Afghanistan - the country that can't be conquered

Ishmael

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Posts
84,005
The ongoing military actions in Afghanistan to remove whatever remnants of Al Queda and the Taliban should continue. But there is a group that are pointing to the failure of the forces involved in the creation of a government and a country. Perhaps they may be excused for not facing the reality of the situation for not having studied Afghan history and culture. I'm not an expert but I have found a few facts that may be of interest.

Afghanistan has been perpetually at war for the last 2,500 years. When not repelling Imperialist powers, they war with themselves.

Afghanistan is geographically situated across all of the major trade routes of old. And apparently of contemporary times as well. It's mountianous with poor infrastructure. This means that most of the peoples there have lived in isolation for centuries. Each valley and habitable area of the country has it's own tribe with it's own leadership. There are a few cities with some industry. But on the main the cities are ruled by the elite and the cops, whereas the countryside is province of the local tribal warlord. Government as we know it begins and ends at the city gates.

It is difficult for a Euro-centric culture to understand the culture of peoples, that except for their weapons, are barely into the stone age. The country side better qualifies as being in the hunter-gatherer stage of evolution

In times of plenty they make war on each other if there is no one else about to war against. In times of tribulation they survive.

The Russians went into Afghanistan, the latest of many foriegn powers going back for centuries, for two reasons. They intended to bring themselves one step closer to access to the Indian Ocean and they wanted a buffer zone between themselves and the rising Islamic Fundamentalist movement growing in Iran. Their method of doing this was to attack and hold the cities, especially the capital, thereby declaring victory in the Euro-centric manner. And if they had been dealing with an advanced culture it would have worked. The made a huge mistake as it turns out.

Everyone wants the Afghans, and the Afghans want to be left alone. Especially in the country side.

Nation builders in Afghanistan are doomed to failure, as are any invader. Short of genocide the Afghans will do as they've done for centuries. Make war, make babies, and generally ignore the rest of the world.

My thoughts are simply that we should:

1. Get out as soon as is practically possible.

2. NOT participate in any UN effort at nation building.

3. Support the Afghani's in repelling any other foriegn invader that may want to take advantage.

Ishmael
 
HeavyStick said:
Afghanistan, just might become East Iran.

Darius tried that. Didn't work for him. Or the Turks or the British.

Time will tell though. I don't think Iran can prevail either.

Ishmael
 
Maybe not all of it. I wouldn't be suprised if Iran did something after the last US troops left.
 
Ishmael said:
Darius tried that. Didn't work for him. Or the Turks or the British.

Time will tell though. I don't think Iran can prevail either.

Ishmael

Hi Ishmael . . . hasn't Afghanistan been properly used already . . . I mean, the only legitimate reason for the U$ invasion of Afghanistan was to use up all the stored U$ military ordnance so that the NE military-industrial cpomplex got more orders and more profits . . .

So the U$ will now renege on any promises for any post-war development aid a la the Marshall Plan, and just protect "their" spoils of war, the oil and mineral reserves, from the Afghani "rebel" nationals who lack the development will and capital to exploit those resources . . . so it must be OK for the U$ to exploit them . . . :)
 
Don K Dyck said:
Hi Ishmael . . . hasn't Afghanistan been properly used already . . . I mean, the only legitimate reason for the U$ invasion of Afghanistan was to use up all the stored U$ military ordnance so that the NE military-industrial cpomplex got more orders and more profits . . .

So the U$ will now renege on any promises for any post-war development aid a la the Marshall Plan, and just protect "their" spoils of war, the oil and mineral reserves, from the Afghani "rebel" nationals who lack the development will and capital to exploit those resources . . . so it must be OK for the U$ to exploit them . . . :)

Uh, you OK tonight Don?

Ishamel
 
Don K Dyck said:
Hi Ishmael . . . hasn't Afghanistan been properly used already . . . I mean, the only legitimate reason for the U$ invasion of Afghanistan was to use up all the stored U$ military ordnance so that the NE military-industrial cpomplex got more orders and more profits . . .

I'm confused, Donk. I thought it was the oil interests who were running the country. Wasn't it they who were pulling the strings? What about the CIA? You've also somehow conveniantly left out the Masons, the FBI, the Presbyterians, and the Daughters of the American Revolution.

You've been suckered in by the media. It goes so much deeper.

You're so naive.
 
Ishmael said:
Uh, you OK tonight Don?

Ishamel

damnit

I only logged in here to rag Don for being tardy and there you are being all concerned about him too!

C'mon Don big deep breaths now.....maybe a cup of tea?
 
HeavyStick said:
No, he saw Kangaroo Jack and was upset the 'roo didn't get a Golden Globe.

I forgot to check the Oz programming damnit.

Ishmael
 
Kipling wrote:

"When you're left to die on Afghanistan's plains,
and the women come to cut up your remains,
then roll to your rifle, and blow out your brains,
and go to your God like a soldier."

*The key to any stability is giving them a commonality that all can relate to. If we went in and told the warlords that they were now out of a job, and the pathetic UN nations would install peacekeepers in all provinces until a stable replacement army could be in place (made up of the generational soldiers of the warlords). Corporations could be given special import/export manufacturing exemptions to get fabrication of homes started, as well as construction jobs to install a true infrastructure of highways, regional airports, and towns. Just like anywhere else, the alternative to their present state has got to be tangible, and attainable in a short period of time. The fucking UN has shown over and over that it can point fingers, and extort money for frivolous programs, instead of walking the talk and putting down their own troops in mass at a warzone.

I vote to move the UN lock, stock, and barrel to Afghanistan to be closer to the Middle East problems.
 
Re: Kipling wrote:

Lost Cause said:
"When you're left to die on Afghanistan's plains,
and the women come to cut up your remains,
then roll to your rifle, and blow out your brains,
and go to your God like a soldier."


Seen "The Beast" LC?

Ishmael
 
The other day I posted a treatise on the futility of militarily building liberal democracies in the poor nations of the world--so Ishmael might have a point. However, difficulties arise by us withdrawing prematurely--not the least is: GWB wouldn't be able to as freely say "little Afghan girls can go to school because of me"

http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/af.html
0-14 years: 42% (male 5,953,291; female 5,706,542)
41.03 births/1,000 population (2002 est.)
17.43 deaths/1,000 population (2002 est.)
144.76 deaths/1,000 live births (2002 est.)
5.72 children born/woman (2002 est.)
Sunni Muslim 84%, Shi'a Muslim 15%, other 1%
Literacy rate, total population: 36%
32 provinces
arable land: 12%
purchasing power parity - $800 (2000 est.)
Exports: $1.2 billion (2001 est.)
Export commodies: opium, fruits and nuts, handwoven carpets, wool, cotton, hides and pelts, precious and semi-precious gems

water: 0 sq km
land: 647,500 sq km

poppy ban cut 2001 cultivation by 97% to 1,695 hectares, with potential production of 74 tons of opium; a major source of hashish; many heroin-processing laboratories throughout the country; major political factions in the country profit from the drug trade

It would be a PR nightmare--that's saying a lot considering the man involved. GWB truly considers himself to be the Boo Radley of the planet--others don't.

*******Added to say: people start to get pissed when they have no food, water, and they aren't allowed to produce their only cash crop---terrorists will take the country over. But at least we'd get to unload some more bombs.
 
Last edited:
I read a newspaper columnist's take on what was going on in Afghanistan – in 1980. The columnist essentially said that the USSR was in a black hole, with no hope of winning.
We all know that proved to be the case.
Now that we have liberated all the petroleum in Afghanistan, per Donk (latest estimate of proven reserves in that fair country: 2.3 gallons of sweet light crude), it's time to leave.
The Afghani government doesn't control that country, and never has. Ishmael is correct.
But we do need some plan to keep track of terrorists who like to camp out there.
Australian U.N. peacekeepers, perhaps?
 
I've seen "The Beast"..

The equivilent to "Platoon". The first thing they have to do is have a country wide radio/television system in place. This would bind them all with current events, and the vision of their leaders. A stable telephone system in every village to keep local officials in touch with the government in Kabul. We should do the domino theory with this one, stay in place until the job is finished, and they're autonomous, then leave. No conquest here.
 
Re: I've seen "The Beast"..

Lost Cause said:
The equivilent to "Platoon". The first thing they have to do is have a country wide radio/television system in place. This would bind them all with current events, and the vision of their leaders. A stable telephone system in every village to keep local officials in touch with the government in Kabul. We should do the domino theory with this one, stay in place until the job is finished, and they're autonomous, then leave. No conquest here.

Yah, right dude. Think about it. We had to air drop them battery operated radios and they didn't know how to use those.

Long time comin'.

Ishmael
 
The destruction of Afghanistan was...

purely a knee jerk reaction to 11 September by Bush. He had to fight back somehow and Afghanistan gave him the perfect target. Weak, unprotected, backward and with no military of its own. Just the sort of target he likes.

All the promises about rebuilding the country, supporting the new Government and injecting aid packages are just the usual Bush bumfluff.

ppman
 
Re: The destruction of Afghanistan was...

p_p_man said:
purely a knee jerk reaction to 11 September by Bush. He had to fight back somehow and Afghanistan gave him the perfect target. Weak, unprotected, backward and with no military of its own. Just the sort of target he likes.

All the promises about rebuilding the country, supporting the new Government and injecting aid packages are just the usual Bush bumfluff.

ppman

That's a crock of crap pp and you know it.

Ishmael
 
Johnny Mayberry said:
A war on Afghanistan was in the planning BEFORE 9-11...

There was lots of talk about the bad treatment of women etc...etc...

But I don't recall any war noises being made by America.

ppman
 
Oh yeah, Afghanistan was the pearl of the muslim countries. We blew up bricks and generators. We set the infrastructure of Afghan back about $1,200. in Craftsman generators.


Planning a war/attack in Afghan? For what reason? Our Armed Forces can blow up dirt in Arizona and Nevada.
 
HeavyStick said:
Oh yeah, Afghanistan was the pearl of the muslim countries. We blew up bricks and generators. We set the infrastructure of Afghan back about $1,200. in Craftsman generators.


Planning a war/attack in Afghan? For what reason? Our Armed Forces can blow up dirt in Arizona and Nevada.
Well, first, because we knew Osama operates out of there...plus something about securing an oil pipeline?
 
Johnny Mayberry said:
Well, first, because we knew Osama operates out of there...plus something about securing an oil pipeline?

Clinton was the first to attack Afghan with cruise missiles.

Pipeline? You're thinking of that James Bond movie.
 
Back
Top