Tiki Tam Tam
<b>MILITARY PROFESSIONALS</b>
- Joined
- May 15, 2006
- Messages
- 9,330
- Reaction score
- 0
Dude, the US army is seen as an invading, conquering force in the region. It's got nothing to do with how good you are! You could be angels and genuinely be interested in the welfare of Afghans, but as soon as you start going to Afghanistan as foreign rulers, they aren't going to stop until you've left! It's their mentality, I'm sure General Gramov would agree!
Given the terrorist threat that has developed around the world and increasingly it is targeting without differentiation i.e. Moslem countries included, the US is hardly seen as an invading force.
In fact, the US is doing what others should have done, unless of course, they are of the opinion that terrorists are doing the right thing. I wonder if that type of a sentiment i.e. terrorists are right will be supported by any person who values his country's stability and who values the right to one's life and property.
The attack on Iraq was for far reaching strategic goals and not for Oil as is normally believed. even if it was one of the strategic inputs. The US presence in the centre of the Middle East was essential since it is a very volatile area which could put the world in a tailspin. The presence of the US in the Middle East does deter forces from going into adventures that they could have done otherwise if the US was not there. Therefore, the presence of the US in the Middle East is for the better and not for the worse.
As far as Afghanistan is concerned, the fountainhead of the terrorism, OBL was being given shelter and the Taliban was going upsetting the world order. Therefore, there was a need to bring stability to this part of the region. The article S2 has put in another thread on the Taliban issue is worth a read even though it is a huge article and a long haul. True, that stability in Afghanistan would also help the TAP, but then, given the environment, it will take sometime. Dispassionately analysed, TAP may assist the US, but then it will bring economic advancement to Pakistan itself and bring down the cost of transit for countries like China and India. It is mutually beneficial.
One may think that overland routes for oil is a boon and that the railway and road link from Gwadar to China would solve the problems. Indeed, such a suggestion is perfect for those who only gaze at maps. Those who operate on high altitude roads and railways will tell you that maintaining such roads and railways is a high cost exercise. The movement over such terrain is equally expensive. Therefore, one should be calm and analyses the pros and cons before getting into raptures.
There is no foreign rulers in Afghanistan. It is a Afghan govt that calls the shots. True, it is being assisted by the West, but what is the other option for sustaining Afghanistan? Leave it to the drug barons and warlords? Leave it to the Taliban so that Afghanistan remains in the Middle Ages, floundering into nowhere? Don't the Afghans have the right to march shoulder to shoulder with other nations into the next century? They can, if there is peace and stability. Can they guarantee that for themselves? Can any other country guarantee the same for them?
If Karzai is a puppet, then many others could also be termed so.
It is a matter of perceptions.