2007-08-26 12:17:28 · 9 answers · asked by Chi Guy 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Yes without a doubt.NATO forces are with too little.When the Taliban attacks they have to rely on air support.That air support isn't as accurate and causes more civilian casualties.Also America is giving ordinary Afghans the impression they will leave.Many Afghans fear the Taliban will take over when the West leaves which prevents lots of them choosing sides and really going for democracy.
2007-08-26 12:23:55 · answer #1 · answered by justgoodfolk 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
For at least 2 obvious reasons: 1. there are much fewer people in Afghanistan, so there aren't as many "enemies" to fight, and 2. Afghanistan is still very primitive, whereas Iraq was a fairly modern society. Since Afghanistan hardly has anything to lose, it's easier to argue that more troops would have a more beneficial effect there than in Iraq.
Truth is, we shouldn't be in Afghanistan or Iraq. The reason we're in Afghanistan is to build a natural gas pipeline through it and the reason we're in Iraq is because Saddam was starting to trade oil with the Euro rather than the dollar, which is a big no-no for American-backed tinpot dictators, which Saddam was in the Reagan days. We don't actually need to steal Iraq's oil. We just need to make sure it gets bought with American currency. It's pretty much the only thing keeping our economy alive at this point.
2007-08-26 19:28:15 · answer #2 · answered by pr0ph3t1cl1v1ty 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Possibly, but that is irrelevant at this point. Whether you agree or disagree with the initial decision to go to war with Iraq, we are there now. We cannot, as a civilized nation, just leave that country in turmoil. The amount of death and destruction will multiply tenfold and it will have effect here.
2007-08-26 19:24:06 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.
You need minimum of 300,000 troops in Afghanistan and 600,000 in Iraq to bring the order.
100,000 contingent (Soviet size) is too weak.
---
The truth about Afghan is explained by the man above: Unocal planned a pipeline from Turkmenistan to Pakistan.
Karzai was a local manager hired by Unocal; you can check his credentials on Google "Karzai Unocal".
2007-08-26 19:34:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
i'd say no. either way. it's not only a different reilgion but the culture is different from what we think. and very set in its ways.
A big reason for not going too iraq. we may have had a leg too stand on in the region had we stayd out of iraq.
2007-08-26 19:25:18 · answer #5 · answered by ball 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Absolutely.
2007-08-26 19:21:02 · answer #6 · answered by Vaughn 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No. The situations are different. When was the last time you visited the Grand Canton?
2007-08-26 19:37:44 · answer #7 · answered by vegaswoman 6 · 0⤊ 2⤋
im going to go with in afghanistan, i think alkaida is more a threat to the united states
2007-08-26 19:29:24 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
have you ever played whack-a-mole?
2007-08-26 19:48:21 · answer #9 · answered by amazed we've survived this l 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋