# Why Iraq and not Afghanistan? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [July 17, 2004, 3:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583 "2004-07-17T15:30:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/21 "2004-07-18T22:55:46Z")
> [@Zagadka](#): > > Putin is trying to pull something: > > [http://www.stratfor.com/coms2/page\_home](http://www.stratfor.com/coms2/page_home) > > Would be… interesting… to see 40,000 Russian troops be deployed to Afghanistan. I did’nt think that they had 40k troops available Declan ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [July 18, 2004, 11:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/22 "2004-07-18T23:58:45Z")
> [@Declan](#): > > I did’nt think that they had 40k troops available This _is_ Russia. Drumming up 40k troops wouldn’t be a problem. PAYING and EQUIPPING 40k troops, maybe, but one would presume they would be getting a fair amount of back-room funding. I still don’t get his motivation, though. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 12:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/23 "2004-07-19T00:05:47Z")
> [@Little Nemo](#): > > Politically, Afghanistan is a dead issue. The invasion of Afghanistan had broad bipartisan and international support. So nobody has an interest in denouncing the military effort in that country. Oh, give it about three years, when the Taliban or some other group of thugs conquers the rest of the place, the entire coalition effort ends in tragedy and disgrace and U.S. troops abandon the place a la Saigon 1975. Then people will be very interested indeed. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 12:13am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/24 "2004-07-19T00:13:36Z")
Although something I would wish against, the only thing that could indeed unite a country like Afghanistan is religion, and a dictorial style regime maybe the best thing for it, think about it, this is a place stuck in the 12th century, and when I can bet good money we were similar to them in many respects during that time. Another aspect is that the people need time to adjust to becoming less violent and factionalised, and if outside help is useless then maybe we just need to leave them alone and respect (even if it is unpopular) any form of government that will crop up. Afghanistan used to be a constitutional monarchy, then a republic, but now because the russians fucked so much up of the infrastructure and governments that were in power, they’ve gone backwards more than ever before. Maybe an authoritarian government is the only thing that can save them. Or we could help them go down the road like the South Koreans did, successful economy, then Human rights because one legitimises the other. ---
**Author:** ![Zagadka](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/zagadka/32/7272_2.png) [@Zagadka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zagadka)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 12:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/25 "2004-07-19T00:22:03Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > Afghanistan used to be a constitutional monarchy, then a republic, but now because the russians fucked so much up of the infrastructure and governments that were in power, they’ve gone backwards more than ever before. lol. Yep, they sure destroyed that resort nation of Afghanistan. ---
**Author:** ![Ryan\_Liam](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ryan_liam/32/3965_2.png) [@Ryan\_Liam](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ryan_Liam)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 12:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/26 "2004-07-19T00:38:59Z")
I’m not saying it was a country that set a benchmark or even an admirable one, but at least it was in some respects stable, and not the terrorist shithole its become. Unless you’re telling me that the country is somewhat better as a factionalised and economically destroyed country? ---
**Author:** ![Rashak\_Mani](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ea666f/32.png) [@Rashak\_Mani](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rashak_Mani)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 12:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/27 "2004-07-19T00:45:35Z")
Afghanistan never had that many US troops to begin with… what many forget is that the Northern Alliance did the sweeping. The US used more spec forces and air power than in Iraq for example. The warlords in a sense aren’t the “enemy”. They simply supported the Taliban before and changed their views either due to US firepower or bribe money. They are what keeps afghanistan from becoming an insurgency riddled Iraq. Sad ? Yep… still the US is right in not meddling too much with the warlords. Long term they might think of undermining their power… but do it slowly. ``` Afghanistan also isn't a strategic oil producer for sure... and its wasn't the pet project of the Bush gang. Once the Taliban and AQ were on the run the place just doesn't matter as much. To help Afghanistan you need to put in more money and political will ... not soldiers. If things do go as they have there might be a good danger of AQ elements taking roots again... but Iraq is by far better for them to act. Hostile population and more weapons and explosives available. ``` ---
**Author:** ![cmkeller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cmkeller/32/118_2.png) [@cmkeller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cmkeller)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/28 "2004-07-19T01:11:49Z")
> [@](#): > > My question is - why all the concentration on controlling and rebuilding Iraq? Why did Afghanistan get completely left behind? First of all, Afghanistan did not get “completely” left behind. Let’s not exaggerate; the U.S. did a lot to re-establish that country. The biggest difference between Afghanistan and Iraq is that Iraq had a workable, if despotic, government before the U.S. invasion. Therefore, if the U.S. expects the Iraqi on the street to have a favorable impression of the American government, the U.S. needs to make sure that there is no way in which life post-invasion is worse than life pre-invasion…including delivery of government services and personal security. In Afghanistan, on the other hand, the Taliban wasn’t really a functioning government. There’s less improvement needed by the U.S. to leave Afghans with a favorable impression of America. ---
**Author:** ![BrainGlutton](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/82dd89/32.png) [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)\ **Post date:** [July 19, 2004, 5:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583/29 "2004-07-19T05:22:14Z")
> [@Ryan\_Liam](#): > > Afghanistan used to be a constitutional monarchy, then a republic, but now because the russians fucked so much up of the infrastructure and governments that were in power, they’ve gone backwards more than ever before. It was a republic in name only, **Ryan,** and the monarchy before that was never really “constitutional.” As I said above: The Communist government, for all its brutality, **was better than any regime Afghanistan had known previously,** and much, much better than the Taliban regime that followed it. Communism is bad but there **are** worse things than Communism. At least Afghanistan’s left-wing, Soviet-backed government was dedicated to land reform, fighting illiteracy, and the emancipation of women. How long will it be before the Afghans have another government dedicated to those things? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-iraq-and-not-afghanistan/255583.md?page=1)