International Politics Thread

[sparks50 0]

My local paper calls it the largest airborne operation done by the Marines since the Vietnam war, which is probably more accurate.

[Colossus 2]

Still not cleared out that area (Helmand river)? They are really dug up around there. What is the current strategic purpose of the Halmand province for the Taliban? Easy to defend is obvious, this is an area which have been in their hands for years.

Edited July 3, 2009 by colossus

[JdB 151]

What is the current strategic purpose of the Helmand province for the Taliban?

Opium-growth (their main source of income)

They won't stand, just blend into the population or move some place else and move back after the operation is over. Even 20.000 Marines are not enough to sweep clean and then occupy the vast province of Helmand. Also the Taliban would just relocate to another province in the South where there hasn't been a surge in troops. Either the Marines can then follow the Taliban, leaving Helmand again open to insurgents, or they can stay, and another 20.000 troops would be needed to sweep and occupy the next province and the next, and the next, and the ...

In short, I don't believe that a prolonged (multiple years) troop surge of less than 100.000 troops will make any difference for the security of Afghanistan. Sending in a Marine force to destroy the opposition in a province and then have it guarded by the current ISAF troops as the Marines move on to the next province would work ... if you were actually up against an opponent that would stand and fight, like the Soviets, rather than the ghosts that the Taliban is.

Edited July 3, 2009 by JdB

[Andi 10]

Obama's approval rating is sinking:

Rasmussen: Obama Disapproval Rating Matches Lowest Level Recorded

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/obama_administration/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Thank god, since everything he promised was a giant lie and people are starting to get with it.

So which U.S. president (let's start after Roosevelt) actually fulfilled his promises and didn't just tell "giant lies"?

Can you name one?

BTW these rasmussen reports are made out of polls with approx. 1500 voters, so come on...

Edited July 3, 2009 by Andi

[MehMan 0]

The taliban get money like we do. From taxing. They tax the farmers and they tax the smugglers, drug dealers, everybody. That's how they avoid the little bit about their religion calling drugs a bad thing. Because they're only taxing it's supposedly all fine.

[TangoRomeo 10]

In short, I don't believe that a prolonged (multiple years) troop surge of less than 100.000 troops will make any difference for the security of Afghanistan.

I think it's a futile effort in many respects;

disparity between military/ paramilitary assets and reconstruction aid, neighbouring countries, and the afghani population itself.

Not only that a good deal of reconstruction aid simply dissapears, and does not reach those who are in need, the amount is also rather pathetic. In Kabul it's about 42 USD / person, in Kosovo it was more than 6 times that number. Because of missing aid farmers are likely to resort to opium poppy cultivation, which leads to an increase in criminal activity connected to the export.

Neighbouring countries such as Russia must see it's relations and interests endangered in Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan, both regions rich on oil reserves. Iran, ranking second in the world in natural gas reserves and third in oil, found itself sandwiched by US presence in the region - recent incidents somehow fit in the greater scheme of things.

Then there are the tribal areas of Pakistan, which are known to be safe havens for Taliban and Queda to start operations from. This is ensured by radical islamic partys controlling the border regions of Pakistan, with Army and ISI support. It´s safe to assume these groups and countries not having an interest in a stable, pro-western Afghanistan.

The Pashtunes in the south, where most of the fighting took place, ruled the country for more than 300 years, and are sure not giving up their claim to power. Although Karzai is a Pashtune himself, he's regarded as a western marionette without any influence, not only by the Pashtunes.

Next there are highly corrupt warlords, who were backed up tactically and financially. How likely these shady figures give up up their shady buisness and influence? Disarming the local militias and integrating them into civilian life seems rather unlikely, and it backfires in several aspects. The most important being encouragement of political splinter groups and therefore inability of the government to gain any authority outside of Kabul.

[Commando84 0]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/87c523a4-6b18-11de-861d-00144feabdc0.html

The Swedish Pirate partys MEP has gotten his debate article put out on Financial Times :D

Long time ago any Swedish politician got to be in that paper.

[MehMan 0]

It seems there's heavy fighting since Operation Strike Of The Sword started, at least considering the mounting casualites. 15 british soldiers so far. While mostly from IED related, it's far more than usually, it would seem they've really stepped on their toes or that the taleban have become very good with IEDs. In any case, I don't think this is the last of it.

[da12thMonkey 1943]

Eight British fatalities in the 24 hours.

I was left speechless when I heard that. I can't even begin to imagine how it must feel when the lads and lasses we have out there hear such devastating news.

I can reflect upon individual tragedies and relate to the friends and families of those who have perished, as I'm sure all of us who have suddenly lost people we love are able to do; but the collective loss of so many of colleagues, experienced by our forces today... I can't fathom it.

My thoughts are with all of them.

Edited July 10, 2009 by da12thMonkey

[Baff1 0]

The head of the armed forces today said he needed the occupation to last another 20 years to win.

That would be one less than our record of 30 and nine more than Russia lasted.

A lot more people are set to die before public will evaporates.

. Sending in a Marine force to destroy the opposition in a province and then have it guarded by the current ISAF troops as the Marines move on to the next province would work ....

It's take and hold mate, ISAF are all busy.

If all the Marines are doing is passing through they may as well not show up at all. Either the Marines provide the domestic security there, or the Taliban will.

Edited July 11, 2009 by Baff1

[sparks50 0]

A lot more tax money will be spent on it too. Tax driven in by the principle of force on individuals.

And Monkey, thats 15 british soldiers the last 10 days.

Edited July 12, 2009 by sparks50

[Baff1 0]

The cost?

The cost of the British deployment in Afghanistan is 5 times greater than that country's total GDP.

As soon as we leave, security leaves with us. They can't afford an Afghan national army. They can't afford a government.

[sparks50 0]

There are several countries in the world in similar situations, it does not make us responsible to "fix" their countries.

It is a "war" with many grey zones, but there has to be alternative ways to fight the threath of terror.

Edited July 12, 2009 by sparks50

[Baff1 0]

Terrorism is fought with policemen, not armies.

I'd quite like a military colony on the pirate coast in Somalia instead of in Afghanistan.

9/11 is over, American's have had their blood.

There is nothing left to gain from that particular war that I can see.

[Commando84 0]

Intresting youtube movie about the events that are unfolding in the EU and why we should stop them, things like the stockholm programme and Acta and all other spy on citizen crap that is making it way forward in the shadows..

[MehMan 0]

Nice theory.

Email over pop3 is unsecured from start, anybody can snoop in and check what you're sending. Anybody who wants to snoop your traffic can snoop your emails if you're sending them via pop3 and smtp EASILY. Doesn't take much effort and definatley not a police force.

CCTV is indeed a bit too much, but I believe the London police offers maps which shows where you can walk without being on CCTV. At least I remember you can get a map somewhere which shows routes without any CCTV.

The biometric passport data, eh, never looked into it.

The trusted content bullshit is just that. The vague idea that somebody is going to disable you installing programs on your computer is out of this world. It's never going to work and at most it can only be a simple warning before installation. It's only going to confuse those that don't know how to use a computer.

[Baff1 0]

We already have all this stuff here, The EU isn't bringing anything new to us on this front, we are the world leaders.

I need a biometric passport to travel to the U.S.A.

So that's that really, no point having a passport if I can't go abroad.

A map from the police showing how to walk without being spied on?

That's a new one on me.

And quite wrong in my opinion. Exactly the sort of things millions of people have died to prevent.

The worst examples are all the government campaigns to persuade people to inform on their neighbours.

That's really the pinnacle of an evil state.

These were the horror stories of what would happen to us if the Nazi's managed to invade, or the Russians.

[NeMeSiS 11]

CCTV is indeed a bit too much, but I believe the London police offers maps which shows where you can walk without being on CCTV. At least I remember you can get a map somewhere which shows routes without any CCTV.

If this isnt hilarious anymore then something is definately going wrong in this world. :confused:

[Commando84 0]

btw a poll made by united minds and news paper aftonbladet put the pirate party at 4.2 % wich is just about what they would need to get a seat into the riksdagen wich is sort of like the Uk house of commons goverment or so.

Despite political experts expecting the Pp to decline after the EU elections.

One of the parties the christian democracts wich is part of the current goverment coalition wants to make a abortion registry.

Imo everytime the words registry or surveillance and data mining ect. is mentioned more young people flee the mainstream parties and join the pirateparty...

Edited July 19, 2009 by Commando84

[echo1 0]

So, Obama got rid of the missile shield...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8260230.stm

Thoughts?

[Commando84 0]

Never thought it would come to use anyways...

Maybe if a crazy computersystem like skynet came alive with A.i and it decided to control weapon systems and launch missiles :D

airborne laser systems for the win imo :)

stationary targets are way too vulnurable anyways :)

[Baff1 0]

It was in the wrong place anyway.

If they had wanted it for Iran and North Korea, they needed to base it next to Iran and North Korea not next to Russia. Who were they trying to kid?

Well done Obama is what I say.

[kavoven 4]

The puplic reactions are interesting. First everyone is yelling for peace and the aggressive americans and now they stop behaving the "Bush-way" and people are yelling "weak Obama"...

:391:

I think its the right decision and it will lead to better relations with Russia. Medwedew made some steps, too during the last weeks (indirectly) by critizising corruption and calling Russia antiquated. I hope the situation will improve :)

[derk yall 0]

So, Obama got rid of the missile shield...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8260230.stm

Thoughts?

Many people there in Czech rep. are very happy now. The propaganda which the US radar brought there was plenty of BS and angered many people. Also the afere with the radar has shown the ass-alpining of our governament (once they go to the annal of russians, other time to the annal of american, but never respect it's own people there).

Unfortonately, this radar idea mad many bad PR to the US/RUS governament in there, because the way the US/RUS governament acted during that time created an assumption, that Czech rep. is an satelite state of USA. There were also some talk about a new "Munich" betrayal.

[Clavicula_nox4817 0]

I wonder what the Polish and Czech think. Thank you for your post, Derk.