Honestly, this is such an delicate topic and its easy to judge what is the right strategy for it.
Who is right and wrong?
We have to protect our society and this starts sometimes outside our borders, such as Afg.
But how far should it expend?
Whatever will be decided, its a hard decision as long the decisions are made with a heart that longs for others and for the good of our society and not self serving.
It is impossible to give to terrorism a religious shade. It is very big error. Not one religion in the world does not propagandise a crime. The person of any religion can be the terrorist.
Having given to terrorism religious character people do mission of the NATO useless. As to these they help terrorists which create to itself an eternal reserve from among the deceived believers. To transform the criminal acts into religious struggle favourably only to terrorists.
It is necessary to create ideological group which will block road of terrorists to a believing reserve.
Aim the NATO this organisation is fair performs very difficult work. And all it becomes for mankind and it is necessary to finish it to the peace population. If the people of Afghanistan take of one position from the NATO the NATO very quickly and with smaller losses will cope with a task in view.
The NATO it is necessary to help because it is the guarantor of our peace future.
“The NATO it is necessary to help because it is the guarantor of our peace future.”
Don’t be fooled, NATO is the guarantor of future wars … A highly militarized system needs war in order to survive, and NATO’s establishment, this modern ‘Octopus’ organization, needs war in order to pay its bills!!!
Don’t forget that NATO was guilty for many ‘hush-hush’ (‘cloak-and-dagger’) operations during its half-a-century life. Operations as bad on Democracy as operation Gladio could only make us think of worse yet to come!
We need to act responsibly and take a good hold on this high-tech scalpel … The command must return to the people of the member states not to some Masonic lodges that support and bless all the hiring and all those idiotic strategies!!!
I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I can’t forget true History, the one that is not in our lecture books … I can’t forget: Gen. George C. Marshall’s real allegiance ( http://www.calodges.org/ncrl/MACARTHU.htm); Propaganda Due and those fake Brigate Rosse; Paperclip Operation and Gehlen Organization; CIA, MI6 and Operation Gladio; (and the list could go on and on…)!!! Yes, NATO has a dark face … and it seems to me that the darkness has taken control over the good and democratic dreams which started this venture in the first place.
It seems to me that the modern NATO establishment is more and more infiltrated by filth and warmongering idiots!!! It’s time for that to stop!!! NATO should get new prerogatives from the member states and these states should get in control of their shady employees! ‘We, the people’ should be able to get our voices back!!!
Why do you think NATO didn’t use referendum policies for going to war? Because a true referendum has an uncontrollable outcome…you may go to war or the people could keep you at home! And if you fake a referendum and then get caught, you loose your credibility and afterwards you lose the powers given to you by the peoples of the member states! It’s a lose-lose situation…
You had control over the weapon? You saw war only on the TV? You asked God sitting in an entrenchment to survive? You saw as your friend dies of explosion of a bomb of the terrorist?
Any soldier or the general seeing war does not want once again war. And the NATO does not want war. It is not necessary to name these people idiots.
You write about NATO errors? Then name the ideal organisation or the ideal period in the history. When who was not mistaken. Cannot, because such is not present. If there is an action that there should be errors. Only at inactivity of errors does not happen. Each Napoleon has the Waterloo.
But a problem not in the NATO and in additional actions, which who does not undertake. Afghanistan the specific country also it is not necessary to dump all failures on the NATO. All actions of the NATO should be supplemented with the civil organisations.
The NATO the guarantor of the world………….
You are lying, we know you are lying and you know that we know you are lying. Why should you ridicule yourself in such a way? Who is forcing you?
You now have a clear strategy? What did you have so far?
Afghanistan instability and drugs and terrorism are a threat to all of us?
Afghanistan was rather stable albeit inhospitable for its female population before the NATO invasion. Drug production was at its lowest then and the “Afghan terrorism” was built by the USA against the Soviets. If you claim that terrorist hosted by Afghanistan were responsible for the WTC attack: we are still waiting for an investigation, or a search warrant for Osama bin Laden by the FBI. Since when do civilised countries invade and destroy other nations, even if they host criminals?
What was the problem Europe or the USA had with Afghanistan before the invasion by NATO?
The USA have committed more resources to the NATO mission in Afghanistan? Would you be so kind to be more explicit on that mission, more than just saying it has to be carried out till the end or such platitudes? What is the real mission there? We really would like to know. It shifted from finding Osama bin Laden to eradicating the terrorists to fighting the Taliban to creating stability… NATO is making war and creating havoc in Afghanistan. So most of the targets would be easily met by just moving out. What other goals, besides protecting opium plantations and the drug trade and supporting a corrupt government are you pursuing?
I also listened to a video where you were talking about the tanker bombing in Kunduz. You promised a thorough investigation by NATO. Don’t you realise that NATO is the defendant. Since when in modern justice does the defendant carry out the investigation and return a verdict? What type of outcome do you think are we expecting of such an investigation but a whitewash or just nothing at all?
Mr. Rasmussen, do you remember that NATO was created as a defence organisation? What does an aggressive war in a distant country have to do with defence? Do you remember that Europa, after World War II was committed to peace? What are we waging a war for in a country which is no threat to us, which never had the ambition to be a threat to anybody? What resources or advantages, in short, are we fighting for there?
Mr. Rasmussen, until you can clearly state the goals of NATO in Afghanistan in relation to the mission to protect the countries of the alliance, unless you can come clean about the threat Europe and the USA are facing from an Afghanistan left alone, just pull the troupes out. To quote Mr. Ron Paul, the US house representative from Texas, declare victory and go home!
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
Where there was this grief and these newspaper articles when millions young men annually died of the Afghani drugs or from hands of terrorists.
Why nobody interviews mothers of these victims, or on yours the life of these people is not necessary also a penny? Who should put to it the end?
Who has no value clears the world of terror and criminality. The main thing is the purpose of the given mission. And the purpose of mission of the NATO in Afghanistan to destroy criminality and terror and to bring the world and freedom in this region.
My comment is that in an unstable security environment, where interstate and civil wars are most of the cases in countries like Afghanistan, in which poverty and factional strife for power is sth natural and usual, due to the lack of development and stable democratic institutions, military presence relied on a U.N. decision, to enforce peace or to keep peace is legally justified.
NATO is not only a defensive alliance, but it has gradualy transformed in a politico-military organization aiming at preserving peace and security – stability in regions that affect the lives of people, europeans, americans and of any other nationality (international flow of trade). As we all know islamists/fundamentalists detest western values and the way of our life, and they want to impose the islamic way of life, thinking, judging and to build this kind of society, exclusively by force, without accepting any objection from a muslim that believes in Allah, but he/she prefers living to enjoy all the good things of universal civilization, like technology, all forms of expression, freedoms and human rights.
Certainly, Afghanistan plays a strategic role in commerce, a stabilizing one in the relations between americans and their allies, and countries like: China, Russia, India and the muslim countries of the region, and so NATO has to safeguard all these interests, but it also has to protect innocent human lives in Afghanistan and elsewhere, because talibans do not hesitate to take innocent peoples’ lives in order to impose their political ends, and they use muslim religion as a pretext for killing, in cold – blood, other humans!!
NATO has to find local allies in Afghanistan because relations are dominated by tribalism, there. Secondly, security has not only a military, but also a political and economic dimension. They have to promote full participation in a truly elected legislative body where all political parties comprising members of every afghan clan/tribe, would have a say in their country’s future. Before that, the present government under an international pressure, and the presence of diplomats – maybe a conference – from every willing country that wants to help the afghan people, has to begin negotiations with the local leaders in order that they find common ground and solutions to problems that affect the lives of afghan people: famine, poverty, lack of basic infrastructure, lack of clear water, ….. These are some thoughts of mine.
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
Unfortunately the world shares on realists and idealists.
It is necessary to agree with a reality, it is not necessary to advance time.
This problem demands the stage-by-stage decision. The first stage
Military operations are.
To address to history lessons it is necessary to study about the beginning the given region and its features, a current situation. It is possible to write anything you like but it will change nothing. In Afghanistan it is necessary to put things in order a military way and longer……………..
So you must be the “realist” in this equation? Yes, you are a REAL example of a true “teacher’s pet”… please don’t get me wrong…our world needs OBEDIENCE!
We “the idealists” are not sheep following the all-seeing and all-knowing Master and his NATO dogs. We try to figure it out for ourselves, because in a democratic establishment “we, the people”, are the ones who are paying the bills and the death toll…
I don’t know were you’re from, what kind of believes you got, what education and working environment…but I must advise you to grew something – the “democratic organs” of your body!!!! (PS: They grew inside a sack in the lower part of your body!)
Afterwards you’ll see better the reality at hand: Afghanistan has entered the 9th year of occupation and if time is not on your side you must begin building something more than merely military forts… You need specialized troops (like those employed by DEA to fight drug-lords in Central and Southern America) capable of destroying poppy fields and fight the drug-guerillas (you can’t send in regular military troops!!!). You need linguists and ethnologists in order to better understand the realities of the many tribes that populate those desolate lands (You must bring peace to the factions, not use them against each other!!!). You need various civilian experts in various fields of expertise, ranging from ‘road-builders’ to economical advisors.
If you request more troops (8 years after the first shot had started this peculiar war) you must have a good reason for that (not a bogus hunt exercise in a poor and desolated country!), or you must be crazy!
Yes you could ask for more troops to protect the new towns that you have build for those poor souls… you could ask for more troops that will guard the new born agriculture of the country…you could ask me to join the forces that protect good and peaceful mosques from deranged terrorists (that are not enjoying the wealth and the prosperity of their country;). But you are “insane in the membrane” when you ask me to fight a bogus never-ending war just for fun, or just in order to protect the economical “bien-être” of some great multinational companies that are sucking the riches out of the country.
We need to build in Afghanistan, we have fought enough!
Instead off: “yet the revolted people maid the situation seem like Hell.” please read: “yet the revolted people made the situation seem like Hell.” (Sorry, bout that!)
I saw you liking the hand that is feeding you (or the hand that you want to be feed by!!!) and attacking my statements without even thinking the things trough… It’s easy to attack some ‘caveman’ in a distant land and make him fear your great weapons, but at the end he will be the same caveman with more hate and phobias!
It’s easy to talk about Afghanistan, as we do, from our comfy homes in our democratic societies. We talk of a distant war and we only see military actions as fit to take care of this ‘problem’… thus ignoring the other much real parts of the problem (hunger, fear, hate, religious manipulation)!
But what about those that live in fear every day? Since they are ‘only humans’ who gives a damn about them? We are more interested in keeping our well paid jobs in NATO’s establishment, in some private contractor’s business or in other industries that benefit from this war… Yes, ignorance is a blessing!
But what we can say about the true nature of this new and old kind of war? What we should see in this war opposing two different worlds? This war should be about ‘soul conquest’ as Alexandre de Marenches magisterially figured it out in the 80s… We should give them the things that they need most: faith, food, medicines and culture. Instead we send more troops… ‘Once you gain control over the minds of people, the territory comes by itself’!
Yes the military presence is needed, but history has a way of telling us that military efforts are not enough when the two societies are so different at core. I just want to remember in this context the Roman Empire and their presence in the province of Palestine, which is in a way a good lesson for the Afghan and Iraqi situations. There were many legions from all over the known world, the best soldiers of their times gathered under one flag, yet the revolted people maid the situation seem like Hell. They fought a religious driven army of zealots, in a guerilla war that seemed to be out of control. When Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD he thought that he had won the war…he was so wrong! Kitos War in (115–117 AD) and Bar Kokhba’s revolt (132–135AD) prove him wrong. And the fights still go on in that part of the world some 1900 years later…
History has many other lessons that could make us think again about our proud little War on Terror! The war is more complex than sending troops to their death… You must get civilians to appreciate your culture as Alexander did all over Asia, you must get them to appreciate your presence on their own lands! Truly good military officers agree on that one… even gen. Marshall did it in Europe a few decades ago in order to make friends when facing the ‘Commi’ threat.
I hope that those troops that you send in Afghanistan will be shortly followed by police forces, great doctors and nurses, good economical advisors, good engineers, teachers and new Islamic teachers (gathered from around the world for their will for peace). You should create some new voluntary organizations that could ‘collect’ great people for this tough endeavor… Give civil society a chance! Military action is not the only way…unless you at NATO don’t want this conflict to end sooner!
The number increase will help to keep order. Today it is unique correct action. It is impossible to leave Afghanistan without having finished putting in order and world mission.
It is not necessary to compare a today’s situation in the world to 80 years, there are big distinctions. The NATO will not make errors as Russian.
Military operations are necessary for supplementing and fixing complex ideological work.
As is so often the case there are pros and cons to the various proposed ideas and eventually implemented strategies.
It should not be forgotten that there are the inevitable restrictions imposed as a result of the conflict being during ‘peacetime’, and other factors such as cost and engagement rules.
It is surely pointless to have doctors and teachers deployed throughout Afghanistan before; A) The bulk of the country is free from the armed presence of the Taliban and any elements of Al Qaeda which exist there.
B) There exists broadly based support from the bulk of the general population and communities throughout Afghanistan.
C)Serious tribal differences, which seem to change from week to week-or season to season-and which seem based on what advantage one tribe has over another; are resolved.
It also seems equally pointless to achieve the above without there being the necessary political will and state infrastructures to govern the people and lead the country forward when those conditions have been achieved.
Without such achievement, the goal of an Afghanistan free from terror and armed insurgency would seem to be somewhat remote.
If current efforts fail then all those who represent some form of improvement for the people, would become targets of the armed fanatics who actively seek to subjugate the people by terror, abject poverty,ignorance, and misuse the words of religion; to control them and the country for their-and / or others-own purposes.
Forgive me if my opinions seem somewhat naive. I am not an expert and certainly not knowledgeable on such matters and I have no answers to resolve the conflict.
I hope that NATO, the USA, the UK, and others associated with them, do indeed have the answers and the means to achieve them.
I hope that thid estrategy works!for the future of the world! But:
I have some questions to Mr. Rasmussen:
What policy NATO will take to prevent the runaway of militants from Afganistan to Pakistan?
How this probable trying to escape or to hide of the taliban and Al queda militants in Pakistan territory will affect the stability in the region?
“When will the Mission in Afghanistan end? The answer is clear : Our Mission will end when the Afghans are capable of securing and running the country themselves, not sooner and not later, we will stay as long as it takes to finish our Job!”
The Russians said the same crazy things in the 80s… I hoped for more real thinking from NATO’s ‘brainiacs’, I was wrong!!!!
Even with more troops your ‘genius’ strategy advisors will make the same mistakes! The Afghans will never be ready to take control of a country that has its people torn apart by some religious and political believes that were born from poverty and stupidity. You need economists, you need teachers, you need doctors and pharmacists, you need roads and schools and hospitals and ’silent’ communities all around the country, which go for your movies or buy your merchandise. When you are sitting on a gunpowder barrel it doesn’t matter how many troops you have…it matters how many specialists that can defuse the situation you got in your party!!!!!!!
NATO should increase troops in Afganisthan if it has to win the battle against the Al-qaeda and the Taliban.The war against terrorism cannot be won without adequate strategy.I agree with the Secretary General’s views on this.
Honestly, this is such an delicate topic and its easy to judge what is the right strategy for it.
Who is right and wrong?
We have to protect our society and this starts sometimes outside our borders, such as Afg.
But how far should it expend?
Whatever will be decided, its a hard decision as long the decisions are made with a heart that longs for others and for the good of our society and not self serving.
Regards
Filmgauge
Stephan Czepanik
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
It is impossible to give to terrorism a religious shade. It is very big error. Not one religion in the world does not propagandise a crime. The person of any religion can be the terrorist.
Having given to terrorism religious character people do mission of the NATO useless. As to these they help terrorists which create to itself an eternal reserve from among the deceived believers. To transform the criminal acts into religious struggle favourably only to terrorists.
It is necessary to create ideological group which will block road of terrorists to a believing reserve.
Aim the NATO this organisation is fair performs very difficult work. And all it becomes for mankind and it is necessary to finish it to the peace population. If the people of Afghanistan take of one position from the NATO the NATO very quickly and with smaller losses will cope with a task in view.
The NATO it is necessary to help because it is the guarantor of our peace future.
“The NATO it is necessary to help because it is the guarantor of our peace future.”
Don’t be fooled, NATO is the guarantor of future wars … A highly militarized system needs war in order to survive, and NATO’s establishment, this modern ‘Octopus’ organization, needs war in order to pay its bills!!!
Don’t forget that NATO was guilty for many ‘hush-hush’ (‘cloak-and-dagger’) operations during its half-a-century life. Operations as bad on Democracy as operation Gladio could only make us think of worse yet to come!
We need to act responsibly and take a good hold on this high-tech scalpel … The command must return to the people of the member states not to some Masonic lodges that support and bless all the hiring and all those idiotic strategies!!!
I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I can’t forget true History, the one that is not in our lecture books … I can’t forget: Gen. George C. Marshall’s real allegiance ( http://www.calodges.org/ncrl/MACARTHU.htm); Propaganda Due and those fake Brigate Rosse; Paperclip Operation and Gehlen Organization; CIA, MI6 and Operation Gladio; (and the list could go on and on…)!!! Yes, NATO has a dark face … and it seems to me that the darkness has taken control over the good and democratic dreams which started this venture in the first place.
It seems to me that the modern NATO establishment is more and more infiltrated by filth and warmongering idiots!!! It’s time for that to stop!!! NATO should get new prerogatives from the member states and these states should get in control of their shady employees! ‘We, the people’ should be able to get our voices back!!!
Why do you think NATO didn’t use referendum policies for going to war? Because a true referendum has an uncontrollable outcome…you may go to war or the people could keep you at home! And if you fake a referendum and then get caught, you loose your credibility and afterwards you lose the powers given to you by the peoples of the member states! It’s a lose-lose situation…
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
You had control over the weapon? You saw war only on the TV? You asked God sitting in an entrenchment to survive? You saw as your friend dies of explosion of a bomb of the terrorist?
Any soldier or the general seeing war does not want once again war. And the NATO does not want war. It is not necessary to name these people idiots.
You write about NATO errors? Then name the ideal organisation or the ideal period in the history. When who was not mistaken. Cannot, because such is not present. If there is an action that there should be errors. Only at inactivity of errors does not happen. Each Napoleon has the Waterloo.
But a problem not in the NATO and in additional actions, which who does not undertake. Afghanistan the specific country also it is not necessary to dump all failures on the NATO. All actions of the NATO should be supplemented with the civil organisations.
The NATO the guarantor of the world………….
Dear Mr. Rasmussen,
You are lying, we know you are lying and you know that we know you are lying. Why should you ridicule yourself in such a way? Who is forcing you?
You now have a clear strategy? What did you have so far?
Afghanistan instability and drugs and terrorism are a threat to all of us?
Afghanistan was rather stable albeit inhospitable for its female population before the NATO invasion. Drug production was at its lowest then and the “Afghan terrorism” was built by the USA against the Soviets. If you claim that terrorist hosted by Afghanistan were responsible for the WTC attack: we are still waiting for an investigation, or a search warrant for Osama bin Laden by the FBI. Since when do civilised countries invade and destroy other nations, even if they host criminals?
What was the problem Europe or the USA had with Afghanistan before the invasion by NATO?
The USA have committed more resources to the NATO mission in Afghanistan? Would you be so kind to be more explicit on that mission, more than just saying it has to be carried out till the end or such platitudes? What is the real mission there? We really would like to know. It shifted from finding Osama bin Laden to eradicating the terrorists to fighting the Taliban to creating stability… NATO is making war and creating havoc in Afghanistan. So most of the targets would be easily met by just moving out. What other goals, besides protecting opium plantations and the drug trade and supporting a corrupt government are you pursuing?
I also listened to a video where you were talking about the tanker bombing in Kunduz. You promised a thorough investigation by NATO. Don’t you realise that NATO is the defendant. Since when in modern justice does the defendant carry out the investigation and return a verdict? What type of outcome do you think are we expecting of such an investigation but a whitewash or just nothing at all?
Mr. Rasmussen, do you remember that NATO was created as a defence organisation? What does an aggressive war in a distant country have to do with defence? Do you remember that Europa, after World War II was committed to peace? What are we waging a war for in a country which is no threat to us, which never had the ambition to be a threat to anybody? What resources or advantages, in short, are we fighting for there?
Mr. Rasmussen, until you can clearly state the goals of NATO in Afghanistan in relation to the mission to protect the countries of the alliance, unless you can come clean about the threat Europe and the USA are facing from an Afghanistan left alone, just pull the troupes out. To quote Mr. Ron Paul, the US house representative from Texas, declare victory and go home!
Thank you for having read down to the end.
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
Where there was this grief and these newspaper articles when millions young men annually died of the Afghani drugs or from hands of terrorists.
Why nobody interviews mothers of these victims, or on yours the life of these people is not necessary also a penny? Who should put to it the end?
Who has no value clears the world of terror and criminality. The main thing is the purpose of the given mission. And the purpose of mission of the NATO in Afghanistan to destroy criminality and terror and to bring the world and freedom in this region.
Please make time to read this article…
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1946410,00.html?xid=rss-fullnation-yahoo
My comment is that in an unstable security environment, where interstate and civil wars are most of the cases in countries like Afghanistan, in which poverty and factional strife for power is sth natural and usual, due to the lack of development and stable democratic institutions, military presence relied on a U.N. decision, to enforce peace or to keep peace is legally justified.
NATO is not only a defensive alliance, but it has gradualy transformed in a politico-military organization aiming at preserving peace and security – stability in regions that affect the lives of people, europeans, americans and of any other nationality (international flow of trade). As we all know islamists/fundamentalists detest western values and the way of our life, and they want to impose the islamic way of life, thinking, judging and to build this kind of society, exclusively by force, without accepting any objection from a muslim that believes in Allah, but he/she prefers living to enjoy all the good things of universal civilization, like technology, all forms of expression, freedoms and human rights.
Certainly, Afghanistan plays a strategic role in commerce, a stabilizing one in the relations between americans and their allies, and countries like: China, Russia, India and the muslim countries of the region, and so NATO has to safeguard all these interests, but it also has to protect innocent human lives in Afghanistan and elsewhere, because talibans do not hesitate to take innocent peoples’ lives in order to impose their political ends, and they use muslim religion as a pretext for killing, in cold – blood, other humans!!
NATO has to find local allies in Afghanistan because relations are dominated by tribalism, there. Secondly, security has not only a military, but also a political and economic dimension. They have to promote full participation in a truly elected legislative body where all political parties comprising members of every afghan clan/tribe, would have a say in their country’s future. Before that, the present government under an international pressure, and the presence of diplomats – maybe a conference – from every willing country that wants to help the afghan people, has to begin negotiations with the local leaders in order that they find common ground and solutions to problems that affect the lives of afghan people: famine, poverty, lack of basic infrastructure, lack of clear water, ….. These are some thoughts of mine.
We must have more troops in Afganistan if the goal should be reached. There can be no doubt about it!
I support Anders Fogh in his statement! – We must act now – together, to reach the point where Afganistan could take over.
Xaliq.Mustafayev.AZE@gmail.com
Unfortunately the world shares on realists and idealists.
It is necessary to agree with a reality, it is not necessary to advance time.
This problem demands the stage-by-stage decision. The first stage
Military operations are.
To address to history lessons it is necessary to study about the beginning the given region and its features, a current situation. It is possible to write anything you like but it will change nothing. In Afghanistan it is necessary to put things in order a military way and longer……………..
So you must be the “realist” in this equation? Yes, you are a REAL example of a true “teacher’s pet”… please don’t get me wrong…our world needs OBEDIENCE!
We “the idealists” are not sheep following the all-seeing and all-knowing Master and his NATO dogs. We try to figure it out for ourselves, because in a democratic establishment “we, the people”, are the ones who are paying the bills and the death toll…
I don’t know were you’re from, what kind of believes you got, what education and working environment…but I must advise you to grew something – the “democratic organs” of your body!!!! (PS: They grew inside a sack in the lower part of your body!)
Afterwards you’ll see better the reality at hand: Afghanistan has entered the 9th year of occupation and if time is not on your side you must begin building something more than merely military forts… You need specialized troops (like those employed by DEA to fight drug-lords in Central and Southern America) capable of destroying poppy fields and fight the drug-guerillas (you can’t send in regular military troops!!!). You need linguists and ethnologists in order to better understand the realities of the many tribes that populate those desolate lands (You must bring peace to the factions, not use them against each other!!!). You need various civilian experts in various fields of expertise, ranging from ‘road-builders’ to economical advisors.
If you request more troops (8 years after the first shot had started this peculiar war) you must have a good reason for that (not a bogus hunt exercise in a poor and desolated country!), or you must be crazy!
Yes you could ask for more troops to protect the new towns that you have build for those poor souls… you could ask for more troops that will guard the new born agriculture of the country…you could ask me to join the forces that protect good and peaceful mosques from deranged terrorists (that are not enjoying the wealth and the prosperity of their country;). But you are “insane in the membrane” when you ask me to fight a bogus never-ending war just for fun, or just in order to protect the economical “bien-être” of some great multinational companies that are sucking the riches out of the country.
We need to build in Afghanistan, we have fought enough!
the dutch will stay aboard, with regards to oure friends, ive you would thank them, on my behalve
Sinsere Lya
Instead off: “yet the revolted people maid the situation seem like Hell.” please read: “yet the revolted people made the situation seem like Hell.” (Sorry, bout that!)
I saw you liking the hand that is feeding you (or the hand that you want to be feed by!!!) and attacking my statements without even thinking the things trough… It’s easy to attack some ‘caveman’ in a distant land and make him fear your great weapons, but at the end he will be the same caveman with more hate and phobias!
It’s easy to talk about Afghanistan, as we do, from our comfy homes in our democratic societies. We talk of a distant war and we only see military actions as fit to take care of this ‘problem’… thus ignoring the other much real parts of the problem (hunger, fear, hate, religious manipulation)!
But what about those that live in fear every day? Since they are ‘only humans’ who gives a damn about them? We are more interested in keeping our well paid jobs in NATO’s establishment, in some private contractor’s business or in other industries that benefit from this war… Yes, ignorance is a blessing!
But what we can say about the true nature of this new and old kind of war? What we should see in this war opposing two different worlds? This war should be about ‘soul conquest’ as Alexandre de Marenches magisterially figured it out in the 80s… We should give them the things that they need most: faith, food, medicines and culture. Instead we send more troops… ‘Once you gain control over the minds of people, the territory comes by itself’!
Yes the military presence is needed, but history has a way of telling us that military efforts are not enough when the two societies are so different at core. I just want to remember in this context the Roman Empire and their presence in the province of Palestine, which is in a way a good lesson for the Afghan and Iraqi situations. There were many legions from all over the known world, the best soldiers of their times gathered under one flag, yet the revolted people maid the situation seem like Hell. They fought a religious driven army of zealots, in a guerilla war that seemed to be out of control. When Titus destroyed Jerusalem in 70 AD he thought that he had won the war…he was so wrong! Kitos War in (115–117 AD) and Bar Kokhba’s revolt (132–135AD) prove him wrong. And the fights still go on in that part of the world some 1900 years later…
History has many other lessons that could make us think again about our proud little War on Terror! The war is more complex than sending troops to their death… You must get civilians to appreciate your culture as Alexander did all over Asia, you must get them to appreciate your presence on their own lands! Truly good military officers agree on that one… even gen. Marshall did it in Europe a few decades ago in order to make friends when facing the ‘Commi’ threat.
I hope that those troops that you send in Afghanistan will be shortly followed by police forces, great doctors and nurses, good economical advisors, good engineers, teachers and new Islamic teachers (gathered from around the world for their will for peace). You should create some new voluntary organizations that could ‘collect’ great people for this tough endeavor… Give civil society a chance! Military action is not the only way…unless you at NATO don’t want this conflict to end sooner!
The number increase will help to keep order. Today it is unique correct action. It is impossible to leave Afghanistan without having finished putting in order and world mission.
It is not necessary to compare a today’s situation in the world to 80 years, there are big distinctions. The NATO will not make errors as Russian.
Military operations are necessary for supplementing and fixing complex ideological work.
As is so often the case there are pros and cons to the various proposed ideas and eventually implemented strategies.
It should not be forgotten that there are the inevitable restrictions imposed as a result of the conflict being during ‘peacetime’, and other factors such as cost and engagement rules.
It is surely pointless to have doctors and teachers deployed throughout Afghanistan before; A) The bulk of the country is free from the armed presence of the Taliban and any elements of Al Qaeda which exist there.
B) There exists broadly based support from the bulk of the general population and communities throughout Afghanistan.
C)Serious tribal differences, which seem to change from week to week-or season to season-and which seem based on what advantage one tribe has over another; are resolved.
It also seems equally pointless to achieve the above without there being the necessary political will and state infrastructures to govern the people and lead the country forward when those conditions have been achieved.
Without such achievement, the goal of an Afghanistan free from terror and armed insurgency would seem to be somewhat remote.
If current efforts fail then all those who represent some form of improvement for the people, would become targets of the armed fanatics who actively seek to subjugate the people by terror, abject poverty,ignorance, and misuse the words of religion; to control them and the country for their-and / or others-own purposes.
Forgive me if my opinions seem somewhat naive. I am not an expert and certainly not knowledgeable on such matters and I have no answers to resolve the conflict.
I hope that NATO, the USA, the UK, and others associated with them, do indeed have the answers and the means to achieve them.
Regards,
Derek Birch
I hope that thid estrategy works!for the future of the world! But:
I have some questions to Mr. Rasmussen:
What policy NATO will take to prevent the runaway of militants from Afganistan to Pakistan?
How this probable trying to escape or to hide of the taliban and Al queda militants in Pakistan territory will affect the stability in the region?
“When will the Mission in Afghanistan end? The answer is clear : Our Mission will end when the Afghans are capable of securing and running the country themselves, not sooner and not later, we will stay as long as it takes to finish our Job!”
The Russians said the same crazy things in the 80s… I hoped for more real thinking from NATO’s ‘brainiacs’, I was wrong!!!!
Even with more troops your ‘genius’ strategy advisors will make the same mistakes! The Afghans will never be ready to take control of a country that has its people torn apart by some religious and political believes that were born from poverty and stupidity. You need economists, you need teachers, you need doctors and pharmacists, you need roads and schools and hospitals and ’silent’ communities all around the country, which go for your movies or buy your merchandise. When you are sitting on a gunpowder barrel it doesn’t matter how many troops you have…it matters how many specialists that can defuse the situation you got in your party!!!!!!!
“We now have a clear strategy of transition…”
What did you have until now?
NATO should increase troops in Afganisthan if it has to win the battle against the Al-qaeda and the Taliban.The war against terrorism cannot be won without adequate strategy.I agree with the Secretary General’s views on this.
Regards
Binu George