Documentary = Afghanistan: The Price of Revenge

[Doktor]

Would like to dissect it and appoint each of the sides their due.

[TopHatter]

The point is that human and economic cost of the US invasion, with very little to show for, clearly illustrates how flawed the policy of rushing into war, invading and occupying Afghanistan was.

The point is, you threw out unsourced bullshit and are now trying to cover your tracks with moral piety.

Tens of thousands dead in Afghanistan and Pakistan - check the source again.

And again, very cute of you to go from "Afghanistan" to "Afghanistan and Pakistan".

[Agnostic Muslim]

The point is, you threw out unsourced bullshit and are now trying to cover your tracks with moral piety.

And again, very cute of you to go from "Afghanistan" to "Afghanistan and Pakistan".

Actually the 'point' increasingly appears that you are far more interested in hijacking the discussion into an argument over 'tens of thousands dead vs hundreds of thousands dead'.

I adjusted my figures - are you going to move on now and address the actual argument of how flawed the US decision to wage war and invade Afghanistan was or keep trying to hide behind casualty figures?

[Chogy]

I completely agree that 'successful nation building' requires the 'nation being built' to actually desire it and participate in it wholeheartedly - I am not contesting the 'how' of nation building, rather arguing that the theory behind 'nation building' is sound. The rush to war in Afghanistan in 2001 prevented a proper analysis of the 'how' and 'if' of nation building in Afghanistan post invasion and occupation and created a much bigger mess.

I probably did not make my point clear.

Just because something (nation building) is possible, doesn't mean it is always desirable. The only sort of nation we'd attempt to build would be some sort of representative democracy, and the sad truth is, not every society can successfully be molded along those lines. And are we obliged to make the attempt? I don't think so. We don't "owe" Afghanistan squat, IMO.

The point is that human and economic cost of the US invasion, with very little to show for, clearly illustrates how flawed the policy of rushing into war, invading and occupying Afghanistan was.

Our mistake is the bolded portion. We were completely justified in "rushing to war" and invading Afghanistan. We identified the perpetrators, discovered them sheltered and protected in Afghanistan, and attacked accordingly.

Let me turn it about... let's say some terrorists sheltering in Afghanistan executed an attack in Islamabad that resulted in the same or greater carnage that we witnessed on 9/11. What would the response be? An invitation to talk over tea? I'd hope not. Such an attack is a true act of war.

[Agnostic Muslim]

I probably did not make my point clear.

Just because something (nation building) is possible, doesn't mean it is always desirable. The only sort of nation we'd attempt to build would be some sort of representative democracy, and the sad truth is, not every society can successfully be molded along those lines. And are we obliged to make the attempt? I don't think so. We don't "owe" Afghanistan squat, IMO.

My point is that if the intent behind invading and occupying Afghanistan was to end the possibility of entities like Al Qaeda from rising up again, then 'nation building' was part of the objective by default. The only other way to accomplish the goal of 'bringing the perpetrators of 9/11 to justice and preventing the possibility of Afghanistan hosting such groups again' was to engage with the Taliban regime and work with them long term.

Our mistake is the bolded portion. We were completely justified in "rushing to war" and invading Afghanistan. We identified the perpetrators, discovered them sheltered and protected in Afghanistan, and attacked accordingly.

Let me turn it about... let's say some terrorists sheltering in Afghanistan executed an attack in Islamabad that resulted in the same or greater carnage that we witnessed on 9/11. What would the response be? An invitation to talk over tea? I'd hope not. Such an attack is a true act of war.

The perpetrators were Al Qaeda, not the Taliban - Al Qaeda could have been attacked militarily without occupying the entire country and bringing about the human and economic cost we have seen so far.

[Doktor]

I adjusted my figures - are you going to move on now and address the actual argument of how flawed the US decision to wage war and invade Afghanistan was or keep trying to hide behind casualty figures?

I have doubts, there is some "cultural difference" so to speak, tho, I have doubts.

USA was attacked. The head of the attacks was located in Afghanistan. Was protected by the regime in power there.
If they shouldn't go to war after being attacked, what should they do in your view?

[Agnostic Muslim]

I have doubts, there is some "cultural difference" so to speak, tho, I have doubts.

I didn't quite understand what you meant there - doubts about what? Cultural differences with respect to what?

USA was attacked. The head of the attacks was located in Afghanistan. Was protected by the regime in power there.
If they shouldn't go to war after being attacked, what should they do in your view?

The regime publicly and officially offered to negotiate, asked for evidence implicating OBL, asked for negotiations on holding a trial in some mutually acceptable third country - the fact that none of these potential alternatives to war were explored was criminal.

[TopHatter]

Actually the 'point' increasingly appears that you are far more interested in hijacking the discussion into an argument over 'tens of thousands dead vs hundreds of thousands dead'.

I adjusted my figures - are you going to move on now and address the actual argument of how flawed the US decision to wage war and invade Afghanistan was or keep trying to hide behind casualty figures?

Thank you for adjusting your bullshit figures. Yes the US war plans, particularly long-term were flawed. The actual decision to invade was a foregone conclusion after 9/11.

[TopHatter]

The regime publicly and officially offered to negotiate, asked for evidence implicating OBL, asked for negotiations on holding a trial in some mutually acceptable third country - the fact that none of these potential alternatives to war were explored was criminal.

The regime publicly offered diddly-shit except stalling and obfuscating. They weren't going to give up OBL until hell froze over.
He was, at the very least, an incredibly useful bargaining chip for extracting massive concessions (money, aid) from the United States.

[Doktor]

I didn't quite understand what you meant there - doubts about what? Cultural differences with respect to what?

About the response on being attacked would unfold.

[Agnostic Muslim]

Thank you for adjusting your bullshit figures. Yes the US war plans, particularly long-term were flawed. The actual decision to invade was a foregone conclusion after 9/11.

The whole idea was flawed - that the war was a 'foregone conclusion' only illustrates the extent of the 'bull shit' US intelligence, military and government planners fed decision makers and the American public.

[Agnostic Muslim]

The regime publicly offered diddly-shit except stalling and obfuscating. They weren't going to give up OBL until hell froze over.
He was, at the very least, an incredibly useful bargaining chip for extracting massive concessions (money, aid) from the United States.

Perhaps, but the fact that the US refused to even try that route as an alternative to war was a 'criminal act'. What was the goal of the war?

[Agnostic Muslim]

About the response on being attacked would unfold.

I am sorry, but I still don't understand - you quoted this line of mine in your initial response:

"I adjusted my figures - are you going to move on now and address the actual argument of how flawed the US decision to wage war and invade Afghanistan was or keep trying to hide behind casualty figures?"

I don't understand the context of your comment about 'doubts and cultural differences' in terms of my comment above.

[TopHatter]

The whole idea was flawed - that the war was a 'foregone conclusion' only illustrates the extent of the 'bull shit' US intelligence, military and government planners fed decision makers and the American public.

If you want to say that about Iraq, I'd say you're pretty spot-on. But Afghanistan? What alternate reality are you living in?

[Agnostic Muslim]

If you want to say that about Iraq, I'd say you're pretty spot-on. But Afghanistan? What alternate reality are you living in?

What was the goal of the war and occupation of Afghanistan?