Friday, June 13, 2008
Afghanistan - more blood and guts needed from NATO
NATO commanders believe that if they had 10,000 more troops, they could clear out the centers of Taliban support, at least in Afghanistan, in a few years, and enable the aid workers to do their magic (build roads and schools, which gets the economy going and gives people better opportunities than trying to impose a seventh century lifestyle on everyone.) Alas, NATO isn't getting those 10,000 troops, and there is much argument and name-calling between the NATO members that send troops to fight, and those (especially Germany) that send troops to just be there, and stay out of trouble.
IMO: Its probably important to remember that Afghanistan is a very different country to Iraq. It is not yet as soiled by US corruption as Iraq is, and its problems could be sorted out. Almost certainly, more NATO smart bombs will be needed to be used on Pakistan, across the Durand Line, as sometimes the Pakistani border guards side with the Taliban. All this tends to be more or less ignored in the Pakistan Punjab, or the still partially finctioning rump state of Pakistan, which is supported by US and Wahabi Arabs. But effectively we have the sad situation of the US on one side of a war, and also on the other, with soldiers and civilians dying and a US President filling his pockets with the proceeds. I'm sure things could be ordered better, and while decent people of course seek impeachment of George Bush, that is not the only or simple answer. The tardy - and it could be said cowardly - Germans and othe NATO members need to contribute more blood and guts, for a start, if peace is required in Afghanistan. So far, England has suffered financially, spiritually, in lifestyle terms, and in deathtoll and injured terms, whilst Europigs in the UK and elsewhere in Europe who call themselves 'politicans' take big salaries.
NATO commanders believe that if they had 10,000 more troops, they could clear out the centers of Taliban support, at least in Afghanistan, in a few years, and enable the aid workers to do their magic (build roads and schools, which gets the economy going and gives people better opportunities than trying to impose a seventh century lifestyle on everyone.) Alas, NATO isn't getting those 10,000 troops, and there is much argument and name-calling between the NATO members that send troops to fight, and those (especially Germany) that send troops to just be there, and stay out of trouble.
IMO: Its probably important to remember that Afghanistan is a very different country to Iraq. It is not yet as soiled by US corruption as Iraq is, and its problems could be sorted out. Almost certainly, more NATO smart bombs will be needed to be used on Pakistan, across the Durand Line, as sometimes the Pakistani border guards side with the Taliban. All this tends to be more or less ignored in the Pakistan Punjab, or the still partially finctioning rump state of Pakistan, which is supported by US and Wahabi Arabs. But effectively we have the sad situation of the US on one side of a war, and also on the other, with soldiers and civilians dying and a US President filling his pockets with the proceeds. I'm sure things could be ordered better, and while decent people of course seek impeachment of George Bush, that is not the only or simple answer. The tardy - and it could be said cowardly - Germans and othe NATO members need to contribute more blood and guts, for a start, if peace is required in Afghanistan. So far, England has suffered financially, spiritually, in lifestyle terms, and in deathtoll and injured terms, whilst Europigs in the UK and elsewhere in Europe who call themselves 'politicans' take big salaries.
# posted by uv : 1:49 AM
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]
