U.S.' failure in Afghanistan

[WWWTT]

You are absolutely right, its not like females get to go to school right? Or get a chance to have a career right?

Oh so now it's my fault that there are human right violations in Afghanistan (according to your logic)!

Hey,remember "Tamil Jack"?

He's the same guy that you said that was hoping the US/NATO would fail so that he could say "I told you so"!

But now,according to you,he knew what he's doing (because what he and many others knew about negotiations is now being adopted by the US)

Got news for you Signals.Cpl,there's a big difference in knowing and hoping!

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

No I said there were significantly less,

No you didn't,you said millions would go back to being raped and murdered.

Oh and by the way,you still didn't provide the link.

Provide the link,then we will continue this,otherwise I have no time to debate with someone who bases their opinion on opinion!

Good luck!

WWWTT

[Guest American Woman]

Got news for you Signals.Cpl,there's a big difference in knowing and hoping!

You don't even begin to "know" what you claim to know. What you "know" is your opinion, at best.

[Guest American Woman]

...it is sad, praying for failure just so you can be "right".

Generally speaking, I think there are more than a few people worldwide who are hoping for failure because they care more about the U.S. failing than they do Afghans having a better life. Same with Iraq. I think they'd be truly disappointed if Afghanistan and/or Iraq had turned into models of Democracy overnight, and because it hasn't happened more quickly than it's ever happened in the history of the world, they are all to pleased to shout "failure." U.S. failure, of course. It's difficult to comprehend.

[Scotty]

But you are, nothing has happened yet you are calling it.

Oh, grow up. The weatherman is predicting rain tomorrow. That doesn't mean he's hoping for it or wanting it.

I predicted South Africa and Zimbabwe would be cesspools after black rule. I was half right. And I think South Africa only staved off what happened to Zimbabwe because Mandela was such an extraordinary man.

Do you see any such men in Afghanistan?

Thats what they said about Iraq, they said it will end up a three way civil war once the US goes yet here we are with Iraq still more or less intact.

The jury is still out there. I'd like them to survive another year before I put any money on that government continuing. But there's too much difference between them and Afghanistan to use one to predict the other.

Edited July 1, 2013 by Scotty

[bush_cheney2004]

.... and because it hasn't happened more quickly than it's ever happened in the history of the world, they are all to pleased to shout "failure." U.S. failure, of course. It's difficult to comprehend.

Sure....probably descendents from the same people who wanted the U.S. failure over 200 years ago thru the Civil War. Yet it was their empire that collapsed.

[Signals.Cpl]

Oh so now it's my fault that there are human right violations in Afghanistan (according to your logic)!

No, its not because you are an irrelevant little person with no power over events in Afghanistan, just like me. The difference is you are hoping for a disaster so you can stroke your ego and tell everyone you "predicted" the collapse whereas I look at the situation as is rather than what I hope it is.

Hey,remember "Tamil Jack"?

If you are going to use it make sure you get the right name...if you cant get it right don't bother at all.

He's the same guy that you said that was hoping the US/NATO would fail so that he could say "I told you so"!

Only he did it while Canadian soldiers were fighting and dying in Afghanistan and all he wanted to do was put them in a position where more of them will die for no result. I have no problem with people who are against the war on principle, I have a problem with people who have zero idea what they are talking about and actively searching for ways to get more of my friends killed in order to stroke their ego and the ego of their supporters.

But now,according to you,he knew what he's doing (because what he and many others knew about negotiations is now being adopted by the US)

I was at one of his speeches a few years back when I was in university, he was the guy who wanted to send Canadians to Afghanistan as peacekeepers... showed me the light, there were those who were realistic and intelligent on one side and then there were those who were in fantasy land with zero knowledge about reality. Besides I think there is a slight difference between the US or Canada telling Afghansitan to Negotiate with the Taliban and the Afghan government deciding on its own.

Got news for you Signals.Cpl,there's a big difference in knowing and hoping!

WWWTT

I know there is, you are hoping that it happens, but the realty is that Afghanistan is holding firm. There was a difference between knowing and hoping when it came to Iraq as well, yet here we are a couple of years after the fact and Iraq still holds together...

[Signals.Cpl]

Generally speaking, I think there are more than a few people worldwide who are hoping for failure because they care more about the U.S. failing than they do Afghans having a better life. Same with Iraq. I think they'd be truly disappointed if Afghanistan and/or Iraq had turned into models of Democracy overnight, and because it hasn't happened more quickly than it's ever happened in the history of the world, they are all to pleased to shout "failure." U.S. failure, of course. It's difficult to comprehend.

I dont think that there is anything the US or anyone else can do to turn either Afghanistan or Iraq in to model democracies, I personally believe it will be at leas a generation before things start looking like a stable democracy. For now there is nothing the US can do to satisfy those "critics" if the US stays they demand a withdrawal because staying equals defeat, but withdraw and you are admitting defeat even though that was the plan from the get go it only took a little longer than expected.

[Signals.Cpl]

No you didn't,you said millions would go back to being raped and murdered.

Which is less then all the women would go back to being nothing but trash... all women would be denied education... all women can be beaten and/or killed at the whim of their husbands. Afghanistan is far from perfect, but the vast majority of women have it much better now than their best day under the Taliban.

Oh and by the way,you still didn't provide the link.

Unlike you I have not found a satire news source to put a link up... but all that aside, what exactly do you want me to put a link up for? That thousands of women are not stoned in stadiums anymore for real or perceived "crimes"? That girls are allowed to get an education? That girls and women are allowed to go outside without needing a man to escort them or needing a note from their father/husband/brother?

You tell me what you want, I'll post sources. I am sure that there is a source to prove that for a women living in hell is preferable to living under the Taliban. It will be a generation or two before Afghan women get some semblance of real equality but for the moment there is no comparison between what they endured pre 2001 and what they have to endure now, what opportunities existed for women pre 2001 and now... I mean for god sake they criminalized rape... rape was legal under the Taliban and up until a couple of years ago so Id say that was and is progress... but I guess you would disagree because it doesn't fit your agenda...

then we will continue this,otherwise I have no time to debate with someone who bases their opinion on opinion!

Good luck!

WWWTT

And I have no time for someone who bases their opinion on satirical newspapers but hey its not a perfect world...

[Signals.Cpl]

Oh, grow up. The weatherman is predicting rain tomorrow. That doesn't mean he's hoping for it or wanting it.

It does if there is little evidence of it happening...

I predicted South Africa and Zimbabwe would be cesspools after black rule. I was half right. And I think South Africa only staved off what happened to Zimbabwe because Mandela was such an extraordinary man.

Do you want a cookie for that?

Do you see any such men in Afghanistan?

Do you see any such men in Iraq?

The jury is still out there. I'd like them to survive another year before I put any money on that government continuing. But there's too much difference between them and Afghanistan to use one to predict the other.

Whats the difference? The people who were predicting doom were disappointed and now they switch to predict doom in Afghanistan. Iraq had and still has three main ethic/religious groups which were not big fans of each other which kind of makes it hard to have a unified and loyal police and military yet they are still hanging on.

Ultimately it does not depend on Karzai or a general or the US, it depends on the Afghans themselves, if they want to live in terror then they can fall back to their old ways and there is nothing anyone could do to change that but if they decide they want to live in a peaceful and prosperous nation then they will fight for that if they choose to discard the tools and resources the US has given to them then by all means it is their choice and no head of state can change that one way or another.

[PIK]

It's not the US first failure Nam was and the US should have know they couldn't win if Russia failed to win against them. Besides the fact that they didn't seem so bad when Cheney wanted to talk oil pipeline or when the US fought with them against Russia. Certain governments want to control the Middle-East countries and I just wish those countries would mind its own business and look after there own first. It's been a very long time since the world has had PEACE.

Nam?? Were you there, because only vets use that term or wannabees. Now do you support the pipelines?? Because that is the only way to get out of the ME.

[PIK]

We the people have let the afghanstan down, by whinning to get out . Education was the only way to help them.And we needed to stay on even longer and held onto that country till more and more people especially women get educated. But alot of the people that whined probably don't give a damn about the country or it's people or even the soldiers that fought there, but it was something they could protest and scream at the government.

[bush_cheney2004]

....But alot of the people that whined probably don't give a damn about the country or it's people or even the soldiers that fought there, but it was something they could protest and scream at the government.

True, as most people didn't give a damn about Iraq either until it was invaded. Nevertheless, the U.S. still has a significant number of troops in Germany, Japan, Italy, Kuwait, and Korea, so maybe just add Afghanistan to the list.

[dre]

Some people admire process. Some prefer results. In suggesting the Americans "did their job" in building a government you're admiring the process even though the results are abysmally bad.

You have to judge any project against the background of the origional plan and the assumptions made. In this case the US and a number of other countries spent trillions of dollars on a war/occuption/nationbuildingproject, that has gone on for 12 years. Make no mistake about it, this is a collosal failure from the standpoint of those that funded the project, even if it results in some positive results.

Lets say you budget 6 months, and 200 thousand dollars to build a house... and the house takes 5 years to build and costs 3 million dollars...

Does the fact that the house finally got built mean the project is a success? No... its a gigantic unmitigated failure.. even if the house turns out real nice.

[Guest American Woman]

Does the fact that the house finally got built mean the project is a success? No... its a gigantic unmitigated failure.. even if the house turns out real nice.

Except we're not talking houses here. We're talking quality of people's lives. You want to put a dollar value on that, go for it, but I say even if the monetary cost and the years invested were more than budgeted/planned, if the government "turns out real nice" and lives are improved, girls get to continue going to school, for example, it's a success. So your opinion may be "gigantic, unmitigated failure" based on your criteria, but my opinion would be success - and I'm guessing some of those girls would agree with me.

[dre]

Except we're not talking houses here. We're talking quality of people's lives. You want to put a dollar value on that, go for it, but I say even if the monetary cost and the years invested were more than budgeted/planned, if the government "turns out real nice" and lives are improved, girls get to continue going to school, for example, it's a success. So your opinion may be "gigantic, unmitigated failure" based on your criteria, but my opinion would be success - and I'm guessing some of those girls would agree with me.

Are you looking to hire anyone? Because I would absolutely love to work for someone like you. I could take 20 years to build your porch, and get a pack on the back because you can finally go out there and enjoy your morning coffee.

So basically what you are saying is that you are completely rejecting the idea of any sort of cost/benefit analysis here? If was worth forfeiting thousands of your fellow citizens lives, and permanently maiming many thousands of others, and spending trillions of dollars... Would it be worth twice that? Would it be worth three times that? Or as long as some girls get to go to schoose ANY cost in blood and treasure is a recipe for "success" in your mind?

[Guest American Woman]

Are you looking to hire anyone? Because I would absolutely love to work for someone like you. I could take 20 years to build your porch, and get a pack on the back because you can finally go out there and enjoy your morning coffee.

Did you miss the part where one can't compare a porch and quality of life?? So let's take another example.

Your child is suffering from an accident that left him unable to walk and thus requires medical treatment, including physical therapy. The doctor, on the initial visit, gives a "plan" that outlines cost and a time frame, but it takes longer - costs more - that what the doctor initially anticipated. In the end, however, your child can walk. Is the medical treatment a "gigantic, unmitigated failure" - or a success?

So basically what you are saying is that you are completely rejecting the idea of any sort of cost/benefit analysis here? If was worth forfeiting thousands of your fellow citizens lives, and permanently maiming many thousands of others, and spending trillions of dollars... Would it be worth twice that? Would it be worth three times that? Or as long as some girls get to go to schoose ANY cost in blood and treasure is a recipe for "success" in your mind?

So now lost lives are a consideration? What happened to "this is a collosal [sic] failure from the standpoint of those that funded the project?" It was all about money in the post I was responding to. That you have now moved beyond that tells me that my point was right on.

[Michael Hardner]

So basically what you are saying is that you are completely rejecting the idea of any sort of cost/benefit analysis here?

Just out of curiosity - wasn't I using the 'cost/benefit' analysis as a method to determine the worth of security policies ? Did my methodology actually rub off on you here ?

[dre]

Just out of curiosity - wasn't I using the 'cost/benefit' analysis as a method to determine the worth of security policies ? Did my methodology actually rub off on you here ?

No actually you were doing the exact opposite. It was me that was trying to get you to weigh the risk of terrorism with cost of these new programs in both treasure and lost liberty, but you just kept telling me about your personal feelings on what was warranted.

[dre]

Did you miss the part where one can't compare a porch and quality of life?? So let's take another example.

Your child is suffering from an accident that left him unable to walk and thus requires medical treatment, including physical therapy. The doctor, on the initial visit, gives a "plan" that outlines cost and a time frame, but it takes longer - costs more - that what the doctor initially anticipated. In the end, however, your child can walk. Is the medical treatment a "gigantic, unmitigated failure" - or a success?

So now lost lives are a consideration? What happened to "this is a collosal [sic] failure from the standpoint of those that funded the project?" It was all about money in the post I was responding to. That you have now moved beyond that tells me that my point was right on.

Your child is suffering from an accident that left him unable to walk and thus requires medical treatment, including physical therapy. The doctor, on the initial visit, gives a "plan" that outlines cost and a time frame, but it takes longer - costs more - that what the doctor initially anticipated.

My childs medical costs need to be paid by extracting money from others. And yes even I as a parent can see that after a certain point expenses would not be warranted. Its just a mattter of where/how you draw the line.

So now lost lives are a consideration? What happened to "this is a collosal [sic] failure from the standpoint of those that funded the project?" It was all about money in the post I was responding to. That you have now moved beyond that tells me that my point was right on.

Your refusal to answer a simple question is actually whats really interesting here.

Lets try again.

If was worth forfeiting thousands of your fellow citizens lives, and permanently maiming many thousands of others, and spending trillions of dollars... Would it be worth twice that? Would it be worth three times that? Or as long as some girls get to go to schoose ANY cost in blood and treasure is a recipe for "success" in your mind?

[Guest American Woman]

My childs medical costs need to be paid by extracting money from others. And yes even I as a parent can see that after a certain point expenses would not be warranted. Its just a mattter of where/how you draw the line.

Your refusal to answer a simple question is actually whats really interesting here.

Lets try again.

Not so fast. Where would you draw the line where your child is concerned? When would you stop treatment, even as you see progress being made? At what point would you say "success isn't worth the cost," ie: my child walking again isn't worth the cost, and cut off treatment?

Answer that simple question and then we'll continue this discussion.

[Michael Hardner]

No actually you were doing the exact opposite. It was me that was trying to get you to weigh the risk of terrorism with cost of these new programs in both treasure and lost liberty, but you just kept telling me about your personal feelings on what was warranted.

But I did weigh it ! The term 'value' is key here, as I tried to explain to you. The 'value' of security and the 'value' of privacy is different for each person. You kept trying to tell me how valuable your privacy was, without care to my security.

Ok, well I'm glad you understand the need to weigh costs vs benefits, at least.

[dre]

Not so fast. Where would you draw the line where your child is concerned? When would you stop treatment, even as you see progress being made? At what point would you say "success isn't worth the cost," ie: my child walking again isn't worth the cost, and cut off treatment?

Answer that simple question and then we'll continue this discussion.

That would depend on a lot of factors, and it wouldnt be up to a childs parents to draw such a line, or clearly a line would not get drawn.

But from a policy standpoint the government has limited resources, and it has to take care of hundreds of thousands of sick children. If it spends a hundred million on one child than it will reduce the quality of care for the rest of the children.

If I ran healthcare I would have to do a cost benefit analysis.... thats why we are already forced to "ration" healthcare in many cases.

Neither healthcare of sick kids, or the war in Afghanistan are zero sum games. And both of them have to evaluated by comparing the cost to the results in order to know if they are successful programs.

[dre]

But I did weigh it ! The term 'value' is key here, as I tried to explain to you. The 'value' of security and the 'value' of privacy is different for each person. You kept trying to tell me how valuable your privacy was, without care to my security.

Ok, well I'm glad you understand the need to weigh costs vs benefits, at least.

Value is a concept though. I tried to get you to use emperical evidence to determine what those values really were, which is what you need to do to perform a cost benefit analysis. In order to know what the benefit of programs designed to increase security is, you need to know what the risk is in the first place. You completely rejected repeated attempts to quantify the risk and weight it against other risks.

This is the exact opposite of a cost benefit analysis, which is what I tried to get you to do in that thread.

Lets see how your mental process in that thread compares to what is required in a generic CBA.

Here are the steps...

List alternative projects/programs.

I tried to do this, by showing that the resources used for this program could bring about greater increases to security.

Select measurement(s) and measure all cost/benefit elements.

We couldnt do this, because you rejected any attempt to actually quanity the risk of terrorism, and unless you do that you cant know the risk and what costs are justified to mitigate it.

Predict outcome of cost and benefits over relevant time period.

I tried this as well, and it went nowhere with you. You had no idea what either the real costs or benefits would be and didnt seem interested in that discussion. You just had a feeling that security was more valuable than privacy.

Adopt recommended choice.

This is the final step in a CBA but its where you tried to START. You came out in favor of a broad data-mining strategy before discussion about any of the other stuff even happened.

[Army Guy]

Your refusal to answer a simple question is actually whats really interesting here.

Lets try again.

If was worth forfeiting thousands of your fellow citizens lives, and permanently maiming many thousands of others, and spending trillions of dollars... Would it be worth twice that? Would it be worth three times that? Or as long as some girls get to go to schoose ANY cost in blood and treasure is a

recipe for "success" in your mind?

It is not a simple question, but rather a misguided one, it's a question that would be asked by someone that refuses to educate themselfs on this conflict....and regardless of what answer is given you will not change your mind or stance.

If was worth forfeiting thousands of your fellow citizens lives

So, Why not ask those that served there , I mean each and everyone of them were volunteers, no one was forced to go , even though we were trained, and knew somewhat , what we were going to face we still went, we left our families, friends and love ones behind because we thought it was worth the cost....For a majority of those that served in Afghanistan they did it multiude of times, the average being 3 the most being 8 tours of duty...that has got to speak volumes as to was it worth it...And while it did not compare to storming the beaches of Normandy, it was by far a picnic....And i for one would say it was worth it, and in speaking for fallen comrads , those that i knew and served with they thought so as well....

Some things just can not be analysis for cost, things like your childs life, cost of freedoms, or little things like going to school ,it is the little things that will change everything..... not just for girls and women, but boys and men as well. It is hard to convince someone that education can change everything, it produces the leaders that will lead them out of this dark hole, it will produce the the knowledge that will improve their infra structure through engineering, through medical training and research and so on and so on....Education is what will change their culture allowing the mid evil beliefs fade into the sun set....

The Maiming of others is unfortunite and until man puts away the toys of war this is going to be a fact of life, it is war it's ugly and it is here to stay a while.

Canada as a nation went to assist Afghan rebuild it self, not only after all the damaged caused by Nato or the US coalition but the entire mess pf well over 30 years of war which for the most part destroyed the nation completely...And during our stay Canadians built Dams for Hydro electricity, Paved Hyways to move cusumer goods, thousands of wells for drinking water, irigation ditchs for crops, hospitals, police stations, fire stations, we also trained hundrds of thousands of soldiers, cops, medical staff, fire fighters, EMS techs, the list gos on, I also want to piont out that Canadian soldiers also purchased out of their own pockets Ambulances, fire trucks etc.....

Nobody has said that Afghanistan is perfect, the media will not allow us to forget that, but our nation is not either....And it will take generations to slowly perfect it.....then and only then can we sit back and say Afghanistan is a sucess or not.....

SO what is your life worth, what would you pay for the freedoms you have today....because huindrds of thousands have already paid for those with their lifes....

Afganistan on average cost each taxpayer 20 dollars a year, or for 12 years, 240 Canadian dollars was this to much for you, was it to much to give alittle bit of that to someone that had nothing.....I mean our military did all the hard stuff for you...plus they paid their 20 bucks a year as well.