Quote:
Originally Posted by FlamesAddiction
I didn't think NATO occupation of Afghanistan was a mistake at first, but now I am really starting to wonder what we are doing there. The Soviets couldn't beat the insurgency, so I don't see this half-assed attempt working either. Afghanistan has never been successfully invaded and occupied.
Even though the Canadian military claims that today was a success and progress was made, citing around 200 insurgent kills to our 4 losses, it is worth noting that the Soviets killed around 1,000 insurgents for every Russian killed and after 9 years, they were still forced out.
There are far too few troops involved in this occupation for it to ever be successful. There are just too many places for them to hide. Perhaps if the U.S. dedicated themselves to Afghanistan like they did to Iraq, but even then I doubt it would matter.
|
When the Soviets invaded the entire nation was up in arms. Today most Afghanis are enjoying more freedom than they have at any time since the 1970s. The current insurgency does not have popular support in Afghanistan, unlike the mujahadeen during the Soviet Invasion.
I met the Afghan ambassador to Canada earlier this year and ever since I have firmly believed the ISAF force in Afghanistan is there for the right reasons, doing the right thing, and has the support of the people.
I think you are wrong when you say Afghanistan has never been successfully invaded and occupied. The Taliban comprised of an international collection of radical muslims, only some of whom were Afghani. They ruled through fear and force; it was they who successfully occupied Afghanistan. I am echoing the words of the ambassador when I say this.
The ISAF force is there on an interim basis to ensure that the Taliban are weakened to such a degree that the fledgling democratic Afghan government will been strong enough--and the remaining Taliban forces weak enough--to maintain stability in the country for the foreseeable future.