Oil, pipelines, and heroin.

When you walk around, as we did, gazing upward at pie in the sky ideals, you often step in excrement.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20100405/ts_nm/us_afghanistan_karzai

Sounds to me like Obama is acting like he owns Afghanistan and forgets she is a sovereign country. Karzai is frustrated. 

THat is rich.  Karzai accusing others of election fraud.  I have no doubt that both sides in that election are guilty on that count.  (Never mind the wrongheadedness of thinking that you can impose democracy on a country or that you can fast-forward the development of a democratic society--the British system [on which the US system is heavily based and the Canadian system is copied] took centuries to develop, but in many nations over the last 60 years the West has thought they could develop it in a few months or so)

Karzai knows that his country is deeply divided and playing both to that division and to US fears.  Think of the child saying they will take their ball and go home.  And the US (and the WEst in general) is prone to acting like the schoolyard bully knowing how things "should" happen.

 Yes, Gord.  Rome wasn't built in a day, you are right there.  

Frustrated people can become irrational.  They just get to that point.  As for the election fraud, it's funny he's ranting since it went in his favor in the end didn't it?

It takes two (sides) to make a fight. 

 you're right there.  He is in a position where he needs leverage and is using it. 

Hamid Karzai could not have been put into power without a fan base or he would have already been assassinated. He supplied money and arms to the mujhadeen against the Soviets. He was a former Pashtun tribal leader who initially supported the Taliban and who the Taliban itself picked to be their ambassador to the UN (he declined). He had influence with and the support of Taliban leaders (many of whom are also Pashtun). That fact was used after the invasion to get Pashtun tribes to end their support of the Taliban. The Taliban even recognized his interim government. Again, if they can roadside bomb and suicide bomb all over and not get Karzai, it is because they do not want to. His fan base was and is former and current Taliban supporters. 

So, why are we so shocked?

well, we gotta fiinish the job so our soldiers will not have died in vain.

How do you finish an unfinishable job? And how many more dead soldiers does it take to make a dead soldier worthwhile?

When you go on a job interview, you know , just know they will ask about your goals for the future. When you cannot answer that with anything at all or anything that is do-able... then the next question is "What job?"

So, what job are we finishing?

When a nation's leader or commander in chief says "victory" is not necessarily the goal. Then what is?

Is it still making an "acceptable democratic nation" with a "normal rule of law"? Or have we accepted that Imperialism has merely changed shaped?

Is it stopping the incubation of terrorism? Or have we learned that it will incubate wherever people who want to incubate it create and foster it including on home soil?

Is it still getting security there that is not warlords an militias? Or have we realized that we cannot provide security to most of Afghanistan? Have we realized that in areas we currently are that there will not be no mass influx of domestic security in the form of courts, judges, police, border agents, an army.... that for a poor level it will take about a decade?

Is it still getting rid of al Qaeda and the Taliban? Or have we realized the hotbed that is many other nations?

Is it rebuilding Afghanistan where humanitarian and development missions require guns?

Is it holding a city or two? Is it getting some girls to school under armed guard? Is it rebuilding roads and bridges until the next bombing?

The facts are the major cities and airports are not stabilized. The roads linking major cities are not under control.  The border crossings are not secure.

From a military standpoint, I am not saying from a humanitarian or development standpoint, it is almost the same as day one. So, finishing what job?

If the whole place was soldiers and every town, road, and house secure... the day the tanks rolled out then what would happen?  

I am sorry, but any concept of "victory" is off the radar.

It's quite hopeless, as you say. But it is supported by a majority of Americans - though it is surely obvious to them that the victory they speak of cannot be won.

So why is the government fighting it? And why are we helping them?

Oil, pipelines, and heroin.

graeme,

I disagee with you. It is not supported by a majority of Americans.

A majority of Americans think it is going badly for the US.

A majority (numbers I have seen in the 70%-80% range) also believe the Taliban will retake control with troop withdrawl. It is that number that is abused... I mean utilized to say there is widespread support. It is that number that is abused... I mean used to say policies "reflect the opinion of the majority of Americans".

Americans are very divided on a choice between keep troops until it improves and withdrawl plans.  It is 48% and 47% at Gallup http://www.gallup.com/poll/115270/americans-afghanistan-war-worth-fighting.aspx

The truth is that "the war on terror" and going into Afghanistan and needing help was used by the US and Bush to go into Iraq and Afghanistan.  The U.S. Government's own website, (meeting of the U.S. Government's foreign policy committee on 12 February 1998) confirms  the need for a West-friendly government recognised long before George's "Wur on Turrurr."  

All you have to do is read their own words. They told the truth, in advance, but nobody was listening or speaking the language.

"The U.S. Government's position is that we support multiple pipelines... The Unocal pipeline is among those pipelines that would receive our support under that policy. I would caution that while we do support the project, the U.S. Government has not at this point recognized any governing regime of the transit country, one of the transit countries Afghanistan, through which that pipeline would be routed. But we do support the project."
                  U.S. House of Reps., "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998  

"The only other possible route (for the desired oil pipeline) is across Afghanistan which has of course its own unique challenges."
                        "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998

"CentGas can not begin construction until an internationally recognized Afghanistan Government is in place."
                              "U.S. Interests in the Central Asian Republics", 12 Feb 1998

The Afghanistan oil pipeline project was able to proceed in May 2002. After America took military action to replace the government in Afghanistan.

You are overstating the poll results. What the graph shows is how people think the war is going. That's where you get the 47/48 split. Lower down, at least sixty percent favour contninuing it, some  with a timetable to withdraw, some without it. Subracting the no opinions and the margin for error, and the opposition to continuing the war in some form is considerably less than forty percent.

The pipeline talk has been floating almost from the start - but it seems bizarre to fight such an expensive war for the sake of a pipeline, Particularly since it is hard to see how the security of the line would be maintained. I keep thinking their must be some additional reason - but I'm damned if I can think what it is.

graeme,

If you look at the numbers 48% want to stay until it improves.... the 47% are those in the timetable to withdraw... you add up the figures of those in withdrawl mode who have picked a timeframe.

There is more to it than oil, definitely and is likely very layered.

Control of the country was it.  <Shhh we can't say that... the creation of a stable and viable, acceptable democratic nation... even if it takes until the end of time, sounds better> 

Afghanistan makes a great staging area, as does Iraq. It gives a presence in the Middle East. If Pakistan or Iran or anywhere thinks they can get out of hand.... It is terrorism central and there is also oil.

Though we do not allow keeping the spoils of war anymore or expansionism, one can be an occupying force or peacekeeper for eons waiting for that stable, viable, acceptable democratic nation to spring up. The world likely sang Hip Hip Hooray for Uncle Sam while Sam had his hands behind his back.

you may well be right. It may certainly be a strategic interest - a sort of hedging of bets to offset problems with Israel or Egypt. Amazing how the press has devoted itself almost entirely to the bringing democracy and helping womenfolk angles.

 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/2608713.stm