America's 7 mistakes in Afghanistan

[VCheng]

Sir Jee itna baraa novel aap hi parein !

Nahi Bhai, it was just a response to the novel written in #53 above!

 

[Armstrong]

Nahi Bhai, it was just a response to the novel written in #53 above!

I didn't read it either ! But merei bhai kabhi tou hum sutaillon ka bhi saaath dei diyaaa karein; Amreeeka ja kar Goraiii seh bhi ziyadaaa Goraiii ho gai hain ?

 

[VCheng]

I didn't read it either ! But merei bhai kabhi tou hum sutaillon ka bhi saaath dei diyaaa karein; Amreeeka ja kar Goraiii seh bhi ziyadaaa Goraiii ho gai hain ?

Nope, I just say and support the truth, whatever it is!

 

[Pak47]

This war has nothing to do with the Taliban..

The U.S. doesn't need 100,000+ troops to take on 5000 militants.

You must see the bigger picture.

 

[Saleem]

They made only one mistake ---- going in there in the first place ------

 

[VCheng]

They made only one mistake ---- going in there in the first place ------

Ermm, are you forgetting WHY USA was forced to go there in the first place? Remember September 11 and Osama Bin Laden's terror group?

 

[Armstrong]

Nope, I just say and support the truth, whatever it is!

No you don't !

Milord, hes biased in their favor !

Case in point : I've thanked two of his posts and yet he considers me - the untouchable Buttt - too much of a low-lifer for the Pakistani Gora Sahib to touch, never mind actually 'thank' his posts !

P.S Chengy Bhai, my name ain't Nostardamus Buttt....how the heck am I supposed to know that you replied without a 'thanks' to intimate me by popping up in the 'notification' tag up there !

 

[VCheng]

This war has nothing to do with the Taliban..

The U.S. doesn't need 100,000+ troops to take on 5000 militants.

You must see the bigger picture.

OBL was killed only last year, and the troop drawdown begins in 2014.

No you don't !

Milord, hes biased in their favor !

Case in point : I've thanked two of his posts and yet he considers me - the untouchable Buttt - too much of a low-lifer for the Pakistani Gora Sahib to touch, never mind actually 'thank' his posts !

P.S Chengy Bhai, my name ain't Nostardamus Buttt....how the heck am I supposed to know that you replied without a 'thanks' to intimate me by popping up in the 'notification' tag up there !

Is this a trial in a court?

 

[Pak47]

Ermm, are you forgetting WHY USA was forced to go there in the first place? Remember September 11 and Osama Bin Laden's terror group?

ohh, you mean the September 11 attacks done by the CIA?

Operation Northwoods - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[VCheng]

ohh, you mean the September 11 attacks done by the CIA? ...........

No, I mean the September 11 attacks that Osama admitted responsibility for:

Excerpt from: Responsibility for the September 11 attacks - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Shortly before the US presidential election in 2004, in a taped statement, bin Laden publicly acknowledged al-Qaeda's involvement in the attacks on the US, and admitted his direct link to the attacks. He said that the attacks were carried out because "we are a free people who do not accept injustice, and we want to regain the freedom of our nation."[71]

71. "Transcript: Translation of Bin Laden's Videotaped Message". The Washington Post. November 1, 2004. Transcript: Translation of Bin Laden's Videotaped Message (washingtonpost.com)

 

[Saleem]

@ VCheng ---so you are so naive that you believe everything they broadcast for you? they cant doctor tapes? i am not saying they did doctor them -- but they are capable of that and much more.....all politicians are and after power and privilege as are general and admirals ------ race, color religion has nothing to do with it............

 

[VCheng]

@ VCheng ---so you are so naive that you believe everything they broadcast for you? they cant doctor tapes? i am not saying they did doctor them -- but they are capable of that and much more.....all politicians are and after power and privilege as are general and admirals ------ race, color religion has nothing to do with it............

No, I am not naive. I just wear my tinfoil hat every day!

 

[VCheng]

Dear Aeronaut:

I hope you are able to find some time to reply to #55 above.

 

[somebozo]

What more can you expect from an Indian Troll with the name Fuego. US's biggest mistake was adopting Indian policy in Afghanistan rather than forming their own. In the end, US found itself defending Indian interests rather than its own in the region.

Adoption of Indian policy and synchronized vision was the biggest blunder US has made so far in Afghanistan. You can't afford to have India in Afghanistan while you want Pakistan to be on your side.

They adopted Indian policy? come on. yes they preferred India over Pak because USA knows that Pakistan seeing Afgan as a proxy country..as a strategic asset.

India shares no boder and demographics with Afghanistan. Doing so only made the Pashtun dominated Talibans to mend their ways with Pakistan.

Being seen as an adversary does not really Pakistan either, does it?

 

[Kompromat]

Thank you for that detailed post. Please allow me to present a point by point response for discussion:

My, Pleasure.

China is the largest producer of only certain types of goods, not all of them.

Correct.

Further, it relies on a global supply chain for many of the components that go into its products too, so it is not isolated.

Correct- Because of WTO, and cheap labor.

China is the largest trading partner of more than 30 countries, not just USA.

China and US are the biggest trade partners,by any measure. The point,here was not to compare the trade, in anyway but "interdependency".

Thus, the above two points are naive.

Sure..

China particpates in the global economy and neither China nor USA can hold each other to any forcible position by virtue of a buyer-supplier relationship alone.

The point, was political leverage which comes with trade and economy.

Chinese industrial capacity is rapidly progressing towards more complex products as it improves facilites and expertise, as it is right. However, as said above, increasgin complexity of products also means more integration into the global supply and commerce chain, which is advanatageous for all parties, not just China.

Disagree, it will kill many industries in the United States and take jobs away, which already is happening. This will only,create rift between China and the US. The US is a developed,economy which produces high quality goods and services. When China reaches that mark in areas of Engineering, Software, Clean energy etc it will make life hard for the US businesses because they won't be able to compete China's "price to performance ratio".

One example: Understanding the Pentagon's ban on Chinese solar products _News_Economy_Hongkong Richful Accountants Service

The US banned many Chinese solar products, in order to keep their own in business. Recently, Chinese company Hwawei was banned in Australia,from taking part in a contract to provide high speed broadband on "National Security Grounds". So, in my humble opinion, it wont be a cakewalk!

A detailed discussion of the Fed is not for this topic I feel, but suffice to say here that the US economy is not collapsing. It would be a mistake to assume that it is.

The US economy may not be collapsing because they are on a money printing spree to keep it coo. The US as a matter of fact is, "The most highly indebted nation in the history of mankind".

U.S. Debt Now Exceeds $16 Trillion - Washington Wire - WSJ == It may not collapse the economy, but it does mean that the gloomy days are over.

The Euro was touted as a rival to the US dollar, and we can see that it is on its last legs. Once the Euro is dispatched as a serious challenger to the dollar, the US economy will rebound quite predictably.

US has tried its best to keep the Euro competition, suppressed. One reason behind, Iraq invasion was also the fact that the Iraqi establishment moved to Euro for oil trade instead of the American dollar.

Iraq: Baghdad Moves To Euro

It will take another few decades of growth and liberalization, including free convertibility, for the yuan to be taken as the next challenger, at the earliest.

Chinese won't let, Yuan become the international reserve currency, call it an assumption but i have no reason to believe they will let it happen.

As I said above, China trades the world over as an important producer and consumer, and will always continue to do so. The SCO cannot and will not replace that global participation.

True, i never implied that either, that the SCO will turn into an iron curtain. The point was that the Chinese will "cut the dependency" for consumer goods to a sustainable level from the US and EU by substituting it with emerging local and domestic markets which would result in "low political leverage" in the favor of the EU or the US.

Please keep in mind that all the SCO countries will trade globally as well, not just with China.

Never, said that. In my opinion, they will develop "regional interdependency".

This massive new and growing market is not just for the member states, but for all major producers of goods and services, since all the SCO countries will trade globally, as I have said before.

That will render westerners to get their act together, and engage with the Asians on equal terms, that was the entire point of my post.

70% from the Middle East? China buys oil globally, and the Middle East does NOT supply 70% of its imports:

I,don't know how accurate, the map is but even according to this up to 45% of their oil is being bought from the middle east.

Chinese net oil purchases are about 5.5 million barrels per day, and oil tankers are one of the most efficient and lowest cost bulk transportation options available for such huge quantities needed by the rapidly growing Chinese economy.

Its not about the oil production, its about who controls the "oil routes". In case of a conflict, the USN would shut Chinese oil supply without any trouble, bringing China to its knees!

Please keep in mind that Russia is one of the world's largest reserves of energy, and right next to China, with no options for USA to realistically contain those supplies. Further, crippling the Chinese economy would have a devastating effect on the global economy, including the USA's. Particpation in growth is the key thing to remember.

Never, said that the Chinese will get 100% of their supplies from the Mideast. The entire point is that by being in Afghanistan, the US has earned itself a geographical advantage with which they can dictate the energy supply through land to China from "All" directions. They already control the seas, remember its about "leverage" more than anything else, and this leverage is bartered during deals and negotiations.

Like I said before, Russia is next door, directly, as well as a large number of Central Asian countries. Why would China want to take a detour through Pakistan for its energy supplies?

Maybe, because mideast wont be able to provide 1.5 billion barrels/year equivalent energy resources anyway?

Further, consider the logistics of an oil pipeline through the northern areas of Pakistan. As an exercise, please consider a pipeline project supplying 1 million barrels of oil per day over the 16,000 ft high Khunjerab Pass, through all months of the year, complete with pumping stations and servicing and security issues through an active earthquake zone (remember Attabad Lake?). Let's start with design, financing and construction, let alone reliable operation for years and years afterwards.

(If you consider road transport via KKH as an option, it will take about 5,500 18-wheeler tanker trucks to transport a million barrels of crude, roughly - per day, every day throughout the year. Try that as a logistics exercise too, please.)

Pipeline!

If China has "moved to the ground", Afghanistan is certainly not it

I,meant that China wants to relocate its energy dependency from sea to the ground to a sustainable level.

rather directly westwards through Russia and CAS to the EU and onwards

.

Through ground! - and that is the entire point, they are too exposed at sea without a blue water navy and owe too much leverage to the US.

However, trading across the Pacific to USA and Australia will be ever more important too

In, case of Australia, it will be slowing down from now on, since the Australians have decided to join the containment policy and allowed their land to be used for American military which China sees as a threat.

As I have explained above, Afghanistan's location is nowhere as important as you are assuming it to be, for either China or USA.

It is, because it sits right in the middle of energy and logistical routes. It can easily be used as an Air craft carrier to contain its regional neighboring countries.

The Chinese economy is growing rapidly, yes, but it will find maintaining that rate of growth increasing difficult in the years ahead due to a complex combination of several factors.

8%/year sustained GDP growth.

You will find that USA will not even try to contain SCO, but will participate in the growth of its markets to mutual advantages. That is the way the global economy works.

US's request to join SCO as an observer was rejected: Shanghai surprise | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk

BLA and the troubles in Baluchistan are another matter, and certainly NOT because Paksitan is central to anything discussed above.

They, might not be a concern to you but to us it is. BLA is an irritant group which threatens the prosperity of Pakistan and whoever controls it has "set the timing" right to delay or irritate at least, any projects going through territory they can kill a few people in.

Here, I will agree with you, finally, that the end result is still to be played out, with the observation that if it is not going to be "nice" for USA,

Just wait and see is all i can say. My entire point is that the US's only reason to still be here in Afghanistan is because of a containment policy which includes all emerging economies.

http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebat...inment-of-china-risks-permanent-brinksmanship

it is far more likely to be catastrophically worse for Pakistan by comparison, unless its policies change soon, effectively, and in the right direction.

It already is "catastrophically worse" for us be it, the Indian sponsored TTP/BLA terror, natural disasters, US murderous done campaign, their intervention in our political system, stinking domestic political system and extremism as a result of all of the above. We know we are in trouble, but Pakistan has its undercurrent, and i am hopeful that we will change for the better.


* Apologies for the late reply, been busy with educational matters- didn't have time to scratch my head.

Regards: