BF2S Forums US to invite Iran to Afghan talks

What they plan to accomplish here is beyond me - but if they do meet and it goes somewhat smoothly, it'll look like a respected 'victory' for the US. Nice move - although I wonder how much of this was actually Clinton's idea.

I think it is incredibly ludicrous that we (the US) and a handful of chosen few are going to decide the fate of Afghanistan.  Bottom line is that the US is the one calling the shots.  We're (US) like the Godfather...you can meet with us and express your concerns but in the end we have the final say.  At least it is a step toward normalized relations with Iran though, which can only be a good thing.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I think it is incredibly ludicrous that we (the US) and a handful of chosen few are going to decide the fate of Afghanistan.  Bottom line is that the US is the one calling the shots.  We're (US) like the Godfather...you can meet with us and express your concerns but in the end we have the final say.

people thought that about the 80's, but the saudis pulled the strings in afghan...not the US

Beduin wrote:

Not the saudi rulers, but saudi millionaires sure..

well...... how do you mean?  the saudis were involved big time.  prince turki played a huge role, not to mention pakistan which played the biggest role.

Last edited by usmarine (2009-03-06 17:47:07)

destruktion_6143 wrote:

Canada/NATO has actually been calling the shots in afganistan for some while now i believe

Officially, yes. In reality, not really.

destruktion_6143 wrote:

Canada/NATO has actually been calling the shots in afganistan for some while now i believe

Are you sure you want that credit?

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

I think it is incredibly ludicrous that we (the US) and a handful of chosen few are going to decide the fate of Afghanistan.  Bottom line is that the US is the one calling the shots.  We're (US) like the Godfather...you can meet with us and express your concerns but in the end we have the final say.

Every major world power has tried to "decide the fate of Afghanistan", going back for at least the last 3000 years.  By an accident of geography, and an accumulation of various historical factors, it's a strategic location. 

It's also a shithole with an amazing ability to suck up men, machines, money, and the best of intentions with little to show for the efforts.  Ask the Soviet Union Russians.

We aren't in Afghanistan to make it an American colony.  We're there to keep the Taliban, Al Quaeda, and others from taking advantage of the poppy field cash-crops and abundance of natural, defensible hiding/training locations.

America isn't in the business of building British-style Empire.  We already have all of the land we need, from the arctic north of Alaska, to the deserts of Arizona, and everything in between.  We didn't annex Japan or Germany after WW-2, did we?  Occupied and helped rebuild into a friendly democracy, yes - annex, no.

We do, however, have a penchant for fighting our wars in everyone else's back yard, rather than our own.
We also have a particular reputation for blundering into countries, with no exit strategy and no awareness of the indigenous culture.

Would be refreshing to get blamed for the things we actually do, rather than the modus operandi of other historical nations.
We're assholes, yes.  But we're American assholes - not British Empire, not Soviet Bloc, not Chinese Communist... we have a flavor all our own.

KEN-JENNINGS wrote:

At least it is a step toward normalized relations with Iran though, which can only be a good thing.

But is Iran quite worth having normalized relations with quite yet.  They're still one of the major sources of Shia weaponry, munitions, and training in Iraq.  We (the USA) screwed up, and didn't keep the Shia from getting revenge on the Iraqi Sunni in the power vacuum after 2003 ... and now the Sunni are joining Al Quaeda, out of desperation (protection, money, security of family, sense of purpose, etc).

(And, as an aside, "normalized relations" sounds like something Bill Clinton would have with an intern...)

rdx-fx wrote:

We're assholes, yes.  But we're American assholes - not British Empire, not Soviet Bloc, not Chinese Communist... we have a flavor all our own.

i lol'd +1

Last edited by destruktion_6143 (2009-03-06 19:28:58)

Mekstizzle wrote:

Nobody is calling no shots in Afghanistan, that's partly why it's such a mess. From what I've seen, each country is pretty much left on their own to defend their own slice of the country. There isn't much integration and it's each guy and his own slice of pie...for the most part...

The Aussie/Dutch sector seems to be doing okay.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

^^^^^^^Agree with Turq

Thanks 

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Afganistan is a 5000 year old shit hole just like the middle east. It keeps festering and they keep killing each other.
Its amazing that the west won't leave it alone. We're like a retarded kid that keeps touching the hot element on the stove. You would think that eventually we'd learn.

If they didn't have oil in the Middle East, we'd probably leave them alone, but hey, they'll probably run out of oil soon enough anyway.

Diesel_dyk wrote:

Eventually we will all just start getting along or this conflict between the islamic countries and the rest of the world will come down to the west, Russia, China, Israel and India versus the Islamic countries in a genocidal fourth World War.

Well, if those were the sides, I'd say the Islamic World would take a massive beating.  But you're right, these conflicts could eventually escalate.

Beduin wrote:

usmarine wrote:

Beduin wrote:

Not the saudi rulers, but saudi millionaires sure..

well...... how do you mean?  the saudis were involved big time.  prince turki played a huge role, not to mention pakistan which played the biggest role.

What I mean is that i can not imagine the saudi royal family will support anything that has AQ label on. I find it very hard to believe, cause they know that AQ wants the royal family removed. Not everyone in saudi is happy about the royal family's foreign policy, and some of those made sure the money will flow in afghanistan to defeat the collision forces led by US.
The same goes for pakistan. I can not imagine pakistan wanting powerful AQ and taliban as neighbours. I could imagine that some inside pakistan who is not quite happy with pakistan's foreign policy, pull their stings to hand over intelligence, and closed their eyes on the trafficking across border northwest of pakistan.

One of the more disturbing connections to terror and Saudi Arabia is Wahhabism.  Wahhabism is very influential in Saudi Arabia, and its perspective is very similar to Al Quida.   Osama bin Laden could be described as a Wahhabist.

I'm not sure exactly what sect of Islam the Saudi family is, but Wahhabism is certainly a major factor in their country.

Beduin wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

Beduin wrote:

What I mean is that i can not imagine the saudi royal family will support anything that has AQ label on. I find it very hard to believe, cause they know that AQ wants the royal family removed. Not everyone in saudi is happy about the royal family's foreign policy, and some of those made sure the money will flow in afghanistan to defeat the collision forces led by US.
The same goes for pakistan. I can not imagine pakistan wanting powerful AQ and taliban as neighbours. I could imagine that some inside pakistan who is not quite happy with pakistan's foreign policy, pull their stings to hand over intelligence, and closed their eyes on the trafficking across border northwest of pakistan.

One of the more disturbing connections to terror and Saudi Arabia is Wahhabism.  Wahhabism is very influential in Saudi Arabia, and its perspective is very similar to Al Quida.   Osama bin Laden could be described as a Wahhabist.

I'm not sure exactly what sect of Islam the Saudi family is, but Wahhabism is certainly a major factor in their country.

They are so called whabies. If you ask them -all wahabies- they will say they are salafi. But still, they do not want OBL to win. It is against their interest .

True, Salafi is the more accurate term.  Still, many Salafis spread anti-Western propaganda throughout Western countries.  They specifically target young, 2nd generation Muslims in countries like the U.K. and Australia.  They are much of the reason for domestic terrorism in said countries because of the ultraconservative mindset they encourage.

So the question I have for the Salafis is, if they don't want Osama to win, why is their message so similar to his?