Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Ninety-Four Percent of Kandaharis Want Peace Talks, Not War

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
ensho Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-10 10:54 AM
Original message
Ninety-Four Percent of Kandaharis Want Peace Talks, Not War

http://ipsnorthamerica.net/news.php?idnews=3002


An opinion survey of Afghanistan's Kandahar province funded by the U.S. Army has revealed that 94 percent of respondents support negotiating with the Taliban over military confrontation with the insurgent group and 85 percent regard the Taliban as "our Afghan brothers".

The survey, conducted by a private U.S. contractor last December, covered Kandahar City and other districts in the province into which Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal is planning to introduce more troops in the biggest operation of the entire war. Those districts include Arghandab, Zhari, rural Kandahar and Panjwayi.

Afghan interviewers conducted the survey only in areas which were not under Taliban control.

The decisive rejection of the use of foreign troops against the Taliban by the population in Kandahar casts further doubt on the fundamental premise of the Kandahar campaign, scheduled to begin in June, that the population and tribal elders in those districts would welcome a U.S.-NATO troop presence to expel the Taliban.

That assumption was dealt a serious blow at a meeting on Apr. 4 at which tribal elders from all over Kandahar told President Hamid Karzai they were not happy with the planned military operation.

-snip-

Obama told a meeting of his "war cabinet" last month that it might be time to start negotiations with the Taliban, but Defence Secretary Robert Gates and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton have opposed any move toward negotiations until Gen. McChrystal is able to demonstrate clear success in weakening the Taliban.
-long snip of other facts in the survey-
----------------------

Hillary needs to stop listening to those whispering in her ear, and think for herself

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Bragi Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-10 11:21 AM
Response to Original message
1. This war is over, more deaths pointless
Obama says the drawdown of U.S troops will begin summer of 2011. Since there is absolutely no chance that a stable, non-corrupt (let alone democratic) government will be established between now and then, this war is over.

As of 2011, as the U.S pulls out, the usual group of warlords, drug barons and religious extremists (minus al Qaeda this time) that have run the place for the past couple hundred years will sort things out.

This beingt he case, what is the point of killing more Afghanis and more U.S troops?

What the U.S military should do is to avoid combat from here on in, to withdraw all troops to their compounds, and just wait for airlife back home.

The big battle planned for Kandahar this summer is the worst idea possible.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Flaneur Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-10 11:53 AM
Response to Original message
2. Kandaharis should just shut up and let us destroy their community...
...in order to save it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
robdogbucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-10 12:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. War tourism = institutional lobotomy
Edited on Tue Apr-20-10 12:47 PM by robdogbucky
Has the office of congressional war tourism been notified?

They have a lot of eggs piled in this one Kandahar basket.

Is anyone even interested in what the Afghan people have to say on this matter?

Guess not, all that pork in all those barrels.



…The report said about 100 groups including more than 700 people had visited by October and that a dozen more congressional delegations were expected by the end of 2009.

“Some describe the incredible volume of visitors from all branches of the federal and even state governments as ‘war tourism,’” the report said

“Although congressional and other VIP travel builds crucial support for U.S. efforts in Afghanistan, it also taxes the same military and civilian assets that would otherwise be deployed in the vital counterinsurgency and reconstruction efforts that the visitors seek to evaluate,” the report said.

Because the majority of assignments to Kabul are for one year with multiple rest and recreation breaks, most U.S. staff spend approximately two months of their tour on leave. The report said that hinders their ability to develop expertise, hurts continuity, requires more people on the ground, and results in what one former ambassador called “an institutional lobotomy.’”

http://blog.taragana.com/politics/2010/03/05/report-vip-visitors-in-afghan-war-zone-are-just-one-challenge-to-struggling-civilian-surge-22171/



And then someone has to tell the mercs, er, sorry, the "contractors."


A simple trip to the dentist's office should not be this problematic.


Ship of fools comes to mind.



Just my dos centavos


robdogbucky
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hayu_lol Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Apr-20-10 12:57 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. 94% of; respondents?
Edited on Tue Apr-20-10 12:58 PM by hayu_lol
We need the other numbers: How many respondents were there and out of what total population?

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sat May 04th 2024, 02:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC