Social Question

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

To win the war in Afghanistan will take how many more 100s of billions of dollars?

Asked by Hypocrisy_Central (26871points) June 25th, 2010

The US has been fighting a war in Afghanistan for more than 8+ years now with no end in sight. In spite of the face US troops kill at least 3 of them for every death they still have not run out of fighters and maybe never will. With the nation sinking slowly financially how many more schools, fire fighters, cops, rec. centers, do we have to close before we stop shoveling boat loads of cash into an alligator made of sand that craps poppies that ends up on American streets ruining lives? Do the average UC tuition has to become $15,000 a semester before we say “enough”? Sure seems after all this time a lot of that money would do way more here at home. Some one is raking in a bundle off the war but it is not John Q citizen he is losing his house and his job is going overseas. How many more 100s of billions do you think Uncle Sam should invest before closing down this circus? Should your children and their children be left holding the tab because they will?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

18 Answers

kenmc's avatar

Eleventy one more dollars.

FireMadeFlesh's avatar

The war will never be won there, because the enemy is a ghost. It is a battlefield where extremists and brainwashed kids go to fight a war they believe should be fought, and our soldiers simply keep them from fighting that war on our own soil. There is no single leader or single enemy we can beat into submission.

That said, I do not think the war should ever have been started, and I have no idea how we should eventually pull out. In the short term though, winning does not look like an option.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@YARNLADY $42 bucks, 42 mil, 42 billion, or 42 trillion more for the win? Or 42 more <gasp> years!?

YARNLADY's avatar

@Hypocrisy_Central The Answer to the Ultimate Question of Life, the Universe and Everything

Dr_Lawrence's avatar

There is no such thing as winning this kind of war against this kind of enemy. The USA should declare victory as in “Mission Accomplished” and begin an orderly withdrawal of troops.

PandoraBoxx's avatar

This is the longest running war in US history. Sad to say, it has become a viable economic segment for the US economy. It’s employing people. Not to the scale the WWII pulled the US out of the depression by manufacturing goods and equipment for a global conflict, but in a country where there is not an abundance of jobs for people come out of high school to just go and do, the military provides employment and structure.

We’re looking at a 100 year’s war. Sad to say, all of this probably could have been avoided by economic aid to Afghanistan after their war with Russia ended. It would have been a whole lot cheaper in the long run.

jazmina88's avatar

terrorism is underground and global. There is no winner. It will continue. war. destruction.
a buck is too much.

jerv's avatar

All of them!

Adirondackwannabe's avatar

Go back and look at your Kipling. We will not win.

Cruiser's avatar

It’s all about money. Just connect the dots and you will see a proposed Oil pipeline is the main reason we are there and 9/11 was the “excuse” we needed to go in there to begin to help create a single stable government in Afghanistan which is needed to secure the regions where the TAP pipeline is to be built. Afghanistan sits smack dab in the middle between the oil fields to the north of them and the ocean to the Pakistani coast where they will move over 1 million barrels of oil to market. This has been brewing since 1995 and Unocal will not spend a dime on the pipline until a stable government is in place. The Taliban have been trying to keep their meat hooks in this project from day one and the big players do not want to have to do business with them plus we have secondary interest in “helping” to build the infrastructure and also protect the US dollar as the preferred currency in the oil exchange market. This is worth hundreds of millions of dollars a day in money money MONEY!

I know you are thinking this is all in Cruisers head but like I said connect the dots here. Look at this map of where the pipeline is to be built. This
time line all but seals the deal as to why we are over there fighting this war for oil. Read about the activity in our government in the months preceding Sept 11…pretty damning evidence.

CMaz's avatar

You destroy a city and a countries infrastructure.
The World Banks shows up and lends the money needed to re build.

Developing monetary control over that region.
Money is where the power is.

Would be easy enough to drop a bomb, call it a day. That being too obvious.

The “war” is just part of the New World Order agenda.

ETpro's avatar

We aren’t fighting a war in Afghanistan, we are fighting an insurgency. The only way to defeat an insurgency is to set up a stable government capable of fully defending itself and policing its own land. With 95% of Afghans illiterate and education almost nnexistent, that will take decades to do, if we ever can achieve it. Right now, we aren’t even taking the steps needed to make the Afghan people capable of self governance because the security situation is too precarious to allow it.

There is no good answer now. Bush should have thought this through and either used drones and cruise missiles to go after Al Qaeda back in 2001 or set aside his burning desire to invade Iraq and gone into Afghanistan with and international force like we had in the First Gulf War (500,000 men) instead of 20,000 to Afghanistan and all else devoted to killing the non-existent WMDs in Iraq.

Now, if we pull out, we leave the Pakistani government in an untenable position. Al Qaeda will just step back across the border from Waziristan into Afghanistan and gather the resources to chip away at Pakistan, which does have real Nukes, not imaginary WMDs. And make no mistake, bin Laden hasn’t forgotten about hating the USA. If he does get his hands on nukes, you can bet where they will explode.

josie's avatar

Sadly, the US has chickened out of fighting wars to win. Gen Sheridan said (paraphrased) that war is over when the enemy begs you to stop under any condition. If you send a lethal instrument like the US military to fight a war, then you should stand back and let them do the shit that they do so well. If you can not handle that, then all you can do is keep talking. Point being, it is a waste of lives and money to fight without the goal of defeating the enemy. I say, get it over with and win the war. Otherwise, come back home, and start building a wall, and drilling oil wells.

ETpro's avatar

@josie I totally agree. If it isn’t worth slaughtering the entire population of the nation involved if necessary, then use diplomacy or sanctions instead of war. When you go to war, go to win.

Hypocrisy_Central's avatar

@Cruiser Very interesting reading for those who take the time to do so, but most would rather keep their head in the sand. Not that it is all that surprising seeing who all is involved. Seems like any proposed pipeline that had any involvement or benefit for the then in power Taliban or Iran was quickly shot down by Uncle Sam……interesting.

But how much more money will it take for anyone to benefit off this plan? You have to get Al Qaeda and the Taliban to capitulate and just how much dough is that going to take, much less years?

mattbrowne's avatar

Depends on our strategies to slow down and halt the Taliban and Al-Qaeda recruitment process. As long as this doesn’t get interrupted, there will always be new terrorists and the war cannot be won militarily.

This is why the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is key.

Answer this question




to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther