One simple question. What is our objective in Afghanistan?

[MadHound]

History, along with any military tactician, will tell you that for there to be victory in war, the first and most important thing a country must have in going to war is an objective, a reason why we're going to war. Be it throwing the invader out of your country, taking the capital city, or killing the opposing head of state, every successful war must have a clear cut, definite objective.

If you don't have a clear cut objective, then you can't win the war, you can't declare victory and go home. All you can do is have the military consuming material and running up the body count. We have seen this type of war, both in Vietnam and Korea.

So what is our objective in our war in Afghanistan? If it was running al Qaeda out of Afghanistan, well, there are less than one hundred members of al Qaeda left there. If it the objective was to find bin Laden and bring him to justice, well, according to the most knowledgeable source around, he's dead Jim. If our objective is that amorphous term "nation building", sorry, but that simply doesn't work, for the sheer simple fact that once we leave, the people in the country will throw off whatever "improvements" we've instituted and put in place their own.

So again, what is our objective in this war? Or is this just another one of those victory-less wars that are designed to burn through men, money and material, enriching the wealthy and elite while impoverishing the rest of us. If that is the case, then we need to rise up and bring this war to an end, now.

[baldguy]

1. To ensure Halliburton, Blackwater & Wakenhut make a profit.

[hobbit709]

24. That's it 100%

[hulka38]

2. Feed the war complex

and prove Obama is a tough guy.

[creon]

3. I do not know

Unknown.
We are there because we are there.

[PassingFair]

4. I've heard the country referred to as "Pipeline-istan"....

O-I-L...specifically the transportation thereof.

[HereSince1628]

5. One of them is obviously to use military products.

Another related objective could be to conduct live-fire field tests of DOD projects under combat conditions.

Remember what Condi said...there is ALWAYS an opportunity!

[tekisui]

6. War profiteering and a Dem President not wanting to look weak.

[MannyGoldstein]

7. To ensure that Dems cannot be called "wimps"

Cut-n- run...

Small price to pay.

[bluethruandthru]

13. +1000000 n/t

[Keith Bee]

8. To demonstrate that we can fuck up even bigger than the Soviets

U-S-A! U-S-A! We're #1!

[madrchsod]

9. carter-reagan doctrine . make the middle east safe for us interests.

carter wrote the doctrine and reagan started using the military to enforce it. every president since carter has used this doctrine to justify killing people in the middle east

[MadHound]

11. "Safe"? How so?

I think that the term you're searching for is "maximumll profitable".

The Middle East has been "safe" for US interests for decades now.

[madrchsod]

33. yup that`s what i meant....

[HughBeaumont]

10. Same as VietRaq:

The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance. This new version is the past and no different past can ever have existed. In principle the war effort is always planned to keep society on the brink of starvation. The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia, but to keep the very structure of society intact.

It's invasion for the sake of invasion. Enough threadbare (albeit convoluted) reasoning ("WarOnTerr", "Taliban", "Freedumz") is given to the hoi-polloi as so not to question the continued funnelling of wealth into the MIC for their vanity occupations. Even if the majority of the public doesn't support it and thinks it should end, who cares? What are we going to do? Stop them? Occupy the DOD and Pentagon? Protest? They won't listen to you. The military loves them some Tea Klux Klannery.

It's the perfect war - a war on a noun that is destined to continue and cost the taxpayers, infrastructure and society in general trillions, and all they need is even a modicum of support to justify continuing it. "War on Drugs", "War on Poverty", "War on Terror". See how that works?

[bemildred]

19. "Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance."

And we loves us some hierarchy.
:thumbsup:

[LiberalEsto]

12. Oil

nt

[dipsydoodle]

14. Broadly speaking

making fools of yourselves. You appear to be meeting that objective aided by the dumbfucks who persist in maintaining it.

[nenagh]

15. 'U.S. Identifies Vast Mineral Riches in Afghanistan' ?

In an internal memo the Pentagon states that Afghanistan could become 'The Saudi Arabia of lithium'.. think lithium for laptops and Blackberries etc..

Vast veins of iron, copper, cobalt and gold..

From article by James Risen, NYT, June 13, 2010.

*I have no idea if this info is real or propaganda.

[MadHound]

16. Oh, it's real

It's also part of the reason why the Soviets went into the region. The area is a mineral storehouse, and everybody wants to get some.

[nenagh]

18. Thanks MadHound,

I wasn't sure whether to believe or not :)

[Bragi]

17. Thanks for asking

The mission now is to try to shape events such that, by the summer before the next Presidential election, it will be media-plausible to claim that troop numbers are declining at least notionally because of the Obama's prowess as CIC, while at the same time maintaining military spending at historic levels.

[dkofos]

20. enriching the MIC

[DrDan]

21. we are addicted to war - we do not know how to stop - nor do we want to

[MadHound]

22. I don't think that it's the all inclusive "we".

The majority of people in this country want to bring the troops home.

Rather, I think that it is a wealthy, powerful minority who are able to impose their will upon the rest of us in order to propagate a war that is making them lots and lots of money.

[DrDan]

23. seems like our politicians love wars . . .

[MadHound]

28. Hmm, then perhaps we need to stop empowering the same ol' politicians and parties,

Perhaps it is time for something radically new and different:shrug:

[DrDan]

30. no doubt about it - we have "groomed" a bunch of politicians who's interests are not in our favor

and that is on both sides of the aisle imo.

I think it might be time to try something "radically new" if we are to save the planet and our country.

[Myrina]

25. ... an excuse for 'drowning the gov't in a bathtub' ...

... well, you know ... America ... we have this HUGE budget deficit problem ... and, somebody's got to sacrifice ... so, it's going to have to be education, and medicare, and tax increases for 90% of you, and less money to state and local programs ... but, uh ... no, uhmm ... we're at war so we can't de-fund the military ... you're all just going to have to do more with less ...

:eyes:

[_ed_]

26. To enrich global corporations via the US Treasury

.

[rbixby]

27. It goes something like this

1. Start war in afghanistan
2. Keep it going for 10 years
3. ??????
4. Profit!

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

29. To keep the Taliban from launching aircraft carriers from Kabul.

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” H.L. Mencken

[MadHound]

31. I would actually like to see the Taliban launch an aircraft carrier from Kabul

One wonders what they would use, a giant slingshot, a humongous trebuchet, what:shrug:

[Johonny]

32. to increase deficit

then use the debt to attack social programs and transfer SS and medicare into the general fund. Then start transferring that wealth to the rich as well.