. It is just an unfortunate, but necessary by-product, that this will require the loss of lives of those who raise their hand to join the defence forces and go to Afghanistan. I do believe that this is a view shared by those who go there, as many of these soldiers return for multiple tours, and state that it is helping the people just a little bit.
I will admit that i am not the one over there fighting the war, but those who are seem to think it is necessary, so I believe that we should do what they think, and not what the numpties we vote in every few years think.
I distinctly remember one high ranking officer from UK's 3 para, the outfit responsible for Helmand province in the south, saying that it must be done in 3 stages. (May not be word for word, but the gist is there)
1)UN security force responsible for all security, whilst training of local forces
2)Transition to support the Afghan forces, taking a back seat so to speak
3)Full control given to Afghan forces
In about late 08 early 09 (when the book was written), he said they were finally starting, albeit slowly, to enter stage 2.
Many of the accounts from soldiers say that they are well received in many a town, as (most of the time), peace and security is brought along with the soldiers, as well as a symbol of things to come. Many of the locals will stop and have coffee with them etc (weather this is for politeness or actual thanks is not known), but i think the majority of Afghani people want a better standard of living, away from the Taliban and away from selling opium to make ends meet.
So, my thoughts. I think that we should stay committed, as pulling out too early will be both bad for us, as the Taliban will treat it as a victory and continue to reign terror and essentially run Afghanistan, and even worse for the people of Afghanistan, with death, destruction and essentially governed by an extremist group. I do believe that it is going to take quite a long time (probably another 10 years, possibly more) to build the infrastructure and training necessary to allow the Afghan people to govern and protect themselves. It is just an unfortunate, but necessary by-product, that this will require the loss of lives of those who raise their hand to join the defence forces and go to Afghanistan. I do believe that this is a view shared by those who go there, as many of these soldiers return for multiple tours, and state that it is helping the people just a little bit.
I will admit that i am not the one over there fighting the war, but those who are seem to think it is necessary, so I believe that we should do what they think, and not what the numpties we vote in every few years think.
DH - racer
Likes Dirt
the only reason we are there is because the australian government is sucking up to america. because if we dont go "help out" the americans wont return the favour if we are ever in need of help...
Bermshot
Banned
I need to say that my first effort at a poll went a bit funky when I polled questions on the question. I'm sure I can be forgiven for that.
I also posted first in a way that if I made a mistake would not be too ridiculous. So now I should state that before you vote could think clearly and concisely with information sourced by yourself or if time does not permit garnered here through the posts that will assuredly be informative.
The 'poll statistics' will be forwarded once this thread appears to fade but it does have a zero setting.
I also posted first in a way that if I made a mistake would not be too ridiculous. So now I should state that before you vote could think clearly and concisely with information sourced by yourself or if time does not permit garnered here through the posts that will assuredly be informative.
The 'poll statistics' will be forwarded once this thread appears to fade but it does have a zero setting.
Nerf Herder
Wheel size expert
I voted to stay ... just to make it 50:50 ... I love a good polling.
Can't leave now, else we're back to where it was ... and all the money and more importantly the lives and sacrifice by affected families is for nothing ... and if it then leads to other terrorist events however distant then it will be an even bigger tragedy.
We need another surge ... but with more contributing nations ... share the load surely
I'm just worried about Pakistan
Can't leave now, else we're back to where it was ... and all the money and more importantly the lives and sacrifice by affected families is for nothing ... and if it then leads to other terrorist events however distant then it will be an even bigger tragedy.
We need another surge ... but with more contributing nations ... share the load surely
I'm just worried about Pakistan
Bermshot
Banned
I have to be honest. This morn I was having my coffee and one of the morning shows aired briefly another casualty, my heart sank, by 9.30 odd, the Air Chief? came on and told us the info. My heart sank even more due to thinking of another family completely distraught. Farrrrrk!
I think those men should be home, training and passing knowledge too the new of the ADF.
I think those men should be home, training and passing knowledge too the new of the ADF.
for those about to rock
Likes Dirt
Last year when we lost a few men in close succession due to IED's the debate was well and truly raging. In my opinion, if there are still constant explosions and killings, we do need to be there. Hell, if I couldn't walk down the street without worrying that at any moment someone could detonate a bomb right next to me, I'd want people helping us.
Sure we are losing soldiers, and I don't mean to say that that isn't a bad thing, it's terrible, and that we didn't start the fight, but now we are there, it would be wrong of us to leave when the country is still in so much disorder.
Whether the government is just keeping us there to stay close with America, or whether it is actually to be of some benefit to the people of Afghanistan we need to stay there and provide the help that the country so desperately needs.
Sure we are losing soldiers, and I don't mean to say that that isn't a bad thing, it's terrible, and that we didn't start the fight, but now we are there, it would be wrong of us to leave when the country is still in so much disorder.
Whether the government is just keeping us there to stay close with America, or whether it is actually to be of some benefit to the people of Afghanistan we need to stay there and provide the help that the country so desperately needs.
hach_bee
Likes Bikes and Dirt
Those casualties? Five of which were mates of my mates (and a previous partner). Another was sent home with a fractured spine last march and is still in rehab. In fact today is the one year anniversary of Snowy and Smitty's (and his dog's) deaths from IED detonation. I saw these men return, broken. And they are being forced to go back on tour next year. Even though they are still reliving the hell of their last deployment.
Between us being there and the amount of lives we have lost for AMERICA's war... I think the line has been well and truly crossed. And it destroys not only the lives of the families but the lives of the men who DO make it home, I've seen it first hand. I support our troops because they love their jobs, but they'd love it more if they were fighting for OUR country, not someone else's. So would we.
Last edited:
Bermshot
Banned
In this sitch I have to focus on us whether that is selfish or not. We understand the alliance issues but as a Nation we can think for ourselves, can't we decide?
I'm sure I remember 500,000 walking over the Harbour Bridge saying NO to Iraq, amongst the other states. We went anyway.... based on lies. "we have to stay the course", we ratted out of there. I bet the troops were pissed at that one.
As wespelarno mentioned, there is another way. Just how (I didn't want to go here) the CIA trained the Taliban to evade and fight the Russkies. < Instead harness the good that is in the majority of people towards a right endevour. That is worth fighting and dying for, not an armfull of bombs and triggers.
I'm not trying to sway the thread.
Bring e'm home and have a standing ADF that the world fears with respect.
I'm sure I remember 500,000 walking over the Harbour Bridge saying NO to Iraq, amongst the other states. We went anyway.... based on lies. "we have to stay the course", we ratted out of there. I bet the troops were pissed at that one.
As wespelarno mentioned, there is another way. Just how (I didn't want to go here) the CIA trained the Taliban to evade and fight the Russkies. < Instead harness the good that is in the majority of people towards a right endevour. That is worth fighting and dying for, not an armfull of bombs and triggers.
I'm not trying to sway the thread.
Bring e'm home and have a standing ADF that the world fears with respect.
Last edited:
jgdj18
Likes Dirt
It became our war too when we assisted America when they first entered the country.
Rightly or wrongly, we assisted America when the decision to intervene was made, and that makes us also responsible for the outcome.
I fear that if the ratbags that our armed forces are trying to get rid of get more control then we'll lose more innocent people all over the world as they will hammer their terrorist crap in any way they can. The world will never be without armed forces and the world will never be a peace loving hippy commune. Our forces and the forces of other like minded countries who wish to protect their shores and their people should keep doing what they do to keep you and I free and safe from attempted acts on terror in our country. If you think you would be better off without our armed forces in other countries keeing the peace then you are kidding yourself.
Troops know what they are training for and none of them would walk around a corner in a bad place thinking they may not get torn into two pieces.
If the oppurtunity ever comes along, talk to a soldier who has served in a bad place........
Troops know what they are training for and none of them would walk around a corner in a bad place thinking they may not get torn into two pieces.
If the oppurtunity ever comes along, talk to a soldier who has served in a bad place........
Nerf Herder
Wheel size expert
As long as there are clear goals (no matter how long and even more strategic in nature) and those serving in the armed forces are willing to make the sacrifice then this is the key IMO.
The worry is that poor leadership both militarily and political fucks up and become wishy washy or chops and changes.
Hearts and Minds I believe is the goal ... elimination of systemic corruption, and allowing the Afghanis to feel safe so that they don't need to support a warlord or taliban, or carry guns themselves. These are cultural goals requiring military assistance, as opposed to military goals IMO. I'm not fully across the non-military goals and organisations contributing there, but I would have thought this is where the surge also has to happen, and more coordination ... my laymans understanding is that the humanitarian effort is not coordinated, but instead is dictated by the mandates of the various organisations. Happy to be corrected, but would have though this is where the UN should play the major role
The worry is that poor leadership both militarily and political fucks up and become wishy washy or chops and changes.
Hearts and Minds I believe is the goal ... elimination of systemic corruption, and allowing the Afghanis to feel safe so that they don't need to support a warlord or taliban, or carry guns themselves. These are cultural goals requiring military assistance, as opposed to military goals IMO. I'm not fully across the non-military goals and organisations contributing there, but I would have thought this is where the surge also has to happen, and more coordination ... my laymans understanding is that the humanitarian effort is not coordinated, but instead is dictated by the mandates of the various organisations. Happy to be corrected, but would have though this is where the UN should play the major role
flamshmizer
Likes Dirt
I have an infantry mate who is heading over next year and is really looking forward to the challange. He didn't join up to make coffee.
He's also a batshit crazy driver, and his girlfriend was actually more worried when he got his WRX then when he joined the army. Realistically, with the way he drives he's probably got a better chance of lasting a year in Afghanistan.
Whether it was right for us to be there in the first place is a little irrelevant now. We're in pretty deep and we should stay there because we said we would help the people. We should stay unless we have reason to leave.
So, what reason to leave do we have? Young soldiers dying is a terrible thing. I hate to put it into mathematical terms as a life is a life, but this thread is focussing on the bigger picture of why we are there, so the bigger picture will be looked at.
We've had 27 dead in 10 years, which is an average of 2.7 people a year. Considering the fact that its a warzone, and the number of people we have there is it really a slaughter fest? I'd say that its one of the safest wars in Australian history.
But are these deaths acheiving anything? That is a question I think only the people who know what they're talking about can answer. I can watch the news for weeks and hear nothing about how many towns our troops have cleared out, how many terrorists they have killed, how many people's freedoms they are securing, but i will certainly hear how many Aussie troops have died. This is giving everyone the opinion that our troops are dying for nothing which I'm certain is not the case. As stated in this thread, the troops over there seem to think they are making a difference.
Role Reversal: If you were the ocupied country and you knew all you had to do was kill some soldiers to upset the invading country enough to pack up and go home, you would just kill a bunch of soldiers. With that in mind would it be wise and fair to the rest of the coalition to pull out now?
Was this because as soon as they pulled out things went back to the way they were? South vietnam was invaded shortly after and pretty much the entire war and all those deaths were for nothing?
So if we pulled out of Afghanistan today, it would be different to Vietnam because....?
He's also a batshit crazy driver, and his girlfriend was actually more worried when he got his WRX then when he joined the army. Realistically, with the way he drives he's probably got a better chance of lasting a year in Afghanistan.
Whether it was right for us to be there in the first place is a little irrelevant now. We're in pretty deep and we should stay there because we said we would help the people. We should stay unless we have reason to leave.
So, what reason to leave do we have? Young soldiers dying is a terrible thing. I hate to put it into mathematical terms as a life is a life, but this thread is focussing on the bigger picture of why we are there, so the bigger picture will be looked at.
We've had 27 dead in 10 years, which is an average of 2.7 people a year. Considering the fact that its a warzone, and the number of people we have there is it really a slaughter fest? I'd say that its one of the safest wars in Australian history.
But are these deaths acheiving anything? That is a question I think only the people who know what they're talking about can answer. I can watch the news for weeks and hear nothing about how many towns our troops have cleared out, how many terrorists they have killed, how many people's freedoms they are securing, but i will certainly hear how many Aussie troops have died. This is giving everyone the opinion that our troops are dying for nothing which I'm certain is not the case. As stated in this thread, the troops over there seem to think they are making a difference.
Role Reversal: If you were the ocupied country and you knew all you had to do was kill some soldiers to upset the invading country enough to pack up and go home, you would just kill a bunch of soldiers. With that in mind would it be wise and fair to the rest of the coalition to pull out now?
Was this because as soon as they pulled out things went back to the way they were? South vietnam was invaded shortly after and pretty much the entire war and all those deaths were for nothing?
So if we pulled out of Afghanistan today, it would be different to Vietnam because....?
Last edited: