Essential Questions to Consider:
- How has policy differed in these three areas?
- Are there common principles applied, or is each a completely unique situation?
- What are the options being considered in each of these areas, and how do we move forward?
- What are the "tools" at the President's disposal?
Afghanistan
Eleven years into the war in Afghanistan, where do we stand? Have me made
progress since the 2008 Frontline Report? What advice would you give
the the President as to the course of action from this point forward (2012)?
Questions to Consider:
Who are we fighting?
What is our objective?
What is the role of Pakistan?
Obama's decision Making Process
We have discussed the role of the President as Commander in Chief, and the awesome weight of this responsibility. Read the articles from 2010, taking into account what we learned from Frontline's Forgotten War (2008). What options was President Obama presented with? Who were the people giving him this advice? How does he make his decision?
Readings All readings/videos located HERE
Obama's War Part 1 & 2
Obama Mulls Way Forward (video)
A Divided Team
Developing Stories. How/have the most recent setbacks reshaped policy?
Amid anger over Afghan killings, U.S. faces growing public weariness about war
Panetta in Afghanistan
More Stories on the Afghan War
Syria and Iran
The Arab Spring has demonstrated that there is no "One size fits all" approach to addressing conflicts. (Why) is the Syrian uprising different from Libya? What unique problems does it present for American diplomats?
We have discussed the increasingly tense situation with Iran. Explore the the possible paths President Obama has to take in addressing this issue. How do some of these options fit into the concepts of unilateralism and multilateralism?
61 comments:
Though on the surface identical, Syria and Libya have several significant differences that make US intervention in Syria considerably more difficult than the intervention in Libya.
Invading Syria, a longtime ally of China, Russia, and Iran, can cause an unpredictable chain of reactions with potentially devastating results. Therefore, aiding the revolution in Syria may in the long wrong cause more death and destruction than simply imposing economic sanctions. Since Syria also plays an influential role in the affairs of Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, and the rest of the Middle East, a failed revolution may also mean increased hostility towards Americans in the Middle East. The United States cannot fare well if the side it supports ends up failing; in fact, the United States may find itself with another Afghanistan.
Also, in one key area, Libya is significantly more important than Syria. Libya was located on a crossroads of oil trade, with vital oil reserves itself. Syria, on the other hand, has no positive economic interest to the United States. It can only be a burden, and can only cause trouble.
In Iran, a different situation exists. Iran as a nuclear power would mean one of the greatest failures of the regulators of modern society, and may lead to the deaths of millions of Israelis. Therefore it is vital that the United States and its allies prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. Fortunately, Israel has been active in this area, assassinating Iranian scientists and impeding Iranian progress. However, America will soon be faced with a decision. America knows that it cannot afford to unilaterally go to war against Iran, and therefore an American-only drive into the heart of Iran seems unlikely. Iran will not become Iraq.
Currently, the United States is participating in a multilateral effort of restraining Iran through economic sanctions. It is this multilateral approach that will most likely be used if the United States decides to commit its military to dealing with Iran. Israel would hopefully lead the charge, with the full force of the United Nations behind it. Hopefully, the aftermath of the invasion would not be another Afghanistan, or at least, not America’s problem.
The war in Afghanistan has shown to be a costly endeavor, taking a toll on the American public, the American military, and thousands of American soldiers. However, the fact remains that over 3000 Americans were killed in one day on September 11th, 2001. The perpetrators of that terrible act remain alive in their circles and cells, and continue to plot against the United States. Withdrawing American troops from Afghanistan too quickly invites Al Qaeda to launch vengeful attacks on the United States, and so American troops, for now, need to remain in Afghanistan.
President Obama inherited a mess in Afghanistan when he came into office. His military advisors were committed to asking for one thing and one thing only: more troops. There were no true alternatives presented, and no exit strategy presented. Although Vice President Joe Biden urged Obama not to get locked into another Vietnam, all Obama could accomplish was to send more troops into Afghanistan.
And now the fight against Al Qaeda and their benefactor, the Taliban, continues. The objective of fighting a war on terror has always been the guiding goal, but the details of the plan have been steadily deteriorating. Winning control from the Taliban was simple, but without a method to finish it off, America has its hands tied. Simple occupation of Afghanistan has proven to be ineffective. With the recent Koran burning and civilian massacre, maintaining a presence seems counterproductive. Recruiting international allies have led to NATO involvement in training Afghan troops, but more prominent, the loss of Pakistan as a real ally. Pakistan was helpful in the beginning, but now that the United States is showing signs of defeat and weariness, it has become more and more unhelpful in the war. Osama bin-Laden even managed to hide within a mile of a Pakistani military school without the Pakistani government informing the United States.
So without clear objectives, strong allies, and a real exit strategy, America seems to be down to just one feasible option. America needs to stay in Afghanistan, and try with utmost effort to kill terrorists, support the Afghan government, and be innovative in methods of combating hidden terrorists. Advances in military technology may save the day yet. If not, then time and effort will have to win the war. Afghanistan has been in battle for decades upon decades now, but who knows what the next few years will bring. The president needs to work on strengthening ties with regional leaders, attempting to placate the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, (forget winning hearts and minds, let’s just try to make them not pursue revenge) increasing international support for the region, and most of all, hunting down the remaining leaders that keep Al Qaeda alive. So long as this these goals are being pursued, the war will stay on the other side of the ocean, and hopefully never again will 3000 innocent Americans die in one day.
and this is the Afghanistan response
Afghanistan
The best advice for our president is to have the troops leave Afghanistan as soon as possible. The United States cannot win against the Taliban in Afghanistan. Our goals to eliminate the Taliban, secure an efficient government and win the war against terrorism cannot be won in this manner. No matter how many troops we send into Afghanistan it can’t be done. We saw this happen to the Soviets in the 80’s when they put half a million soldiers in Afghanistan and still had to pull out. Half of Obama’s administration believes that the United States should also evacuate whereas the other half believes we should stay in Afghanistan and finish the job. The point for this reasoning is for all of the complications associated with the Taliban and Afghanistan and Pakistan as well. The Taliban are an insurgent group trying to overthrow and replace the government in Afghanistan. Pakistan, a country with warheads, is caught in the middle between the U.S. and the Taliban. Pakistan, receiving aid from the U.S., helps the Taliban which are also putting pressure against Pakistan. The U.S. then has to decide whether to stay and help militarize the Afghan government so they can fight the Taliban themselves, which also puts ourselves at risk in engagement, or to remove ourselves from the picture and risk Taliban control over two countries. Yet to do the former is futile because all of those middle easterners do not want foreigners in their affairs. The Taliban certainly don’t like us. And the civilians and government are tired of the U.S. taking the bull by the horns. Our best bet is to remove ourselves from the whole equation. We’ve been in there for eleven years and have seen little to no progress overall.
Syria & Iran
Syria, similar to what had happened in Libya, is enduring political protesting and violent government retaliation against the civilians. In Libya’s case, the United Nations came in and assisted the protestors in overthrowing the government and their former leader Gaddafi. However, now the United States is faced with a similar issue but with a twist in Syria. Syria, may not be as easily assisted by the United States in their political upheaval due to their alliance with Iran. Iran, which is currently developing nuclear war power, has been in constant tension with Israel, United States ally. To assist the people of Syria in replacing the Syrian government would increase tensions between Iran and the United States. Right now, knowing that tensions are already high between Israel and Iran, the United States doesn’t want to risk war and create another conflict in the Middle East when we are already engaged in warfare with Afghanistan. If we were to engage in a confrontation with Iran we would hope for a multilateral approach with the UN backing the effort by using economic threats to the country in an effort to destabilize them. However if Israel and Iran were to engage in combat it would be most likely that the UN would not be involved. The U.S. would have to hope for Israel to lead most of the force in order to not be the major fighter in the ring.
Afghanistan
To truly win Afghanistan we must define our objective. The goal should be, to create a secure and stable Afghan state and a regional leader of democracy in action. In order to achieve this goal we must continue the presence of NATO troops in the region. President Obama has handicapped the American forces by refusing to listen to the advice of the military leaders in charge. I recommend that the president listen to the leaders and stick to the strategy that they are using. Further, we must change the daily lives of every Afghani. We must increase the amount of public works projects throughout the country. These projects will increase as the military forces decrease. Starting in the safest areas of the country and then moving toward the tribal regions an infrastructure must be built to create an economic engine for the entire country. Many of these early projects will be destroyed by the insurgents but they will then be rebuilt. Eventually, the projects will reach “critical mass” and people will begin to see the benefit of these projects. The people will then move farther away from the Taliban and more toward the Kabul government. The infrastructure projects in combination with the military counterinsurgency strategy will increase the safety and stability of the Afghan State. In addition we must create an Afghani government and police force that is well trained and able to fight for itself. Once US troops leave Afghanistan the Taliban will attempt move in and overthrow the country. We must continue to increase the number and quality of the Afghani National Police so that they can repel this future advance. The finish line in Afghanistan is in sight, we must cross it.
Syria/Iran
Syria is different to Libya because Syria is a regional power that has not acted out against the international community. The incidents in Syria are more representative of a Civil War rather than the rebellion that occurred in Lybia. Further, in Lybia NATO should have stayed out of the region and let the internal politics of the country decide what should occur. Now, there is an unstable nation in the most volatile region of the world. Syria requires the support of the entire UN or the results will be fruitless. Lybia was able to achieve the objective with just NATO support.
President Obama has taken a strong stance on Iran. The United States does not need or want a third war in the Middle East. It is unacceptable to the worldwide community for Iran to have a nuclear weapon. We must continue to take hard diplomatic action against Iran. When and if the time comes for military action the US must act swiftly in a supporting role as part of the International community to control the regime’s misuse of the most dangerous power known to man today. Israel sometime this spring or summer, probably after June when the toughest US sanctions go into place, will launch military strikes into the country. Israel has shown time and again that they are militarily competent. The US should protect strategic interests and launch and aerial campaign similar to Lybia but it must be other countries that supply the ground forces. The US will be prepared for the naval action but we must make an effort to stay out of the conflict. The US simply cannot afford monetarily and through human lives a third long-term conflict in the Middle East.
Kaitlyn Gaudio
If we leave Afghanistan now, that decision could jeopardize everything our country has done for the war on terror. If we remove all of our troops, Al Qaeda could easily take advantage of the new weak government, and plan future attacks against the United States. It is imperative that we don't leave until the new afghan government can support itself and protect themselves from Al Qaeda. If we were out of Afghanistan and Al Qaeda were able to plan attacks that they were able to execute, what have the last ten years meant? All of the soldiers who have been killed, all of the money spent on the war, everything would mean nothing. We can't just bring home all the troops and jeopardize homeland security. However I do think that the way we are fighting this war isn't right. This isn't a war where the enemy is identified. These terrorists blend in with the Afghani people and will do unconventional warfare like use roadside bombs to kill our troops. We need to be using the counter insurgency type of military action. Small elite teams should be going into small villages, do reconnaissance and infiltrate Al Qaeda base camps. Our troops driving around are just looking to get injured or killed because they have no way of differentiating the enemy from the normal civilians.
Afghanistan
The war in Afghanistan has continued on for far, far too long. It is clear that in the eleven years we have been there not much progress, if any at that, has been made. The Taliban are a difficult enemy to fight despite their mid-20th century technology. They are incredibly accustomed to their territory and have a greater advantage over the US soldiers on the battlefield because of this. If our intent is to protect the Afghani citizens and remain in there to help rebuild the government, we must start doing so instead of just remaining as a military presence. As seen in the video, most Afghanis do not want the United States in their country. They either despise us, or are afraid of us because the Taliban threaten them. If we do not create a more strategized and effective plan of action in dealing with Afghanistan, and within the next couple months at most, we need to get out. Everything we have done to try and help has failed or made no difference. The roads we build and projects created are destroyed by the insurgents. Americans are dying for a war that is making no progress and will continue on for years and years. Lives are at stake each and every day. We must come to terms with what is best for America and what is a lost cause.
Syria/Iran
The internal conflicts of Syria and Libya seem to be very similar on the surface but underneath, subtle differences can be seen. In the case of Libya, it is a large oil trading country in the center of the oil-trading Middle East. It is imperative to the United States and the rest of the world. Military action was taken to prevent devastating effects on the world’s economy. In the case of Syria, it is more complicated than simply interfering to stop the rebellions and government massacres. Syria is an ally with many powerful nations that pose a threat to the United States, such as Iran with its nuclear program. Sending military support to aid the Syrian citizens could be seen as an issue to the Iranian government, who we also need to make some decisions about. The Israel-Iran conflict has gone on for far too long and the United States needs to take a side. With Israel threatening to act soon before its “too late” and Iran threatening to bombard the international harbor with mines that would pull the oil industry to a near halt and kill the economy, something clearly needs to be done. We could use Iran’s nuclear program as an excuse to enter the country and put these shenanigans to a stop. Or use missiles like we talked about in class to rid them of their navy and lower the threat. But anyways, it is obvious that steps need to be taken to deal with this topic as it has been a national issue for decades.
It is clearly time that we begin exiting from Afghanistan. Day by day, more and more Afghans turn against Americans, and pick up arms and fight them so that they may leave their land. What we are doing in Afghanistan has good intentions, but we do not have the man power, nor the support to help our cause. There is good being done in Afghanistan, hospitals, roads, and other projects are being completed. However, we should not focus on building another country when we should be focusing on our own. It is no question that the Afghani government will fall after we leave, and the only way to change their fate is to increase the amount of troops stationed in Afghanistan. If we did this, more Afghans would turn against Americans, and more Americans would die. Afghanistan is not worth the lives of American Soldiers.
Syria and Libya only differ in the fact that Syria is an even worse situation than Libya was. The death toll in Syria rises day by day by an even more oppressive and murderous regime. Obama already attacked Libya, setting a precedence. I opposed conflict in Libya, but after we attacked, I find it difficult to not support attacking an even worse regime in Syria. Both situations are extremely similar, and I believe that either you attack both, or do not attack either. Obama already attacked Libya, so I believe that he must use airpower against Syria as well.
Iran is an extremely interesting situation. Israel is one of our lone allies in the Middle East and I believe that we support them at all costs. Obama has stated time and time again that he wants multilateral solutions, and this is one area where he can use it. I believe Obama should band with the likes of Israel, Great Britain, France, and Germany and pose economic sanctions on Iran. That would make creating weapons of Mass destruction significantly harder, and could allow for peace through negotiations, just like Obama wanted. Each situation in the Middle East presents a particularly challenging task, but each could be solved.
Afghanistan
I think I would advise Obama to play hardball with Karzai. It has been years, and I think it is the only way. He is a puppet seeing as the election was so corrupt. We should let him know that there is a line that he can’t cross and there is just so much that we will put up with. We need to remind him that he needs us.
The Afghans are in between wanting us and not wanting us there. Afghanistan is a tribal society, and the tribal leaders really run the country. We need to stop trying to make it a democracy and recruit the tribal elders that really count. We want stability so we need to find the people that can really put the Taliban out of business. We need to find the people that can… it isn’t us…it is the tribal elders. So what we need to do is to create a situation that the tribal leaders see as beneficial to them to make the Taliban disappear. We are not going to change their 2,000ish years old society. It is the Taliban we want gone. Let the Afghans run their stuff. The tribal leaders and the ones with money will be the ones to eventually get rid of the Taliban.
It is clear that active duty is taking a serious toll on many of our soldiers. Sadly I think that a lot of their dedication to our country is going without true success. It seems that with every few steps forward we somehow end up taking one back. We need to do the best we can and I think this advice will put us in the right direction moving forward.
Syria and Iran
Syria is different than Libya because it is militarily more complex. Because of Syria’s connection with Iran, the United States cannot use the same tactics that it did in Libya. There is too much uncertainty in Syria already to have an end result like the one in Libya. If we send troops into Syria, Iran could take major issue with it. We don’t need to possibly start another war in the Middle East.
And, clearly, we need to really think about Iran. The Israel-Iran conflict is getting out of control. We need to intervene and choose a side to prevent a major fall out. But, more importantly the issue is the nuclear weapons. NO ONE wants a rogue state to have nuclear weapons. There are huge economic sanctions on them, which is positive I think. The military option is a huge deal involving a lot of bombing. Unilaterally means we do it by ourselves of Israel does. Multilaterally, which I think is the best approach, is to get other nations of the world to put sanctions on Iran and isolate them and therefore forcing an end to the issue.
Rachael Robitaille
Afghanistan
While the most recent events in the War On Terror are unfortunate, both were isolated mistakes that should not and will not define our role in Afghanistan or the war. If we give up now, what message does this give to the insurgents, or even the Afghani people? That just when we have our own domestic problems, suddenly we quit? Our objective was to stay in Afghanistan to set up a stable autonomy in the form of their government. It is quite evident that there are many obstacles that have kept us from achieving this goal, and there will continue to be. However, if we back out now, not only do we hypocritically retract our long-standing principle of not negotiating with terrorists, we let thousands of people wishing for the simple luxury of peace down. Added to this, we put our own nation in jeopardy. Pulling out prematurely could subject the United States to numerous terrorist attacks. Fighting for justice on our soil would be much less popular among the public than fighting on foreign soil. I do not believe hope is lost, and that whatever progress, no matter how minimal, that has been made since 2008 should not be devalued and forgotten. Pakistan’s role in the war has been helpful, but I believe that more should be done by Pakistan to aid in our efforts. President Obama looks to the generals and other key figures involved in the war to give him options, but in the end it is truly his decision as to what he thinks would best benefit the nation. General Petraeus in particular has been campaigning to Obama to deploy more troops, which Obama is in strong disfavor of. He is frustrated with his “divided team” and the numerous conflicting opinions that accompany it. The military advocated for him to deploy 40,000 more troops, but President Obama was strong in his position and deployed 30,000 instead. Biden stated that the number of troops did not matter, but rather it was the strategy. In the end, I agree with the vice president’s view. Only terrific strategizing will defeat Al Qaeda’s unconventional warfare and suicide bombings. This strategizing will obviously only prevail if the troops are kept in Afghanistan in order to complete the mission successfully.
Iran/Syria
The violence occurring in Syria is similar to that of Libya this past year, on the grounds that the government’s stability is decreasing exponentially. The difference between these two dysfunctional nations is the Syria’s alliance with Iran, which could pose as a dangerous situation for the United States. When dealing with Syria, American diplomats need to be careful to not create unnecessary tension. The characteristics of the Syrian outbreaks are much more indicative of a civil war rather than insurgent uprising. Israel’s threats weigh heavily against Iran’s copious supply of nuclear weaponry. If the United States were to invade Syria, a nation in which would spark no interest otherwise, there could quite possibly be a devastating war. In the end, it comes down to an issue of sticking with our allies or putting our nation first and foremost. I would advise Obama to get other allies involved before making a decision resting solely on the actions of only one. Escalating tensions are providing extremely unusual circumstances, but it should be a decision that Obama can make, rather than a situation where we are forced to comply. Unilateralism is what Obama has been leaning towards in his presidency. Acting alone on this issue would cost an ally, but could potentially save a deteriorating situation between the United States and Iran. Multilateralism is another option, which could include working with numerous other nations to cease the conflict along with Israel. Whatever his decision may turn out to be, it should and will be justifiable and made with extreme caution. It is not just the safety of the United States that is riding on it, but the safety of the world.
AFGHANISTAN
Obviously things aren’t going so fantastic in Afghanistan. Case and point: the recent rogue American soldier who went on a shooting rampage of civilians. Although he is a most likely mentally unbalanced individual, this is just a testament to the point people in our armed services over there are being pushed to. This is the longest conflict in the United States military history, and some may consider it one of the most unsuccessful. In many ways it parallels what happened in Vietnam: a war no one wanted that went on forever and ended badly, and involved many humanitarian crimes.
We definitely have not made any progress since 2008. It seemed as though things were going pretty well when the war first began, but since then the situation has deteriorated. The truth is, the Taliban will never give up, because although we have the greater number of forces and the fancier weapons, they are still fighting because of their strong and deep-seated religious beliefs which our forces are lacking. To put it simply, the hearts of our troops are not in it, and the opponents hearts are. The Taliban is playing a sit-and-wait game; they retreat into their caves when our forces come around, and when they leave they destroy all the work America has done and reclaim their control. While our goal is to get rid of the Taliban and stabilize Afghanistan, this cannot be accomplished if we continue with the approach we have been using over the past few years.
When it comes down to it, America just doesn’t understand Afghanistan and it probably never will. Look at the Revolutionary War: it seemed like the colonies had no shot at winning: they were under-equipped and severely lacking manpower. However, the British did not know the terrain of America, nor did they have a vested interest in the situation, they had bigger problems. Well now the tables have turned and America is Great Britain and Afghanistan is a psychotic version of the colonies. I would recommend to Obama that he have some serious negotiations with Karzai and get him to deal with the problem once and for all: solve the problem in Afghanistan with people that know Afghanistan. Nothing else will work at this point.
SYRIA & IRAN
The Libyan uprising was a crazy bloody mess, with an all out assault on Qaddafi that was supported by the UN. Anti-government rebels turned it into a major bloodshed. Syria has also had its fair share in violence over the past year. It seems that like with the Libyan uprising, foreign intervention may be necessary to put down the ruthless government. However, in the Syrian conflict, many civilians are at risk of getting caught up in the middle of the conflict and losing their lives. Also, the regime in Syria is far more oppressive to its people and the death counts are mounting rapidly. Syria’s superpower allies are Russia and China. US diplomats should focus on negotiating with them to to convince Syria’s regime to step down, which is a much safer option than direct US intervention, which could cause a flare-up with Iran.
Which brings us to the testy situation with Iran. Economic sanctions have been placed on Iran, to encourage them to stop with the nuclear weapons nonsense. The US has enlisted many other nations who are concerned about the situation to help enforce these sanctions. This qualifies as a multilateral approach to foreign diplomacy, since many countries are getting together, so their efforts can be more effective. Obama has made it clear that military action is the last thing he wants to engage in, but will do so if necessary. He has instead made many public accusations against Iran, all of which Iran has denied. So this probably is making Iran mad at America, so Obama should try to find a way to have peaceful and less accusatory negotiations.
Mike Thomas
P5
The issue of Afghanistan has been a controversial topic for many around the country. Although we all may not see eye to eye on our involvement in the country of Afghanistan, we must understand that in order for the past several years to have an impact and mean anything to our objective, we must maintain military presence and continue our efforts to make a secure and safe state in Afghanistan. We can accomplish this goal by increasing the National government of Afghanistan and continue to work with their nations police organization to train and prepare them for the many battles they may face with the Tailban. In order for the US to decrease troops over in the areas of Afghanistan, we need the government of theirs to continue our work once we are no longer there to train and advise. We need to help the country develop and maintain a secure economic state by continuing to work to put democracy into effect. With so many of the top brass in the military urging President Obama to take action, he needs to understand the importance of these plans and listen to the advice being given. As a nation we need to continue to offer support to the country of Afghanistan until the objective is complete.
The issue of Syria significantly differs from that of Libya because of the type of action taken. In Libya, the civil unrest that occurred was able to be controlled and was just an act of outrage towards there conditions in a rebellion form. In Syria there is a civil war in an unstable region of the war that requires support of international communities.
The issue of Iran is one that President Obama made quite evident that the United States does not need a third conflict on our hands at this time. It is also important for us to take the stance that Iran must not maintain nuclear weapon power. We need to remain close allies with Israel and take military action if required to protect the security of the world.
Afghanistan:
President Karzai has recently made clear to the United States that he wishes us to remove troops as soon as possible, especially in light of the recent shooting and Qur'an burnings. This is obviously a difficult decision to make for the United States; do we “give up now”?; or, do we keep going and finish strong? The issue is that we don’t want to slink away having “lost” the war, but if we keep going we may be fighting a futile war and keep digging deeper into a ditch that is already quite deep. In my opinion, our surge of troops was inefficient, and for it to have really worked much more troops should have been sent. Our efforts to “win the hearts and minds of the Afghans” did not work out; in fact, most of the people of Afghanistan want us to leave their country, as we make the violence from the Taliban even worse. My worry is that our attacks are creating unnecessary violence in Afghanistan, and that this war may become the new Vietnam. But, I also realize that the government of Afghanistan will most likely be unstable without the help of the U.S. Each country deserves their autonomy, but the situation in Afghanistan is so unstable that this may not be possible. We should pull out of Afghanistan as quickly as we can to respect the rights and safety of the Afghan people, as well as the sovereignty of the country.
Iran/Syria:
While the United States was able to intervene in the conflict with Libya, we have been debating the possibility of interfering in Syria quite heatedly. The fact is, the conflicts are different. While both countries are experiencing similar conflict, Syria would be much more difficult to intervene in for our country. We simply do not have the resources to become involved in this conflict at this time. Civilian deaths at the hands of American soldiers is sometimes the price to pay, but in Syria (vs. Libya), these deaths would be one more thing on top of the difficulty of actually becoming involved in such an international and tactically difficult war. President Obama has to also consider the tense situation with Iran when it comes to the Syrian conflict. If we take the tactic of unilateralism, the U.S. will have to fight this war on our own, which would be militarily detrimental as well as alienating. If we go with mulitlateralism, though, we will get other countries to have too much of a stake in the situation. In reality though, many countries do have a stake, especially with the threat of nuclear weapons, so this is probably the best choice.
Courtney McQuade Period 8: PART 1
AFGHANISTAN:
I think that the U.S. needs to adopt one of the following options in regards to the war in Afghanistan:
Option A: We leave Afghanistan altogether. We cannot afford to stay in a country that doesn’t want us there and fighting a war that is going nowhere in either direction. It is not worth sacrificing the lives of thousands of U.S. soldiers to avenge a terrorist group for killing 3000 innocent Americans back in 2001. Yes, it was terrible that those innocent people died at the hands of ill-informed, brainwashed terrorists who are filled with pointless anger and superficial knowledge, however, is any justice being served by sending more innocent U.S. citizens to die too? Of course we all wanted revenge in 2001, and at heart, many of us still do, but now that we have been in Afghanistan for a little over 10 years, we must step back and realize, from a statistical and pragmatic standpoint, that we are not winning this war. By trying to seek revenge on terrorists, we have only caused the death of more innocent Americans and have inflicted only minimal change in the country of Afghanistan. Is such a small change worth such a high price?
Option B: We recruit many many more ally forces. If we are to make any real progress in Afghanistan, we will need allies. We need to put more pressure on Al Qaeda and the Taliban, we need to exert such pressure on them that it will be undeniable and eventually crush them. The only reason these people are neck and neck with us is because of their numbers and their dedication. Our weaponry is much more advanced than theirs, but we simply do not have the numbers to seriously intimidate or defeat them. Although it would be an ideal victory to engage the support of several powerful allies to fight forces in Afghanistan, it is not necessarily realistic. Understandably, other powerful countries that are currently uninvolved or minimally involved are just not going to be willing to involve themselves (at least not if they are smart and pragmatic), especially after seeing what the United States has gone through for such little progress. But, in an ideal world, if we could gather up thousands of allied troops to fight with us, we should take a course of action similar to what we did to defeat the Nazis back in World War II. We should push the Taliban back until they are isolated in a small, condensed area, and then go in for the kill, using high-level bombs to deplete their numbers. Of course we would have to be strong allies with all surrounding countries (including Pakistan) for this to be successful. And even then, there is still a major difference between the Nazis and the Taliban that would most likely render this impossible, and that is that the Taliban does not operate as one, typical army style body; but rather, it has many smaller groups that are splintered all over the place in that area. This would make it nearly impossible to isolate them.
AFGHANISTAN
As of right now it is indisputable that we have had little progress in Afghanistan since the conflict arose over a decade ago. As the soldier in the video said, every step forward is followed by five steps backwards. The fact of the matter is this is simply a conflict the Americans aren’t going to win. The Taliban is fighting an unconventional war, shooting and running, initiating fear in the Afghan citizens, and we don’t have the crucial support of the people of the country. As long as we are on their turf, fighting against their people with out their support, our attempts are futile. One of the biggest problems with the war is the setting.
A large portion of the Afghan region is blanketed with mountains, making it the perfect place for insurgents and militants to hide and attack. So long as we continue to deploy conventional tactics, our advance weaponry will never out power their soviet era ones.
Our biggest Achilles heel however, is the Afghan people. We took on a task to “win the hearts and minds” of the people much like we had planned to in Vietnam and the results have been similar. Regardless of whether the Taliban wants to improve the country or not, they are still their people and we will forever be the intruders. A large population of Afghan citizens in the outskirts of the country have no access to the media. As far as they are concerned, we are just a bunch of foreign men walking around with large guns and a tendency to shoot at them when they gather in a group. The recent Koran burnings and the shooting rampage of the American soldier definitely didn’t help with that either. The tensions have risen exponentially in the recent weeks and President Karzai as well as the people of Afghanistan have called on the United States to leave them be.
There isn’t a more obvious indicator than that that whatever we had hoped to accomplish is only a dream now. If we continue the war, not only will we be fighting the Taliban, but we will also be fighting the rest of the country as well. We need to get out before our relations with Afghanistan gets worse and we suffer more unwarranted losses.
SYRIA & IRAN
The Arab spring has taken hold of numerous countries in the Arab region, from Egypt to Libya, and Syria is he last one still going. The Libya uprising saw a huge number of deaths and left a blooding path behind it. Unlike Libya however, Syria has support from strong allies such as Russia and China. If we are careless in the way we decide to handle that situation, we will only be provoking a larger conflict that will inevitably be harmful for everyone. At this point, the only real logical angle to approach it would be to negotiate not only with Syria itself but with its allies as well. Keep everyone happy and avoid problematic tension.
In respect to Iran, we need to avoid any military intervention. We’ve already expended far too many resources in wars in other parts of the region and engaging in a third one would just be stupid. I agree that allowing Iran to acquire nuclear weapons is incredibly dangerous for its neighbors and us but provoking them with force will only bring us closer to that point. Diplomatic solutions is the best way to go on this one. We need to express our concern while at the same time pushing other countries to do the same. If Iran sees the force against them, they will have no choice but to surrender peacefully.
Courtney McQuade: PART 2:
Completely unrealistic option, C: This us totally implausible in the world we live in now, but if the Taliban were an easy group to isolate, and they were completely separate from Pakistan, I would say we (the U.S. and those idealistic allies I was mentioning previously) should isolate the Taliban into a remote area, and then desert them completely, ignoring them until they give up and have no resources left. They would have no one to preach their ideas to and eventually they would get bored of not fighting anyone and give up their cause. Everyone would forget about them and move on with their lives. Of course this would only work if a number of factors that are not and never will be true, were true; factors like technology (the Taliban would have to have no access to cell phones or other communication).
All in all, I think we should abandon our efforts in Afghanistan just like we did a few decades past in Vietnam. Back then we were worried what the communists would do if we left, but in the end we knew we had to go. And what did the communists do? Nothing. Perhaps we will get lucky again and the Taliban will take over Afghanistan and call it a day, just as the communists did in Vietnam.
SYRIA AND IRAN:
In the case of Syria, the U.S. has another problem, sort of a source of internal conflict for us right now. The naïve and idealistic part of the United States wishes to help the Syrian population that is undeniably suffering a great deal as a result of their current government, but becoming involved in this civil war poses too many risks to the United States. This would end up like another Vietnam/Afghanistan situation all over again, and that is exactly what the United States doesn’t need. Add to that the threat of Iran and you got yourself another reason the United States should stay away from Syria, despite the suffering going on there. The U.S. has no interests to protect there, besides peace in the Middle East, which has been a lost cause for many years now, and our involvement there only poses bad outcomes for us. It is time to be selfish and leave Syria to the Syrians to right as a civil war. Iran hates us enough and is already a growing threat towards us each and every day, lets not give them another reason to further develop nuclear weapons to threaten us with, and possible use against us in the future.
Afghanistan
It seems that after years and years of fighting, not much is being accomplished in Afghanistan. High tensions have recently developed, and since the Frontline Report from 2008, there has not been a great improvement in relations between the United States and Afghanistan. It appears that America stands as a country trying to leave the conflict, which is obviously not an easy task to accomplish. There is so much that has to be done in order to smoothly exit the fighting. If I were an advisor to the President on this issue, I would strongly recommend removing troops in large numbers at a time while sending in diplomats to discuss the situation. It does not seem possible for anything to occur between the two armies that will end well. After all these years, the situation has possibly worsened between the two nations, and no matter what each side does, the fighting will only cause more problems to occur. It truly is a tough position as President, having to decide how to solve tough conflicts such as this, yet hopefully in the next few years, improvements in the foreign relations with Afghanistan will occur. It is a shame for all of this fighting to have to go on for this long period of time.
Syria and Iran
With the Arab Spring occurring last year, it seems that there were many different types of rebellions that occurred. Compared to Libya, those in power in Syria seem to be causing more deaths to occur so that the country will be out of conflict once more. With many civilian deaths taking place, a huge problem is evident. American diplomats have much to deal with as a result. When trying to negotiate with Syria, it proves extremely difficult as the government forces continue to act on their own. Obviously, diplomats do not have much say in what the Syrian government is doing, which makes the situation even more difficult.
In Iran, it is also a tough situation to deal with as the nuclear weapons debate arises once again. Not wanting to have Israel as an enemy, the President cannot do too much in order to make amends with Iran. One possible way to improve the situation is to negotiate regarding the nuclear weapons. Since this is one of the most pressing issues in the Middle East today, Obama must work to decrease the number of these weapons. This could employ unilateralism, as the United States would be talking strictly with Iran in order lessen the number of nuclear weapons in each nation. Additionally, the President needs to work with Israel and Iran together in order to improve relations between the two nations since there is great pressure at the moment. This would be using multilateralism with various countries having discussions about the situation. This will be tough to do, yet there is hope for more peace in the world in the future.
Afghanistan:
The war in Afghanistan has largely evolved into a catch 22. We can either pull all of our troops out of the country, only to watch it be consumed by instability as its government breaks down, or surge the number of troops in the country, further isolating our troops from the people of the country, again making the war impossible to truly win. This is in a large part due to the nature of the objectives of the war. With such vague goals for the initial invasion of Afghanistan, it's fair to say that subjectively any goal could be determined for the war. Because of this, America is stuck between a rock and a hard place, seeing as either option for Afghanistan has a negative outcome.
Syria and Iran:
The Arab Spring was supposed to be a large movement of peaceful protest that ultimately culminated in the establishment of more representative governments in the Middle East. It seems that this hope for peaceful protest has gone forgotten however, seeing the heinous actions being taken upon civilians in Syria. Even worse there is little the U.S. government can actually do, apart from condemning the acts being committed. Negotiation then, proves to be very ineffective.
Iran poses a different, but difficult problem as well. Since the U.S. largely supports the Israeli nation with various forms of military hardware, not to mention our strong diplomatic ties. A unilateral action would probably be more effective than any multilateral one, seeing that multiple UN resolutions have been made in order to stop Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons and most have been largely ignored. The U.S. has a strong edge on Iran when it comes to military might, and through a combination of military and economic pressure may be able to force Iran into halting its weapons programs, allowing both countries to save face.
1) This war has continued far too long and these past eleven years much progress has not been made. In fact, some worry that the conflict in Afghanistan may become the “new Vietnam”. Every day, more and more Afghans turn against Americans, picking up arms and fighting them so we will leave their land. These Afghanis either despise us, or are afraid of us because the Taliban threaten them. Even President Karzai has recently made clear to the United States that he wishes us to remove troops as soon as possible .If our intent is to protect the Afghani citizens and remain in there to help rebuild the government, we must start doing so instead of just remaining as a military presence. And since they do not want us there, wouldn’t we be doing them the most by leaving their land? Obviously, America has good intentions however, this military conflict has gotten out of hand and we do not have enough help to support our cause. Yet, do we give in now after all this time and energy? Or do we continue and fight on? Without the United States the government of Afghanistan will be unstable; on the other hand, we have not “won the hearts and minds of the Afghani people,” in fact we should respect the rights and safety of the Afghan people, as well as the sovereignty of the country. But most of all, the Taliban are a difficult enemy to fight against with a great advantage over United States soldiers being on their home front and all the roads we build are projects created are destroyed by insurgents. The real question is: Is this all worth the lives of our American soldiers?
2) Iran is an extremely interesting situation. Israel is one of our lone allies in the Middle East and I believe that we support them at all costs. Obama has stated time and time again that he wants multilateral solutions, and this is one area where he can use it. I believe Obama should band with the likes of Israel, Great Britain, France, and Germany and pose economic sanctions on Iran. That would make creating weapons of Mass destruction significantly harder, and could allow for peace through negotiations, just like Obama wanted. Each situation in the Middle East presents a particularly challenging task, but each could be solved. The dilemma is that Syria may be more difficult to assist for the United States because of our alliance with Iran. If we were to assist the people of Syria in replacing the government, tensions would for sure increase between Iran and the United States. Is preventing increased tensions and another conflict in the Middle East worth the lives of civilians? In my personal belief, I would not be able to live with myself if I knew I had the power in my hands to help people that needed it and I could help save them. Yet, the president cannot always make decisions based upon these reasonings, rather he must do what is right for our nation. And in this circumstance, what I think is right is to not become in Syria as of now. However, as circumstances change I think the president will need to relook at this issue.
-Megan McGrath
Matt Mendonca Period 6
Afghanistan
The United States has been involved in the War on Terror in Afghanistan for just over 10 years now and even after all this time it’s hard to determine where we stand as a country on this matter. President Obama had an abundance of problems handed to him when he took office. The American public is made up of millions of people all with contradicting views and opinions of what path the United States should now take. It is such decisions that can prove either lethal or extremely beneficial for our nation. This becomes a great responsibility and burden on the President who wants to succeed in the impossible task of pleasing everyone’s ideas. Simultaneously, the President wants to make the right decisions that end well for our country. Unfortunately, the President cannot see the future, and therefore can’t tell which decisions will end in this result, which is why every decision in this war is a risk. At this point there are two options that the President has. These options are either to begin withdrawing troops or to leave the current troops in Afghanistan to stabilize the region with the possibility of having to send even more troops in. When weighing out the positives and negatives of each situation, the withdraw of troops seems to be the more intelligent answer. The most difficult problem we are faced with is that we are fighting an undefined enemy. Sure, we have killed some terrorist leaders, among them, Osama Bin Laden, however for every Taliban leader we kill, there will always be one to replace the spot. The enemy isn’t just in plain sight too. They hide where we can’t find and kill them easily because this is their region and we don’t know the playing field. They will always have a one up on our troops because we are fighting a war in a foreign country. Another reason is that the Afghan people don’t want us there and they aren’t afraid to say it. Whether the people are in terrorist organizations or not it is undeniable that there is a common hatred for Americans. We even see it in the video, where groups form and chant for the death of America. Events such as the Koran burnings and the American troop killing the innocent villagers also doesn’t help in this area. This only makes people that didn’t like us before now despise us and make them possible recruits for the Taliban. Revenge is very prevalent in Afghanistan and for instances like these we may have our Soldiers shot by random people in return. Basically, we aren’t going to win a war in which the enemy is nameless and great in numbers. What we need is a government strict enough there to take care of these people themselves rather than our soldiers. However, this task is nearly impossible and after 10 years hasn’t been completed yet, so why will it any time soon? Of course, the removal of troops and ending the search for these Taliban and terrorist leaders will make us vulnerable in the event that they gather and plot an attack on the United States again like 9/11. However, in that case we must do all we can to prepare for the worst and stop becoming an enemy target in the meantime.
Matt Mendonca Period 6
Syria/Iran
Syria is a very touchy subject, seeing as if the United States was to get involved, it could prove very dangerous to our nation. There are some general similarities between the issues of Syria and Libya, however when we take a closer look at the specific distinguishing factors, we can then see the dangers our own country may face. Syria, alike Libya is dealing with internal conflicts of political protest against the government who is brutally stepping down with retaliation. The struggling citizens of Libya however, were assisted by the United Nations, who aided in the downfall of the corrupt leader Muammar Gaddafi. This is the difference between the issue that is currently present in Syria. Unlike the help that was given to Libya, it is a large scale risk for the United States to try and aid Syria with its own problems. These restrictions on aiding Syria are strictly due to the tightening tensions between the United States and Iran, a nation that is an affiliate of Syria. Iran is currently of the United States top priorities because they are in the process of developing new nuclear weapons and because Iran is an enemy of Israel, an ally of the United States. Currently if we were to aid Syria, it would most likely force the breaking point and potentially lead to a new World War between all four countries and possibly more that would join in. This is what the United States is highly skeptical of and something we cannot risk due to the fact that we are currently in a war in Afghanistan. It seems as though for now Syria will have to fend for itself and will lack the help of the United States. We do not need to form any new enemies than we already have and we need to just keep Iran at bay and do everything we can to prevent them from launching a nuclear strike that will mark the beginning of a new and deadly world war.
Bella Guo
Syria, Libya, and Afghanistan are all unique, troubled countries that cannot be dealt with the same way. For example, even though it is morally right to crush the government in both Syria and Libya, Syria is not as simple as Libya, nor are there any benefits to helping Syria. Syria has powerful allies that could potentially lead to a cold war like struggle. In the end, all we would get out of helping Syria is the moral upper hand. Afghanistan is another case, because there is no capital to attack, so our strategy must also be different there.
In Libya, we could have (and did) help the rebels gain the upper hand. In Syria, however, the government's (and it's allies') forces are strong enough that we will not be able to easily defeat them. Even though it is important to act morally and help those in need, the US can only do so many things, and therefore, President Obama shouldn't do anything about Syria because American lives and American money will be used to fuel this conflict, and we really can't afford to spread ourselves out this thin.
Iran is a bit more troublesome, seeing as we might not be the ones who decide if we are involved in this conflict or not, especially if Israel decides to act. While acting unilaterally to stop Iran from becoming a nuclear power is an option, it is unlikely, seeing as we are already imposing economic sanctions multilaterally. In addition, we really have to motive to attack Iran by ourselves, unless they're really close to developing or have developed a nuclear weapon. A far more likely scenario is that either the UN will choose to act against Iran or Israel will act. I believe Obama shouldn't act unless provoked (or Israel/the UN decides to act), because our technologies are advanced enough (hopefully) that we can cause them far more damage than they can cause us in a short amount of time.
Part 1 of 2
Bella Guo
Afghanistan is a different situation again, compared to Syria and Iran, because in this case, we're not fighting an organized military force, we're fighting an enemy that we can't really see most of the time. Half the battle with Afghanistan is finding the enemy. We're supposed to be fighting with the government and the people, but not much has been done to accomplish that goal. In order to create a successful democracy in Afghanistan, we must win the hearts and minds, as has been said many times before. The issue right now is that joining the Taliban is a more attractive option than helping the US government, because the Taliban will kill anyone that helps the US. Pakistan is another force that's supposedly the US's ally. This has also not worked well in the past because Pakistan is more focused around not getting itself killed while getting aid from America. In addition, Pakistan is either unable or unwilling (or both) to stop Taliban members from crossing the border into Pakistan and seeking refuge there. The fact that we're not allowed to send troops and vital supplies through Pakistan isn't helping either. If Pakistan were to completely side with the Taliban, any hope we have of winning is essentially lost, because we don't have the troops, money, nor means of fighting a lengthy conflict around the world. However, if Pakistan were to side with the US, then the US's chances are significantly improved.
Obama was faced with two options when he entered office. He could either send more troops in, or he could pull out of Afghanistan entirely. More troops were sent, because Afghanistan, to Obama, at least, is important enough for the US to send money and lives over. However, I believe that we should have pulled out a long time ago, when we realized that traditional war tactics wouldn't work with the Taliban. Our experiences with the Vietnam War should have warned us, and we could have escaped this costly conflict. We really haven't moved forward since the 2008 report, so instead of committing more effort to an obviously fruitless task, we should concentrate on more pressing matters that will actually help America, which will in turn allow us to help more countries as our economy improves. Even though the idea of helping Afghans help themselves is great, it's most likely not going to work, because the Taliban will just counter what ever we attempt. Even if the Afghan forces are trained and citizens are recruited into improving the country's infrastructure, the Taliban will just destroy everything (bribe and blackmail a couple generals, blow up a couple bridges and roads) once the US pulls out.
Even though it is very important to not to be an isolationist country, we really can't afford to go dashing around and getting involved in other people's problems. Our military is no where near the size it used to be, so we can't expect to throw a couple men over there and win a war anymore. Therefore, we need to redress our priorities and make sure that America, not a Middle Eastern country, is put first.
Part 2 of 2
Afghanistan
It is clear that the United States will need to remove all military troops from Afghanistan by the set year of 2014. However the United States should follow the current plan that has been set and not yield to the pressure of the Afghan government. The term limit for the Presidency of Afghanistan is two five-year terms. President Hamid Karzai was elected into office on December 7th of 2004. He will leave the office in the year 2014 which is also the year the United States plans to withdraw all troops from the country. The current disagreement between the Afghanistan and United States government might not last into the next Afghan presidency. Hopefully the next administration will be an American friendly one. The recent issues in the region including the Koran burning and the civilian killings by a American soldier has soured and tensed the Afghan government towards United States military.
These events seemed to have given Karzai even more reasons to demand an earlier retreat of American troops from his country, an option that will have a different set of consequences than the current time plan. President Obama’s advisors regarding the war did not provide clear and viable plans that the president wanted to consider. Only variations of the addition of 40,000 troops; the plans that were created did not fit the president’s personal goal for ending the conflict. From the 2008 Frontline documentary it is clear that the majority of the Afghan civilians and villagers do not help American troops for fear of retaliation by the Taliban. The goal of ‘winning the hearts and minds’ will most likely not occur given the current warzone environment. The United States should pull troops out of the most violent areas and start to regroup in the military bases. It is apparent that the Taliban fighters know the mountainous region more than the troops given that it is their homeland. Cooperation is needed with the Afghan government to prevent secret and backdoor planning with the Taliban organization. The concept of sovereignty should be applied to Afghanistan given that the government clearly wants American troops to leave as soon as possible. The war in Afghanistan will be a loss for the United States. There is no viable reason to prolong the end of the conflict regardless of reputation as a nation. The loss of lives is not, and never will be, equal to salvaging the military’s standing.
Syria and Iran
The situation that is currently plaguing the nation of Syria is different than the revolution in Libya. President Bashar al-Assad has the support of both the Russian and Chinese government. The United Nation’s Security Council has tried several times to pass resolutions that would create trade bans and condemn the actions of the Syrian government. However the Russian and Chinese delegation has vetoed these resolutions which caused the proposals to fail. The job for the American delegates is more difficult with Syria because to openly criticize Russia and China for vetoing would be to criticize their actions in trying to defend their own country’s domestic turmoil. The movement of the Arab Spring affects each Middle Eastern country in a unique manner even though many of the nations have experienced repressive governments. The environment of each country and level of resentment was diverse. In addition Libya had already had past troubles with the United States and the United Nations. The Arab Spring movement has taken a longer time in Syria than in Libya. Public demonstrations in Syria began in January of 2011 while protests began in February of 2011 for Libya. The revolt in Libya was also expedited by the United States providing air support. Currently Syria has had no luck in receiving the same response from the United States military.
The United States should not be militarily involved with Iran. The current conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan has already drained America’s finances and morale. The burden of another conflict will create public disillusion in the actions of the current presidential administration. The United States should continue to deter the malicious actions of Iran through the United Nations. It is only through multilateral actions that the United States can successfully achieve its goal to lessen Iran as a foreign threat. There is a tense relationship between the Supreme Leader Ali Khameni and President Mahmoud Ahmandinejad as a result of disagreement with the future of the Iranian government and nation. Such an internal conflict may remove Ahmandinejad from being the favorite to continue as the president. If this occurs then a change such as the one in North Korea may happen where the new leader agreed to cooperate with the international community.
Lexi Koukos
Afghanistan:
The war in Afghanistan has become a very debatable topic and ultimately the country has two main choices. Either we can pull all of our troops out of the country, which would only lead to the countries government and civilians to take over again and watch the country crumble once more. Or we can leave our troops in there and finish out what we started. In order to make the past years to count we need to continue to have military presence and we need to continue to make Afghanistan a safe and sustainable country. The Afghan police and government are not trained well enough to take on the Taliban. By having the United States soldiers there, they are able to teach them skills and tactics in order to defend themselves in future conflicts. The only way that the United States would decrease the number of troops in Afghanistan would most likely be if the government and others agree to continue our work once we pull all of the troops out. By them doing this they are creating a safer place to live and they are creating a more democratic government. Obama need to listen to the troops and the people actually fighting the war. Taking the troops out would obviously be a very good idea, considering everyone wants to be with their loved ones, however this can be selfish in the sense that then we are putting the US at risk for more terrorist attacks if we pull otu to early. In the end as the United States we need to finish what he completed.
Syria/Iran
The syrian uprising is much different than the Libya uprising. This is due to the fact that the type of action taken on both is different. In Libya, the United States was able to break up the conflict. This act was just a form of rebellion against the government because of the conditions. We have been debating on doing the same with Syria. However, the conflicts may be similar but Syria would be much more difficult to break up and it would not be as simple. In Syria, there is a civil war that requires the support from the international communities because of the fact that it is in an unstable region. President Obama needs to consider the fact that this situation will cause tension not only with the United States people, due to the fact that we will be getting into a third conflict, but also it would cause tension with Iran. We would be using unilateralism in the sense that the US will fight the war by ourselves. The smarter way to go about this would be if we went mutlilateralism and if we worked with other countries they would become more vulnerable. However, most countries are would rather stop the threat of nuclear weapons, which Iran may not even maintain nuclear weapon power. We should remain close and take action which is probably the most practical decision.
Afghan responses should all be in!
I believe that the United States should keep its deadline of withdrawing all Afghan troops by 2014. While setting up a stable government in Afghanistan is important for the people of the country, our work there is simply not worthwhile because our actions are not well-received or appreciated by the Afghan people, who just want us to leave, even though we’re trying to help them. In addition, every time we build a road or other infrastructure the Taliban just blow it up or destroy it in another manner, and we’re not really making much headway, in my opinion, in terms of stabilizing the Afghan government against the Taliban, especially while Pakistan’s growing role in giving the Taliban a safe haven. If so many of our American men have died, and we have nothing to show for it and more men will continue to be killed in action if we stay, I really think we should pull out and cut our losses. Even though I think what is happening to the Afghan people with their living situation is awful, it’s hard to know that our troops are there trying to “win the hearts and minds” of the Afghan people when in the Frontline documentary there were Taliban groups shouting “Death to America!” and “We hate America!” and making the Afghans afraid that if they help or cooperate with the Americans, they will be killed. I just don’t think it’s worth all of the American lives we’re giving if nothing is getting better. In addition, the war in Afghanistan costs a TON of money, and if we’re already facing deficit issues at home, I don’t really think we should be spending the money on an Afghan war that has made no advancements. I think that this is a lose-lose situation, and that we should stick to our 2014 pull-out deadline.
-Monica DiLeo
Kayleigh Torok
I believe that we should keep our plan to withdraw all troops from Afghanistan by 2014. I think that we have already put in enough effort to try and help these people but it just isn't working. We have been in Afghanistan longer than we were in Vietnam, and many would consider that war a great American failure. Why should we prolong the inevitable? It seems as if there is no way to help these citizens, so we cannot spend any more money or American lives trying to do an impossible task. Every time we try to help them, the Taliban is right there to make sure that we cannot. When we build roads, they never fail to blow them up. We aren't making any progress, and the Taliban is only getting stronger. Because we don't know who is a member of the Taliban and who is an innocent citizen, we are unsure who to attack. We also don't know if the Taliban are disguising themselves as women, and it is disrespectful to check if the US soldiers are wrong. This is in no way helping us to win the "hearts and minds" of the people. The cost of the war is great, and considering our economic state, the money could definitely be spent better elsewhere.
Also, I think we should stay out of Syria. I realize that it is the idea of many that the United States is responsible for protecting innocents and preserving democracy. However, we have to learn from our previous mistakes. We can not send troops into another country when our own country needs help. A war in Syria would just result in a similar thing to the Afghanistan War. American troops would fall and money would be spent with no positive result. America is great in the fact that it can help countries in need, but there is only so much we can do. The United States cannot single-handedly save everyone in the world.
Taylor Frazier Period 8
Afghanistan
I believe that the war in Afghanistan isa very touchy subject. If we pull our troops our now our efforts for solving the way on terror will all be for nothing and we will have had troops die for nothing. It is such an unstable territory that pulling out now could cause the further damage to their citizens and would make the way on terror basically impossible to truly win. We have made no progress in this territory since 2008 and it seemed as though things were going well when it began but recent events have proved that the Taliban will never give up and our efforts and becoming useless. We need to stop attempting to make this territory a democracy and allow them to resume their tribal ways by placing one of their own trustworthy elders in charge. We should not be trying to change the culture of this society but instead we should be trying to make its culture bettering for this day and age.
Syria
Attempting to invade Syria is a mistake that will likely bring about a number of predictable complications for the United States. Syria is a longtime ally of China, Russia, and Iran which would mean that attacking them would cause way with everyone therefore causing lasting and potentially devastating results. Trying to assist the citizens of Syria also has the potential to increase the tensions between Iran and the United states being that they are have such close relations. I would like to believe that the United States foes not want to engage in war with their Syria or Iran but if we were to engage in combat it would most likely result in an uprising between both Syria and Israel, which could create another Middle Eastern conflict that we are not in any way prepared to deal with.
Pat Winiarski
Afghanistan
The war in Afghanistan is starting to become a very controversial topic on the means of either keeping or withdrawing our troops. In one hand the occupation in Afghanistan is good because we are trying to help their government become stable and independent, but on the other hand if we pull out the past few years may be wasted because they are not strong enough to be self sufficient without our help. I believe that we should withdraw by 2014 deadline and in 2013 have large amounts of troops already being pulled out. The reason i feel this way is because we wanted to set up a way to connect with the locals and win their hearts and minds about what we are trying to do, but with the recent events that took place with the killings of the innocent civilians and the burnings of the Qur'an have really pushed back or relations and more and more Afgans simply just want us to leave. The truth is for every step we take forward we seem to shoot ourselves in the foot and fall back three or four and are right back where we have started. I feel that we need to reconsider our strategy of the war and focus less on the offensive and more on the defensive, meaning that we should train the Afghanistan military until they are ready to take the offensive while we begin to pull out.
Pat Winiarski
Syria/Iran
The United States is not the world police, although we want to promote and protect democracy that does not give us the permission to invade any country that is having conflicts such as Syria. Syria is well connected with other powerful nations such as China, Russia and Iran and with our involvement this just causes more tension between those nations and the United States. I feel that we have not learned anything yet, we cannot simply just invade another country that strategy did not work in Afghanistan and after 10 years no major progress was achieved. Our country needs to focus on itself for once we would be putting ourselves in further debt if we were to get into another war and not to mention putting our troops at risk again. The United States needs to step back and let the Middle East resolve its own conflicts and stop getting directly involved.
Emily Smith
Period 6
Afghanistan
Afghanistan has been a growing problem for our nation for over a decade now. Many people say that the troops in Afghanistan have been useless and we have been risking American lives for no reason. Granted, we have not fully completed our mission of defeating the Taliban and Al Qaeda, but we have killed and captured many Taliban leaders. Currently, Afghanistan has a democratic form of government with Karzai as their elected leader. Our mission, as Americans, is to keep this democratic government in power and out of the hands of the Taliban, and subsequently Al Qaeda. Maintaining some sort of military presence is necessary in order to accomplish this. Our military presence has prevented, and can continue to prevent, the Taliban from gaining power. If the Taliban gains power of Afghanistan, there is no doubt that Al Qaeda will gain power as well. Therefore, if we were to pull troops out of Afghanistan, we would be opening the doors to terrorist attacks from Al Qaeda against our nation, such as the 9/11 attack. The only way to ensure our nation’s complete safety against attacks such as this, is to keep our troops in Afghanistan. Many people suggest using only economic sanctions to support the democratic government in Afghanistan. However, although this seems like a good, convenient way to solve the issues in Afghanistan, it will not be sufficient in keeping the Taliban from seizing control. If I was advising President Obama regarding troops in Afghanistan, I would tell him to consider the lives and safety of the American nation when withdrawing troops; although he may be relieving a small amount of war casualties, he may be largely risking America’s future safety.
Syria/Iranian
The difference between Syria and Libya is simple; one of the nations poses a direct threat to the United States’ economy if we did not take multilateral action, while the other poses a direct threat if we do take action. Both nations are experiencing an uprising against their government, which, in theory, America should be supporting. With Libya, if we had not taken action to support the up rise, we could have risked a significant loss in our foreign oil availability. Therefore, we had a very clear motive to take Gaddafi out of power. Although the same situation is occurring in Syria, our motive is not so clear as to whether or not we should support the up rise and remove Assad from power. This is because Syria’s current government, with Assad as President, is allies with Iran’s government. If we take out Syria’s government, we are in essence, threatening Iran’s power, because the two nations are allies. If we do take action to remove Syria’s government, there is a very large possibility that Iran will attack either America, Israel (our ally), or possibly both. This is an extremely large risk to our nation because Iran has been developing nuclear power that is becoming increasingly threatening to both Israel and America. Therefore, helping Syria could directly cause major problems for our nation and our allies. The only possible way I would consider taking action to help Syria, in these circumstances, would be using a small amount of multilateral action, so Iran would not be able to put full responsibility on America for destroying its ally. This way, America could help Syria meanwhile putting only small amount of risk on our own nation. If this type of multilateral action is not possible, then I would suggest we do not intervene in Syria’s affairs at all.
Controversy has surrounded the U.S. military's involvement in Afghanistan for this past decade. It has become a focal point in debates and candidate positions, and continues to cost the United States troops, money, and global and domestic support. Our idea going into Afghanistan was strong: bring down the dangerous forces that wage their asymmetrical warfare and spread their anti-Western sentiments. A decade later, however, with little accomplished, it appears our goals are only more clearly defined than Occupy Wall Street (zing!). It has become much less clear who it is we are fighting, and even less so what we hope to resolve with our presence. The goal of winning the hearts and minds of the Afghan people seems only to have accomplished the drawing of an unfortunate parallel between the War on Terror and the War in Vietnam. In the words of the soldier interviewed in Frontline's Forgotten War, it seems that every one step forward with these people is followed by five steps back. In the wake of the recent Qur'an burnings and citizen killings, we are breeding hostility among the citizenry and generating more recruitment for those we oppose. With economic trouble and a tiring public, it begins to seem more and more like our country should cut its losses and loosen its involvement in Afghanistan. President Obama was faced with the same option that Soviet Russia was faced with approximately thirty years ago; to increase troop commitment significantly or to withdraw. He picked the former, but little seems to have come of it and is now pursuing a slow but steady agenda of withdrawal. Although I have the utmost respect for our military and acknowledge the arguments from across the political spectrum that staying in Afghanistan promotes peace and stability in the region, I would advocate continuing to withdraw our troops completely within the next year or two. The very nature of the Taliban, as an enemy that can melt into the mountainous landscape and blends in indistinguishably to the Afghani population, leaves our progress painstakingly slow or nonexistent. The cost of the war continues to be staggering as we try to balance the national budget. And outside of our own country, our continued involvement against the volition of the rightful government under President Hamid Karzai tramples on Afghanistan's sovereignty; the presence of our overbearing forces there are no more appropriate than a nanny state at home - politically, these are undesirable parallels. I understand the origin of our involvement, as well as the tricky nature of pulling out, and recognize that I cannot even begin to understand the awesome responsibility of Commander-in-Chief, but it appears that the termination of our military involvement in Afghanistan is the best path for both our nations.
Tiantian Liu
Period 8
Syria and Iran:
Both Syria and Libya uprisings are similar in its violent and extremely political nature. The governments are going against their own citizens in effort of reinforcing its political views upon them. Eventually, these actions backfires to create massive violence within the countries’ borders. On one hand, Syria’s conflicts seemed more difficult to dissolve than that of Libya’s due to its massive protestants and unbreakable death rates. The ongoing internal conflict in Syria is backed up by strong allies such as China and Russia. The difficulties faced in this situation are the reasons why it has lasted this long to ease down the tension from all sides of the conflict. The U.S. can not simply enter the crisis and hope for a sudden turning point. Like the Vietnam war in the 50s, there are many risks in taking actions towards the country’s massive uprisings. As for Libya, foreign aid was needed in order to take Qaddafi and his cruel ruling system away from its people. The process took a much shorter way than that of Syria’s. U.S. diplomats are faced with direct oppositions from both sides if it were to take part of the conflicts. For neither side would be willing to simply give up their current positions for the other.
On the other hand, Iran is faced with its economic and nuclear problems with Israel. President Obama had worked towards unilateralism for the conflicts between Iran and Israel. But this step requires many risks on U.S.’s side. Besides unilateralism, the choice of working alongside other nations to solve this issue is also available, given the fact that certain conditions are to set between these nations.
AFGHANISTAN- The war in Afghanistan began on October 7, 2001, and in the eleven years since, not much progress has resulted within the battle. The Taliban are stubborn, as are we; it seems that the invasion due to the 9/11 attacks that led to the full-blown war has harmed us instead of assisting our country. The war spread to other areas in nearby Pakistan, in the attempt to follow Osama bin Laden, who went into hiding at the time, and his Islamist terrorist organization, al-Qaeda. Once that was discovered, it seemed to go completely downhill for America. The forces of the Taliban are extremists, meaning their ideologies hold very little morals/standards. They are trained to furiously fight us off and have an advantage since they are situated right in their homeland. The drug trade in Afghanistan is a big deal; they provide opium to most places in the world, and this is what their government lives around and feeds off of. If it were not for that drug trade, Afghanistan would become utterly corrupt. The Taliban consists of many drug-lords, which again is a major “pro” for them because they are essentially the ones in control here.
We are inferior and must take out troops because there is no point in continuing to fight. I would advise that from this point forward, the President should gradually take out troops from the war. If they were eliminated from Afghanistan and Pakistan in an immediate manner, even more chaos would occur. Afghanistan could become angry with the sudden end and take part in something drastic, such as a violent demonstration or a drastic killing rampage. Taking a safe and calm approach is easier on everybody rather than raising even more utter havoc in the Middle East.
SYRIA/IRAN- The Arab Spring is one approach taken by countries on the other end of the world in order to achieve world peace. The demonstrations and protests taking place in some Arab countries have not brought on peace though; violence is their answer. The recent revolution in Libya led to the overthrow of Libya’s ruler, Muammar Gaddafi, which initially brought on a corrupt government in the country. The conflict of Syria has been occurring for about a year now and is noticeably more serious than the conflicts experienced by Libya beforehand. For one thing, Syria has a very powerful military that makes our country look inferior. American diplomats are not exactly clear on the issue in Syria, as they are constantly setting out threats of war. We do not know the right way to approach this crisis, which is really scary. More people are also dying quickly in the case of Syria. In Libya, there were around 30,000 deaths, but Syria, which does not foresee an end currently, is closely approaching 10,000 deaths. With its intimidating military force, it does not seem surprising that more people will eventually die from the Syrian demonstrations over the Libyan demonstrations. Syria has already sent troops to nearby areas, resigned from the Parliament and their own government, and formed the Free Syrian Army this past summer. Their suspension from the Arab League also brings forth a bleak future for any remainder of the country’s well-being.
The situation in Iran has been dragging on for too long; we need some resolution and to bring the conflict into final terms. Obama has been trying to avoid another war, but in our day and age, this is difficult to achieve. Too many people advocate war. I, myself, do not believe in war and think it is a very immature path to reaching any solutions. Too many innocent lives have been taken because of war; the casualties need to stop. I would not be surprised if our country did go into a war with Iran though. It seems rather predictable mainly because Iran is developing some serious nuclear weapons/power. That is how the Iraqi War began; we thought they were in some conspiracy against us, and hiding nuclear weapons. If we were to take on unilateralism in this conflict, we would be by ourselves in this war, which is not ideal with how much nuclear power Iran has. Multilaterally, other countries would become involved. This can provide assistance in battle and resources, but can also create chaos, as America always seems to find trouble when dealing and/or intervening with many foreign affairs.
Sooriya Sundaram
Period 6
AFGHANISTAN
The passed events in Afghanistan clearly parallel the detriment faced by the United States during the Vietnam conflict. Vietnam was war-torn, being pulled in multiple directions by the nationalists, the Communists, and the United States. Similarly in Afghanistan, the nation is being stretched by the Taliban and Islam extremists as well as the “advisers” sent to appease the citizens. Like in Vietnam, thousands of soldiers have been killed by power-hungry, ravenous Jihadists. Another clear similarity between the two conflicts is the fact that there was never unanimous support for either conflict. I thought that America might have learned her lesson when she packed up her bags and headed over to the terror-infested regions of Vietnam, but seeing as history has somehow managed to repeat itself, I’d say that the lesson still has not sunk in.
America faces a slew of disadvantages in this conflict. For one thing, American soldiers are fighting on foreign turf, which was a huge burden on the soldiers during the Vietnam War. This is one reason why I would advise President Obama to withdraw troops as soon as possible. Clearly, the United States military has gained little understanding of the rugged terrain of Afghanistan since the beginnings of the conflict. It would certainly be more prudent to avoid losses that could have been attributed to a lack of knowledge for the mountainous and barren landscape of Afghanistan.
The one thing that the Taliban has more of, arguably, is perseverance. Unfortunately, they will never give up their struggle for power and their thirst for innocent blood. Although the United States might have honorable intentions, it would simply make more sense to withdraw the troops. Our troops are too valuable to waste on a suicide mission like Afghanistan.
The Libyan rebellion was, without a doubt, the text book definition of the word “mess.” The uprising was ridiculously bloody and violent, some of which can be attributed to the attack on Qaddafi. Rebels with an anti-governmantal view of things managed to create one of the bloodiest uprisings ever witnessed by the world. It must not be forgotten, however, that the assault on Qaddafi was not supported by the United Nations. Libya was slightly different in that foreign intervention might have put a stop to the situation or at least somewhat tranquilized the anger-driven people. Foreign intervention in Syria would not tranquilize the people, but rather annihilate the people. There was a good chance that innocent civilians could have been trapped in the middle of the conflict, resulting in a handful of unwanted casualties. While normally I would advocate sending troops into a nation as unstable and threatening as Syria, this time I would suggest diplomatic intervention on behalf of the United States. That way, rebellions would not be further fueled by our presence, and if negotiations take a negative turn, no troops or other various innocent people would be in nearly as much danger.
AFGHANISTAN RESPONSE:
Afghanistan seems to be the war that will never die. We have been there for years now and progress was only made in the first few years we entered. We were able to destabilize the corrupt government and remove the militia driven politicians. However, as stated in the video, we did not replace the government with sufficient leaders. Instead, we let the country fall to poverty and more people joined the Taliban and other rebel forces. Now, the country is so terror-stricken that it is almost impossible to navigate and fight. The war seems to have eerie similarities to the war in Vietnam. The latter war, fought in a guerilla warfare style, was too much for Americans. They were surrounded in an unfamiliar country with difficult terrain and eventually lost because they couldn’t hold out. I fear this is the same situation in Afghanistan. America may have had a chance to win this war early on, but the chance is now gone. If Obama is smart, he will pull the troops out of Afghanistan. There is no need to lose American lives when they could serve a better purpose somewhere else. America should help Afghanistan stabilize a good government that will not be uprooted by the Taliban. I believe that Obama can do this through diplomacy and ambassadors, not through the loss of US troops. If we leave, we need to make sure that the Taliban will not take over the country because then our entire purpose of ever entering Afghanistan in the first place will have been lost. I believe that Obama should listen to ambassadors from Afghanistan because they know what the people want and what is best for their country. If we just listen to the people, then we may be able to make progress in the country. I don’t believe in using American troops in a long and tedious war that has no purpose anymore. Why are we in Afghanistan? To prevent terrorism? To stop the Taliban? To protect ourselves on the home front? There is no definitive answer to the question and I feel this war has no clear objective. It is important that we learn from the mistakes we made in Vietnam and not let history repeat itself.
Miranda Scaramozza
Period 6
Afghanistan:
11 years later and to be perfectly honest little progress has been made. Yes, we removed the Taliban from power and tried to bring stability to the nation of Afghanistan, but this does not mean that we have completely renewed Afghanistan. The Taliban have built themselves up ever since they were removed by U.S. troops, stabilty will not exist as long as the Taliban are still around. The Taliban now have a huge motive and reason to fight for control even more than we do. U.S. presence in Afghanistan is no longer wanted by Afghans and the longer troops stay the worse relations between Afghans and Americans will get. Recent actions by U.S. troops, such as the burning of Korans and shooting of several Afghan women and children by a U.S. soldier will not be soon forgotten by the people and will only serve as more of a catalyst for the Taliban. Removing troops now is Obamas only logical choice. America does not need to be the referee for all the worlds issues. Sometimes taking no action at all is the smartest coure of action possible. Every day U.S. troops remain where they are unwelcome is a day wasted.
Syria and Iran
The dilemma that President Obama is currently facing with Iran needs to be looked at with some perspective. Iran needs to be dealt with firmly but not too agressively. America needs to sit down one on one with Iran and discuss the fact that their actions affect all other surrounding nations and the decisions they make. Opening up communication with Iran has possible positive outcomes that cannot be obtained through any other method. Militarily would only provoke Iran to make extreme and harmful retalliations.
SYRIA AND IRAN RESPONSE:
On an international level, Libya represents a far greater country than Syria. It has a greater international impact because of its surrounding countries as well as its profitable resources. The uprising in Syria is more on the lines of civil unrest while Libya seemed to have an revolutionary impact. America’s involvement in Libya was a smart move because it protected our foreign oil economy. We had a fiscal responsibility to get involved in Libya. The situation with Syria is completely different because it could cause an even greater international incident. Syria has an alliance with Iran and if America were to intervene in Syria, we could upset Iran as well as Syria. To put it bluntly, our relations in the Middle East are terrible. If we want to make progress, then we will let the Syrian people do what they have to do on their own. We cannot be involved in every uprising that goes on in this world. America is a leader in this world, but we must learn draw the line between involvement and instigation. A unilateral effort in Syrian would upset American citizens and would upset surrounding countries. We do not need another reason for the Middle Eastern world to dislike us. We already have so much tension due to terrorism, oil conflicts, the war in Afghanistan, and we cannot add Syria to this list. As far as Iran goes, President Obama should do all he can to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear nation. The world cannot have hot headed countries possess weapons that could result in the loss of millions of lives. Obama needs to take a firm stance on this nuclear issue with Iran. Even if this is a unilateral effort, America can prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear power. We have been lucky up until now because preventing Iran from gaining nuclear powers has been a multilateral effort. America and other countries see the danger that nuclear weapons could cause.
AFGHANISTAN: So yeah, I do agree that the war is kind of dragging on and there’s no way we will be able to win it. This isn’t an average war where you have two clear sides in a battlefield fighting it out with at least a tiny bit of courtesy to the wounded or medical personnel. Terrorists do anything and everything to kill any American, not just soldiers and they multiply by the thousands each day. It’s like Mr. Kirby said, “It’s like squeezing jell-o”. However, when it comes to the question of whether we have made any progress so far, I have to say yes. Everyone blames Bush for getting us into the war, but honestly how many people cried out for war to protect the freedom of the United States after 9/11? Everyone did, Democrats and Republicans alike. We have been successful in the sense that we have not had any major attacks on our home soil since then. We have also provided some stability over in Afghanistan even though the news and tabloids don’t say it. We always hear about the negative things that happen over there, but never the positives. That’s mainly why people’s views on the war are skewed to the negative side. On the campaign trail obama promised that he would take the troops out right away and I love that people were dumb enough to believe him. That option was highly improbable at the time because if we just withdraw all the troops then the Taliban is almost certainly going to take over immediately. After 10 years I do think we should start withdrawing more troops, but it has to be a slow process. The Afghan government has to be strong enough to resist the Taliban, but for the sake of saving how other countries think of us, I think we should work more on getting them as stable as possible soon or more Afghans will turn on us. Yeah obama only had the options of pulling troops out or increasing their size by a good amount and he was being pulled in different directions by military leaders and civilian leaders, but everyone feels so sorry for him because he is a “military thwarted president”. Do you people think Bush was praying that terrorist would attack the twin towers so early in his presidency so that he would have to deploy millions of troops and declare war? Nobody wants that! The attacks ruined his presidency right from the get go, but everyone just blames him when any other president would have declared war as well. Boohoo obama, I don’t feel sorry for you.
SYRIA AND IRAN: Syria and Libya both pose dangerous circumstances for the U.S. to get involved with. Syria has many allying countries, such as Russia and China, and to become hostile in this country would ultimately just gain us more enemies in the long run which is one of the things the U.S. cannot afford more of. Libya controls many oil reserves and is therefore an important aspect in the world’s economy. The U.S. economy is already at a pretty low point and to get involved with them would most likely hurt our chances for economic recuperation. Iran is another dangerous situation that the U.S. has to face. We can’t just let them get hold of nuclear power which could mean death for much of the Israeli nation, but we also don’t want to get too involved in war with them alone. That is why going unilaterally into this situation would be detrimental to the U.S. We need to take more of a multilateral approach with the aid of the UN and other countries so that we don’t have another full blown war on our hands, but also so that Iran remains nuclear powerLESS.
Eric Price
Afghanistan
The war in Afghanistan has now reached its final breaking point. We really do not have any defined goals and we are not making any progress. Especially since the 2008 Frontline report came out. We may keep killing one or two leaders with predator drones, but then a new, possibly even more radical, leader of the Taliban comes to power. The Taliban soldiers have just been coming out for a little bit then taking refuge again in Pakistan. If its one thing they have, its patience. As shown in the past, the Soviets never got anything accomplished because the fighters in Afghanistan just kept running, hiding, then attacking. We have not been effective at all against these forces. My advice is to really start pulling out as soon as possible, but not all at once. It is too dangerous to pull out at a single time. The government doesn't seem to be able to sustain itself no matter if we are there or not. Our forces just seem to be a medium for the country because we are sometimes doing positive projects like building roads, but we also get innocent people killed in small villages. So my advice is to slowly pull out because anything we do to help will just be ruined by the Taliban.
Syria and Iran
The uprisings in Syria and Libya have shown many similarities, yet intervention with Syria may prove to be extremely dangerous. The rebellion in Libya was not supported by the U.N. though. Also the people in Libya didn't have support from certain allies like they do in Syria such as China and Russia. If we cut into the issue in Syria the people rebelling would only become angrier. The option of sending troops in is simply not an option because they would just be attacked for trying to become involved. Now in Iran there is a lot of conflict between the people of Iran and the people of Israel. President Obama has tried to support unilateralism, but has landed us in hot water with other nations. We need to come up with a good solution to hopefully benefit both sides.
Tiffany Wang
Afghanistan
As of now, there have been little advancements in Afghanistan by American troops since 2001. Our country’s goal was to combat the Taliban and Al Qaeda groups and also to create a safe democratic form of government. American troops have been kept in Afghanistan longer than they had been in Vietnam with very little progress to show. It is important that the people of Afghanistan know that the American troops are there to protect and benefit them from extremist groups. However, Afghans living in rural areas are disconnected and don’t seem to know why American troops are here on their home land. Our military troops cannot fight against these extremist groups without the Afghan citizens’ support. The Taliban also uses the geographics of their home country to their advantage. They hide and attack from within the rocky mountains. As the soldier said in the video, one step forward is followed by five steps backward. Both sides are suffering casualties, and our country is spending too much money by keeping troops there. President Karzai has made it clear that he wants our troops out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. Our tensions with Afghanistan have been increasing exponentially since America’s interference with their own people.
Syria/Iran
Syria and Libya have both experienced similar violent uprisings within the past year. They are both part of the Arab Spring, a wave of upheaval throughout the Arab world. During the Libyan uprising, the UN stepped in and assisted them in the downfall of Gaddahfi. Libya, is also a large oil trading country in the middle east. If there was no intervention, our foreign oil trade would also be at stake. Syria is different from Libya, because it has strong support from allies such as Russia, China, and Iran. We cannot afford to get involved due to mounting tensions with Iran. Iran already has WMD in their possession, and our country cannot afford to be caught fighting in another war.
Maggie Senft
Afghanistan:
It is time that the United States start to take back troops from Afghanistan. Too many American soldiers have lost their lives fighting a war that will have no end. Our objective there was to stabilize the Afghani government, however it has become clear that that is an impossible task. The Afghani public clearly does not want us to be there, and we are costing the lives of our own soldiers. The two recent incidents of the Quaran burning and the American solider’s killing spree show that we are not making a positive impact on their country. It is in our best interest to have our soldiers return to the US and improve our own country before we worry too much about others.
Syria/Iran:
Syria and Iran are somewhat similar however Syria is poses a greater difficulty. Syria is uprising differently from Libya because Libya occurred previously making Syria a much harder task. The two nations are both struggling and may only get worse with time. Becoming involved in a war with Syria would cause more civilian deaths for them and an increasing amount of deaths for American soldiers which we cannot take at this time.
Iran poses a difficult situation for President Obama. We are close with Israel which gives the United States the edge over Iran. A possible mulitlateral approach would be to essentially “gang up” with countries such as Great Britain and France to pose a threat to Iran. There should be no nuclear weapons used to fight Iran, but an economic tactic would be the best solution.
Afghanistan
I believe that the U.S. occupation in Afghanistan is a fool’s errand. Every dollar we spend, every life we waste, is a waste. Our presence does not enhance the security of the United States, which is what ought to be our goal. As Commander in Chief, President Obama must realize that it is impossible to remake a country that nobody since Genghis Khan has managed to conquer. What makes us think that we can succeed where the British and Soviets failed? It will take tens of years, hundreds of billions of dollars, tens of thousands of American lives, and we don't need to do it. It is not our right to do so. Yes, the 9/11 attacks did occur but we are only hurting ourselves as a nation by sending our young men and women to waste their lives there. This is valuable money that could be used to prop up our own people domestically. In the video, anti-American chants were seen among various Taliban members that all share an undeniable hatred for our nation. If they want America out, so be it. It is not our job to be the world police. The Taliban is too large of a terrorist network to fight. We aren’t going to win a war in which the enemy is nameless and great in numbers. Being in Afghanistan only causes the locals to become angry. The United States is just encouraging another terrorist attack in this aspect. All troops must be withdrawn from the Middle East in order to reinvest money into our home front and end our status as an enemy target.
Allison Saffiotti Period 6
Afghanistan
For the past 11 years, the United States has been engaged in a war with Afghanistan, and so far no real progress has been made. There is still strong presence of the Taliban who have a great amount of control over citizens. As seen in the video, women were shown contacting through radio Taliban leaders to warn them of U.S troops in the area. If the citizens of Afghanistan have no desire to change their unstable country, then there is no point in the United States wasting time and resources to improve this country. The recent events that have occurred in Afghanistan, such as the Koran burnings do not help the already strained relationship between U.S troops and Afghan citizens. In addition, many Afghans are not protesting the stop of the Taliban, even though they are the cause of most problems in this country. For these reasons I feel the United States should leave Afghanistan and focus our time and resources domestically. In order to save money, time and the lives of our soldiers it is imperative that the United States leave Afghanistan on our 2014 pull out date.
Syria and Iran
The uprising in Libya is different than Syria because NATO as well as the United Nations was involved in overthrowing Moammar Gadhafi. The people of Libya also wanted a change in government and embraced the help of other countries. This uprising was ultimately a success because the regime was overthrown. Now a new system of government is being put in place in Libya that will bring stability and democracy to this country. Unlike this uprising, the one occurring in Syria cannot be solved as easily. Since Syria is allies with Iran, it would be foolish for the United States to become involved. We do not want to support countries that promote terrorism. I feel that we should make no attempt to help this country in order to protect our own.
Jeffrey Lee Period 8
I think that the problem in Afghanistan is a controversial topic for many around the country. The Middle East is where most of our oil is supplied and in Afghanistan the problem has been the highest these past few years. Although there are those in our country who do not view the time and effort we put into Afghanistan as a worthwhile effort I believe that we must keep our troops in Afghanistan. For the years in which we spent trying to impact and create a stable government for Afghanistan we should stay and complete our mission. If we were to back out now, even though it seems as though we are not wanted in Afghanistan we must understand that in order for the past several years to have an impact and change the course of Afghanistan. By giving support to our troops and reenforceing them with supples we can ensure that the issues in Afghanistan shall be resolved. I think that with the addition of more US. Forces we can conclude the Afghan war on a good not. As a nation we need to continue the effort in supporting the Mission to bring Afghanistan into a new revival of a better state.
The Arab Spring was supposed to be a large crusade of peaceful objection that ultimately ended in the establishment of more representative governments in the Middle East who are corrupt. Those who participate in scrutinizing the government and treated terrible and even killed. The U.S can hardly do anything to stop such acts, and only has the capability to say it is wrong.\. With Iran, I believe we should not have any military intervention. We have too much conflict in which we are participating in and I don’t believe that we have the resources to fight another one. Although Iran has the possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons, which could lead to nuclear war, I believe that if we confront them we will provoke them into using them. I believe that this issue in Iran should be solved diplomatically.
Afghanistan is such an endless war, it just seems like it will never be over. America has been there for eleven years, and we have not made much progress since the first few years we were there. Our goal in Afghanistan is to help them set up a stable form of government. However, we have not replaced the government with sufficient leaders. President Karzai has made it clear just recently that he wants the United States to pull out of Afghanistan as soon as possible. Although it seems hypocritical to just pull out now, we are not doing any good by staying there either. By making our troops stay in there, we are creating unnecessary violence from the Taliban. The Afghans do not want us in their country, if we couldn’t “win the hearts and minds of the Afghans” in the eleven years that United States has been involved, what will? The Afghanistan government has not stabilized, and probably will not anytime soon. I think we should respect the wish of the people, and pull out of Afghanistan before the relation between the two countries get worse.
Trace Lange period 8
Afghanistan, is a place that many young mean and women of the U.S. military have called home for the past 11 years. We have wasted countless tax payers dollars and the lives of so many of there soldiers. It is a was that has no end and one that can not be pulled to conclusion by this current tactic. The U.S. must fully fund a wage an all out war of the lands of afghanistan, but that is a war we can not win there will never be a stable and steady government in the mideast put in place by a western power. So if a war is not winnable the answer Is simply stop the fighting. We must pull out and send the troops home to America. The US will never win the hearts and minds the the native and local people in this region. We build a school they blow it up, a road blow it up, a building they blow it up. They do not want our help. We are simply prolonging the answer that we were not successful. I do feel we must protect ourselves and that this war was started in a good cause but it has gone on long enough we have sent a message and it is time to head home
Right now, I think it is dangerous for the U.S. to get involved in anything. Although I think getting involved in Libya has a legitimate outcome because we were able to protect our foreign oil economy. We honestly cannot afford to get involved in every uprising there is around the world. Libya poses a direct threat to our economy if we did not act, while Syria poses a threat if we do. Both nations are experiencing social unrest and uprisings. While we had a clear motive in Libya, our motive in Syria is not clear. Syria has an alliance with Iran, and if we were to intervene in Syria, we will make our relations in the Middle East worse than it is right now. I feel that Obama should take a stance on this nuclear issue with Iran. Americans will want Obama to do all he can do to prevent Iran from becoming a nuclear nation. If Iran were to become a nuclear nation, it could threaten the lives of millions of people. Iran is an unstable country and seems to be getting in conflicts all over the world. If they had nuclear weapons at their disposal it would mean trouble for entire world.
This is my Afghanistan response. -Monica
Syria and Iran
Syria is a country that differs in many ways from Libya, because a bad situation in Syria could have much more devastating results than a similar situation in Libya. To start, Syrian affairs are also extremely intertwined into the Middle Eastern countries that we currently hold troops in. A bad situation with Syria could also make things worse in the Middle East with U.S. troops and relations, and when the fragile attitude toward Americans is already so negative and volatile there, we must be careful not to make things worse. In addition, Syria is allied with China, Russia, and Iran, which are countries whose actions matter a lot to the United States. Libya did not have these same superpower alliances. Because of this, supporting rebel action in Syria is much more dangerous to U.S. foreign relations then U.S. involvement in Libya was.
The United States cannot afford another Iraq, so it is very important that we take great care to make sure that Iran does not turn into Iraq. However, it is also extremely important that we do not let Iran become a nuclear power because of the absolute devastation it could cause. We also must be careful that we closely monitor the relationship between Israel and Iran. In terms of unilateralism versus multilateralism, I think that it is extremely important that we uphold a policy of multilateralism when dealing with Iran. We cannot handle invading Iran on our own, there’s no question. My hope is that Iran does not become a nuclear power, because I think that only bad can come from that.
-Monica DiLeo
Syria and Iran: Generally speaking, Syria is in an even worse shape then Libya. Obama already attacked Libya, so why would he choose not to attack Syria? Personally, I don't think we should have been involved in either, the U.S cannot afford another war at this point. The death rate is only increasing rapidly in Syria, and tensions are high. Syria also has connections with Iran, making the situation even more dangerous. If we plan to attack again, we most consider different tactics and proceed with great caution. The complexity of the situation is much different than that of Libya alone. We especially need to be careful in dealing with Iran. Again, the last thing we need is more conflict so I would recommend picking the best possibly side, and stay allied to avoid conflict. In this case, being allied with Israel is essential. Military action is only necessary to ensure our safety and protection.
Syria and Libya differ on many key points, although inspiring revolution in either is overstepping our boundaries. Syria is involved in a tangled web of alliances that will upset the United States’ position in the Middle East, along with many other countries, and rightly so in my opinion. Interests we may have, but it is not the place of our country to interfere in the business and development of countries throughout the world simply because we have a vested interest in parts of their economy, any more than those countries have a right to try and dictate to us our policies and developments. Involvement in Syria would lack cohesiveness and a clear goal, a catalyst for a lengthy and disastrous involvement; not something we need right now.
Iran’s situation may be a difficult one, but much like Syria it is not our business to be involved in. In the past, we interfered with Iranian development by overthrowing Mossedeq in 1953 for his having an interest primarily vested in the Iranians; this paved the way for a dictator and the seeds of radicalism, and has turned into the situation we have today. There is no conclusive evidence that has yet been confirmed by American or United Nation intelligence, and a preemptive strike at Iran will oblige them to strike back and drag even more countries into the ensuing mess. I am uncomfortable with the idea of Iran as a nuclear power, but I am even more uncomfortable with the idea of an unnecessary, costly, protracted war when the situation might be solved by diplomacy, a la Cuban Missile Crisis.
Jesse Eddy
Afghanistan is a place where we take one step forward and two steps back. We simply can not successfully improve this area because the Taliban is scaring the people that want Americas help more than America is helping them therefore making the United States military unwanted and unsuccessful in the area. The only way to improve this areas condition especially after all the recent setbacks would be to send a lot more troops in and invest countless more money which we can not afford. The United States has pumped too much money into the Afghan area for the results they are getting and my advice to the president would be to cut the United States losses and quit while we are "ahead"(not really ahead).
Syria and Libya
These two conflicts may appear similar in some ways but are very different and many more. Though I don't believe America should be involved in either conflict the difference between Libya and the Syria conflict is very different and this makes intervening in Libya much easier than intervening in Syria. The Libya conflict is much more separate and not intertwined with other conflicts like the Syria conflict which is more intertwined with the other conflicts in areas which our troops occupy. Not only could America never afford a war in Syria or Libya but Syria is also allies with China making launching attacks on them very hard to do from a diplomatic standpoint. America imports lots of goods from China and owes money to China and attacking their ally would not help our cause.
Syria and Libya
In comparison to Syria, Libya was a simpler uprising. For Libya, there was no complications. The majority of Libyans were united over a single cause cause. In Syria, by comparison, anyone considering military intervention is forced to consider everything that went wrong in Iraq and the long bloody civil war in neighbouring Lebanon. However, at this time it is in the America's best interest to steer clear of both uprisings. Involvement will inevitably lead to unnecessary spending to will contribute to our already enormous deficit. In the Middle East, we are bringing troops back home, so to send more to Syria and Libya would be taking steps backwards. We are in no serious threat as a country from these conflicts, so there is no reason to interfere by wasting valuable dollars and military lives.
Syria and Libya
Kayleigh Torok
I responded to the situation in Syria in my previous response, but as far as Libya, I would like to take a different stand. Of course we could not possibly know the difficulty or ease with which the United States could aid Libya, and it just so happened to work in our favor. We made smart decisions regarding troops and were lucky with how the situation went. However, I don't think this should mean that we are free to attack Syria. We may have gotten lucky once, but who is to know what the situation in Syria could amount to. The situation in Libya should be ended and the situation in Syria should not be started. There are many other things the United States should spend time and money on. We do not want to get more involved with these countries when we can't even keep our own economy strong. The United Nations should handle these situations.
Afghanistan and Syria/Libya are in one post, in different paragraphs (but not labeled)
Bella Guo
Afghanistan:
We are now eleven years into the war in Afghanistan and I do not believe we have made much progress. Sure we have taken out some key leaders of global terrorism, but our goal to secure a democracy in the country, while eliminating the Taliban has proved to be nearly impossible. As for advice on where to go from here, I would tell the President that it is crucial that we greatly reduce the number of troops in Afghanistan, if not pull out completely. We are wasting money, but more importantly we are losing countless lives of soldiers. We have involved ourselves in a matter that we should not have gotten into in the first place, and now it is backfiring on us.
Syria vs. Libya:
The Syrian uprising is different from Libya because of how complex the matter was. In Libya, demonstrations and civil unrest were violent but were able to be controlled. Taking action and relief were easier because of foreign intervention. Too great of U.S. intervention would make matters much worse in the Syrian conflict because of the tension between our country’s support of Israel and past experiences with getting involved with dangerous Middle Eastern countries.
Post a Comment