# I pit whoever convinced our president to prolong the war in Afghanistan **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [December 2, 2009, 4:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711 "2009-12-02T16:04:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Michael\_Ellis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/977dab/32.png) [@Michael\_Ellis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Michael_Ellis)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 5:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/61 "2009-12-03T17:39:19Z")
> [@kenner116](#): > > The Taliban isn’t an imperial power. They are mostly confined to Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan and are not about to invade Alaska anytime soon. The Taliban is not going to take over the Pacific or Atlantic oceans, unless I am \*vastly \*underestimating their navy. > > If they tried to take over Xinjiang, I’m sure the Chinese will be able to hold them back. Iran is not about to fall to the Taliban. > > If the Empire of Japan was limited to Japan, Taiwan and the Liaoning peninsula, I don’t believe we would need to wage war against them. In reality, they were a threat to the US mainland and our Pacific territories. The Taliban is mostly a threat to people in a landlocked Asian country. It’s not so much the Taliban that people are concerned about (well, they are, but…), it’s the sort of people they allowed to set up shop there the last time they were in power. The last thing we need is yet another spot where the next Osama bin Laden can set up training camps or whatever. Hell, the last thing we need is giving the current Osama bin Laden any more freedom of movement than he (regretfully) already has. Also, I don’t know how you made a leap from NurseCarmen’s post about the Japanese to thinking she or anyone else was saying the Taliban were an imperial power or anything of the sort. Frankly, it’s downright asinine of you. ---
**Author:** ![buttonjockey308](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/bcef8e/32.png) [@buttonjockey308](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/buttonjockey308)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/62 "2009-12-03T18:00:01Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Has putting a timetable on our withdrawal from Iraq produced the horrible results you’re predicting for Afghanistan? No, but then the problem was never really in Iraq in the first place. Victory in Afghanistan is key, for the reasons set out above and also because we’d be the first in a loooong line of those who’ve attempted. This isn’t an engineering project, it’s a war. It takes as long as it takes, bottom line. Projecting artificial deadlines (and meaning to stick with them, which I’m not convinced he is) gives the people you’re battling a reason to stop what they’re doing until you leave. The robber doesn’t break into the house until AFTER the police cruiser has passed by. Making a so-called ‘exit strategy’ that includes a timeline is like having local cops say ‘hey, all 12 of us in this patrol district are going to be at the donut shop between 12 midnight and 1 am.’ Would not the bad guys say ‘Well, pencil me in for the 1230 house robbery?’ If we’re in, we need to be all in for as long as it takes. If we’re out, we’re out. At the risk of sounding jingoistic, this is America, we don’t do things half-way. We do biggest, fastest, strongest, tallest as well or better than anyone else. That’s what made us what we are for the past 232 years. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/63 "2009-12-03T18:04:23Z")
> [@L. G. Butts](#): > > It’s about Pakistan. It would really suck if the resurgent Taliban were to take Pakistan over. What happens in Afghanistan is critical to what happens in Pakistan. The Taliban are not going to take over Pakistan. They are a minority in Pakistan, and have only been able to ‘take over’ ethnically Pushtun tribal areas. > [@kenner116](#): > > Staying in Afghanistan is all about saving face. Much of the country will be under Taliban influence or control whether we leave tomorrow or in 30 years. We could prevent a Taliban takeover of the country without being there by sending a few billion per year to prop up the Afghan government/military. But the only events that will cause us to leave is a significant increase in American soldier’s deaths or the near-bankruptcy of the American government. You do realize that we are supporting the faction that has traditionally ruled Afghanistan for the past century and a half right? The Durrani. > [@Really\_Not\_All\_That\_Bright](#): > > Pakistan isn’t destabilized by India. If anything, the presence of India is the only thing that keeps the non-Islamists from taking power. The non-Islamists ARE in power in Pakistan. There are Islamists there with lots of political power, but the idea that they control the government is a bit overstating it. > [@Marley23](#): > > Have you noticed that Bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri are still out there, in an enormous area, and nobody has much of a clue where they are? “Some special ops” might not work. The goals were to capture or kill the people responsible for the attacks and take out the network and government that were supporting them. You know where bin Laden and Al-Zawahiri are? You’re sure they’re still in Afghanistan? > [@kenner116](#): > > The Taliban isn’t an imperial power. They are mostly confined to Afghanistan and parts of Pakistan and are not about to invade Alaska anytime soon. The Taliban is not going to take over the Pacific or Atlantic oceans, unless I am \*vastly \*underestimating their navy. Right. > [@](#): > > If they tried to take over Xinjiang, I’m sure the Chinese will be able to hold them back. Iran is not about to fall to the Taliban. Take over Xinjiang? Why do you think the Uighurs would be amenable to imperial Pashtun rule? > [@](#): > > If the Empire of Japan was limited to Japan, Taiwan and the Liaoning peninsula, I don’t believe we would need to wage war against them. In reality, they were a threat to the US mainland and our Pacific territories. The Taliban is mostly a threat to people in a landlocked Asian country. Right. Also, there is a difference in levels of industrialization. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/64 "2009-12-03T18:04:33Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > The President isn’t prolonging the war in Afghanistan. He gave a time-table for withdrawal. Anyone who thinks he’s prolonging the war in Afghanistan is a moron. A deadline for Karzai to get his shit together? How novel! I guess it beats the Bush policy of propping up corrupt incompetents till the end of time. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/65 "2009-12-03T18:07:04Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > A deadline for Karzai to get his shit together? > How novel! > I guess it beats the Bush policy of propping up corrupt incompetents till the end of time. Still the idea that he is prolonguing it is a facile notion that you can just flip a switch war on/war off. It doesn’t work like that. Even if we stipulated a draw down right now, it would embolden them to shoot the retreating troops and hasty withdrawals leave weapons behind which leave your enemy better equipped than they were before you went there. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/66 "2009-12-03T18:18:51Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Even if we stipulated a draw down right now, it would embolden them to shoot the retreating troops and hasty withdrawals leave weapons behind which leave your enemy better equipped than they were before you went there. Just as sticking our around, propping up a corrupt, incompetent regime emboldens more people to take up arms against imperialists. Plus with the corruption already there our weapons are _already_ falling into the hands of the Taliban: > **[US weapons in Afghanistan at threat of falling into Taliban hands](https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/4601427/US-weapons-in-Afghanistan-at-threat-of-falling-into-Taliban-hands.html)** > > Hundreds of thousands of US weapons given to Afghan soldiers and police are at risk of falling into the hands of the Taliban because there is no record of where they are. [http://www.iansa.org/regions/namerica/US\_weapons\_taliban09.htm](http://www.iansa.org/regions/namerica/US_weapons_taliban09.htm) There’s no need for a hasty withdrawal to ensure that outcome. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/67 "2009-12-03T18:22:18Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > Just as sticking our around, propping up a corrupt, incompetent regime emboldens more people to take up arms against imperialists. Except you would have to provide proof that we are sticking around. Obama set a timetable for withdrawal. > [@](#): > > Plus with the corruption already there our weapons are _already_ falling into the hands of the Taliban: > [http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/4601427/US-weapons-in-Afghanistan-at-threat-of-falling-into-Taliban-hands.html](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/afghanistan/4601427/US-weapons-in-Afghanistan-at-threat-of-falling-into-Taliban-hands.html) > [http://www.iansa.org/regions/namerica/US\_weapons\_taliban09.htm](http://www.iansa.org/regions/namerica/US_weapons_taliban09.htm) > > There’s no need for a hasty withdrawal to ensure that outcome. You do realize that there are differences in scale right? That concept isn’t lost on you? ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/68 "2009-12-03T18:55:48Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > Except you would have to provide proof that we are sticking around. Obama set a timetable for withdrawal. No no no, we _had been_ sticking around waiting for a shining city on a hill or a pony to show up, or something. Obama appears to have set the ball in motion, but I don’t trust him to keep it moving. re weapons turnover: Sure there are differences in scale, but as long as we’re there we’re _also_ training the taliban in how to fight American trrops. That sort of experience can outweigh a large pile of rifles, radars and rockets. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 6:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/69 "2009-12-03T18:59:29Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > No no no, we _had been_ sticking around waiting for a shining city on a hill or a pony to show up, or something. Obama appears to have set the ball in motion, but I don’t trust him to keep it moving. Well that’s your projections, you might be right you might be wrong. The future will bear it out. > [@](#): > > re weapons turnover: > Sure there are differences in scale, but as long as we’re there we’re _also_ training the taliban in how to fight American trrops. That sort of experience can outweigh a large pile of rifles, radars and rockets. They had many years of experience fighting the soviets and yet it was the Stinger that turned the tide. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 7:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/70 "2009-12-03T19:24:19Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > yet it was the Stinger that turned the tide. No one left the Stinger behind, we shipped them to Afghanistan. I’m not clear on which weapons you feel will pose an unnacceptable threat should we leave any behind. Billions of new Stingers? Humvees? Surely not tanks or helicopters. Frankly, I think the threat posed by abandoned American weapons is overhyped. You’re welcome to get your undies in a knot over them, but I’ll not sweat it unless it turns out Bush shipped [Davy Crockets](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29) to Kabul. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/71 "2009-12-03T19:41:17Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > No one left the Stinger behind, we shipped them to Afghanistan. Actually they were left behind and we spent $ 55m recovering them. But that’s only part of the point. The point is that technology is as, or more valuable than learned tactics. > [@](#): > > I’m not clear on which weapons you feel will pose an unnacceptable threat should we leave any behind. Billions of new Stingers? Humvees? Surely not tanks or helicopters. > Frankly, I think the threat posed by abandoned American weapons is overhyped. ‘which weapons’ you’re asking for a lot of meaningless bullshit. It doesn’t matter which weapons, a Humvee here, an M-16 there, and eventually you’re talking about real ordnance. If you think the issue is overhyped then frankly you don’t know shit about the subject. Which is kind of surprising as it’s one of the anti-war bete noirs used to beat every American action over the head with. > [@](#): > > You’re welcome to get your undies in a knot over them, but I’ll not sweat it unless it turns out Bush shipped [Davy Crockets](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davy_Crockett_%28nuclear_device%29) to Kabul. Right, because only nuclear weapons make a strategic difference. :rolleyes: But then again, that is kind of the point right? To keep [these guys](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban) from trashing [this place](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pakistan). ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 9:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/72 "2009-12-03T21:13:08Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > ‘which weapons’ you’re asking for a lot of meaningless bullshit. It doesn’t matter which weapons, a Humvee here, an M-16 there, and eventually you’re talking about real ordnance. You can’t fly a Humvee into a skyscraper, no matter how many you have. Nor do M-16’s _PLUS_ Humvee’s add up to any sort of strategic threat to the United States. Terrorists will always be able to get their hands on explosives. Our leaving some behind in Afghanistan won’t automagically turn harmless America haters into an imminent threat. At worst, it’ll just mean slightly lower prices on the international arms market. You’re hyperventilating about a small issue. ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 9:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/73 "2009-12-03T21:24:42Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > You can’t fly a Humvee into a skyscraper, no matter how many you have. Nor do M-16’s _PLUS_ Humvee’s add up to any sort of strategic threat to the United States. An open war in Pakistan however, does. > [@](#): > > Terrorists will always be able to get their hands on explosives. Our leaving some behind in Afghanistan won’t automagically turn harmless America haters into an imminent threat. At worst, it’ll just mean slightly lower prices on the international arms market. You’re hyperventilating about a small issue. No. This is just wrong. The supply of ordnance is one of the most important parts of a war, and guerilla wars are constrained by the limitations the guerillas have for receiving ordnance. Guerillas use their ordnance more efficiently than nation-state militaries do, because they have to, or else their insurgency doesn’t last very long. So it really DOES matter if they get 1000 M-16s. It really DOES matter if they get 100,000 bullets. It really DOES matter if they seize some fuel trucks from the retreating military. And it really DOES matter if they can overwhelm the nascent national military with the hardware left behind by the neo-colonialist power that didn’t have the stomach for it. I’m neither hyperventilating, nor is it a small issue. You are trying to diminish the importance of a strategic implication that anyone who has strategic influence, thinks about and cares about because it doesn’t suit your meta-narrative. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/74 "2009-12-03T21:47:33Z")
What, now the taliban are going to take over Pakistan if we leave? It’s like freakin dominoes over there in asia, AGAIN? It sounds to me like [Pakistan is already headed towards internal strife](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/asia/29pstan.html), even while we’re hanging out in Afghanistan. That doesn’t say much for our on-location ability to stabilize the region. So what’s your point about our having to stay in Afghanistan so as to stabilize Pakistan then? Heck, our crossborder drone missions are a major cause of the instability in Pakistan. If we pulled out of Afghanistan and stopped flying those missions, Pakistan might cool down _without_ civil war. That’d be in our strategic interest, right? 😉 ---
**Author:** ![mswas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e99b99/32.png) [@mswas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mswas)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 10:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/75 "2009-12-03T22:28:44Z")
> [@Squink](#): > > What, now the taliban are going to take over Pakistan if we leave? Take-over and destabilize are not the same thing. > [@](#): > > It’s like freakin dominoes over there in asia, AGAIN? Except it’s not quite the same. It’s not about Pakistan being taken over it’s about Pakistan becoming a nuclear armed failed state thus precipitating the need for India to invade to secure the nukes that will most likely be aimed at them, and for China to assert itself against Indian regional aggression. Though China also has a vested interest in Uighur terrorists not getting their hands on the bomb. So yes, dominoes are a valid metaphor, but you say it like an epithet thinking that it somehow invalidates any argument that resembles the one you are referring to. > [@](#): > > It sounds to me like [Pakistan is already headed towards internal strife](http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/29/world/asia/29pstan.html), even while we’re hanging out in Afghanistan. That doesn’t say much for our on-location ability to stabilize the region. So what’s your point about our having to stay in Afghanistan so as to stabilize Pakistan then? Pakistan is always headed for internal strife, and has always been. At the same time Pakistan has been one of our closest allies for decades and is our only source of access to central Asia. > [@](#): > > Heck, our crossborder drone missions are a major cause of the instability in Pakistan. If we pulled out of Afghanistan and stopped flying those missions, Pakistan might cool down _without_ civil war. That’d be in our strategic interest, right? 😉 Uh huh, sure. But regardless your point is moot since the policy is to withdraw from Afghanistan. You’re just made that it’s not hasty and ill-planned so that you can bitch about it some more for the next twenty years of unintended consequences. ---
**Author:** ![Squink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b5e925/32.png) [@Squink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Squink)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 10:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/76 "2009-12-03T22:47:55Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > You’re just made that it’s not hasty and ill-planned so that you can bitch about it some more for the next twenty years of unintended consequences. ??? Oh, I see, you’re debating with someone who isn’t actually present in this thread. Well, carry on. Have a few tokes for me, and keep fantasizing bout the grave threat raised by withdrawal before Karzai dies of old age. I’ll just close with the wisdom of another proponent of perpetual war, [John McCain:](http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,578807,00.html) > [@](#): > > We can succeed if we base our conditions for withdrawal on when we win. Makes perfect sense, no? ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 10:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/77 "2009-12-03T22:53:22Z")
I mean, 8 years “training” the Afghan army? The people of Afghanistan do NOT want us there-they have made that abundantly clear. Think Vietnam (1969)-getting out in 1969 would hav saved thousands of lives and billions of dollars-and the ending would have been the same. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 11:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/78 "2009-12-03T23:21:40Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > The people of Afghanistan do NOT want us there-they have made that abundantly clear. People keep saying this, but it really isn’t as simple as that statement. John Burns, the New York Times journalist, said this recently: > [@](#): > > My own sense, developed over 40 years reporting from places of authoritarianism and repression, is that common sense is the best guide to what people are really thinking. . . . It was a lesson I have never forgotten; applied in Afghanistan, it suggests to me that a great majority of Afghans have no desire to see a return of the relentless miseries the Taliban imposed during the years between their march into Kabul in 1996 and their fall from power in 2001. And why would they? Who but extremists could wish to see the routine suppression of women and girls, the ready resort to violent punishments, the banning of everyday pleasures, from television to movies to kite-flying? > > This is not to say that Afghans in their millions embrace the coalition forces. The strong streak of nationalism among Afghans runs heavily against occupation by foreign powers, and many Afghans will tell you that they are sorely disappointed at what they regard as the breach of the promises they understood to have been made by the Western nations that combined to topple the Taliban, principally the United States. . . . > > Nearly a dozen years later, I returned to find the homes rebuilt, the lives of the villagers restored, the children flying kites and playing happily in the rocky pathways, the Taliban receding as a bitter memory of lives and homes destroyed. . . . Asked about the Americans, the villagers pointed to the sky and said: “We don’t know them. We thought they would come and build us a school or a clinic, but they never came.” The words were spoken without reproval, more as an expression of sorrow than dislike. I felt then, as I do now, that an effective American aid program – the “civilian surge” of which Mr. Obama spoke last night – could, if combined with the enhanced security provided by more American troops, help turn the tide of a war that in the past two or three years has seemed ever more likely to be lost. ---
**Author:** ![gonzomax](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/e8c25b/32.png) [@gonzomax](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gonzomax)\ **Post date:** [December 3, 2009, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/79 "2009-12-03T23:57:47Z")
> [@NurseCarmen](#): > > I couldn’t have put it better myself. Now, I’m a creaming liberal and am not a fan of war, but Afghanistan is the only conflict in my lifetime (42) that I feel is justified and the right thing to do. Do all the people on my (political) side forget that we didn’t start that war? Al Queada is not in Afghanistan now. So how will attacking Afghanistan atone for 9-11? They ran to Pakistan. Do you want to chase them there next? We are now fighting in a mountainous land that can not be secured. They will just melt into caves and wait. We will waste lives and treasure, and accomplish nothing. ---
**Author:** ![Kyla](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/eada6e/32.png) [@Kyla](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kyla)\ **Post date:** [December 4, 2009, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711/80 "2009-12-04T00:01:18Z")
> [@mswas](#): > > At the same time Pakistan has been one of our closest allies for decades and is our only source of access to central Asia. I agree with your point in general, but this is inaccurate. The US has negotiated agreements with Uzbekistan and Tajikistan to use their land as access points to Afghanistan. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-whoever-convinced-our-president-to-prolong-the-war-in-afghanistan/519711.md?page=5)