Most Afghans see the Western alliance as occupiers

**Eki** · 18th Oct 11, 22:02

Did someone expect the opposite?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...792436,00.html

Fully 60 percent of Afghans fear that the country will descend into civil war once NATO forces leave, but over half see the Western alliance as occupiers. A new survey carried out be the Konrad Adenauer Foundation has found that the mood in Afghanistan is worsening.

The troops are there, according to the mission statement, to "provide a secure environment for sustainable stability." But 10 years after NATO entered Afghanistan to drive out al-Qaida and beat back the Taliban, a majority of the local population has come to see the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF) as little more than occupiers.

According to a survey published on Tuesday by the Konrad Adenauer Foundation, 56 percent of Afghans now see the foreign troop contingent as an occupying force. Furthermore, only 39 percent of those surveyed said they saw ISAF as a guarantee for security, well down from the 45 percent result found in the same survey in 2010. Fully 60 percent think that the country will descend into civil war once NATO forces withdraw.
Babak Khalatbari, head of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation's Afghanistan office, said on Tuesday that the results were "a matter of concern."

**Bob Riebe** · 19th Oct 11, 04:48

Originally Posted by Eki

Did someone expect the opposite?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...792436,00.html

It all depends on how the questions are worded.

**Mark** · 19th Oct 11, 14:04

Channel 4 news showed a report recently where tribal elders in Helmand were shown pictures of the twin towers during the 9/11 attacks. None recognised the images or knew that's why the NATO forces were in the country.

**Rudy Tamasz** · 19th Oct 11, 14:30

Who needs the damn country? Seal the borders from the outside to stop the drugs trafficking and let proud Afghanis settle their own differences (PC jargon for killing each other).

**Dave B** · 19th Oct 11, 16:51

I'd be more worried about the USA's little excursions over the border into the sovereign state of Pakistan, randomly killing innocent civillians with their unmanned drones.

**DexDexter** · 19th Oct 11, 18:12

Originally Posted by Starter

Let's see what the Afgans say when the US troops leave and the country is in a full blown civil war and/or the Taliban is in complete charge again.

I don't think they'll change their opinion. As hard as it is for us Western people to understand, people in some parts of the world just don't care about democracy, freedom of this and that, equal opportunities etc. They're just too different from us. Iraq is the perfect example.

**Roamy** · 19th Oct 11, 18:22

Originally Posted by Starter

Let's see what the Afgans say when the US troops leave and the country is in a full blown civil war and/or the Taliban is in complete charge again.

Civil War is good - Lets get the Fu______k outta there. Let the poppys grow we need to work on the crystal meth problem

**Mark** · 19th Oct 11, 19:45

Just like they did in Somalia.

**Eki** · 19th Oct 11, 21:49

Originally Posted by henners88

It seems we never learn.

It's not just the Afghans and the Somalis. Most Americans didn't listen to the advice of foreigners before they invaded Iraq in 2003 or re-elected George W Bush in 2004. They thought they knew better.

**DexDexter** · 20th Oct 11, 07:58

Originally Posted by Starter

Good advice is always valuable. However, the highlighted part is none of your, or anyone else's, business who is not a citizen of the US.

It is when it affects us. It's a global world and unfortunately the decisions of American voters have an effect on us as well. Just like our decisions over here. I'm talking about the Greece bailout. If we here in Europe make the wrong decision in that matter, you're going to feel it as well, believe me.

**Eki** · 20th Oct 11, 12:49

Originally Posted by Starter

Good advice is always valuable. However, the highlighted part is none of your, or anyone else's, business who is not a citizen of the US.

That was my point. In a similar way, most Afghans and Somalis probably think it's not business of anyone who's not a citizen of Afghanistan or Somalia or a member of their tribe to decide who their leaders or political system should be.

**Dave B** · 20th Oct 11, 13:15

Originally Posted by Eki

That was my point. In a similar way, most Afghans and Somalis probably think it's not business of anyone who's not a citizen of Afghanistan or Somalia or a member of their tribe to decide who their leaders or political system should be.

Shame the "like" button's disappeared.

**Bolton Midnight** · 20th Oct 11, 16:10

Originally Posted by Starter

Let's see what the Afgans say when the US troops leave

Are they there on their own, just I could have sworn other armies are there too, or is this the Saving Private Ryan / Enigma Code version of the war/conflict?

**Koz** · 21st Oct 11, 08:43

Originally Posted by Starter

Let's see what the Afgans say when the US troops leave and the country is in a full blown civil war and/or the Taliban is in complete charge again.

Seeing as Karzai's policies are becoming more and more similar to those of the Taliban, and the fact that more than half the country is already in the Taliban's hands, I'd say the majority of the population will welcome them with open arms.
A great deal of collaborators, who don't change colours right away, will probably lose their arms though.
The women's rights ladies will get lashings and/or stonings.

Originally Posted by Bolton Midnight

Are they there on their own, just I could have sworn other armies are there too, or is this the Saving Private Ryan / Enigma Code version of the war/conflict?

Not really. Go look for the numbers, they are all insignificant compared to the US, except perhaps the British - they have a massive 10% of US troops.

Funny thing is, there has been a 2200% increase in US casualties since 2002 till 2010, I betcha it might just reach 50x by the time they withdraw.

**555-04Q2** · 21st Oct 11, 11:50

Originally Posted by Eki

Did someone expect the opposite?

http://www.spiegel.de/international/...792436,00.html

If I had some turd sitting in my back yard with an M16 and his buddies in a tank on the road in front of my house, I would feel occupied as well...

**Eki** · 21st Oct 11, 12:26

Compared to Bush's fumbles in Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama handled the Libya situation quite well. He didn't piss off his potential allies and didn't send in occupying forces to piss off the Libyans.

**Bolton Midnight** · 21st Oct 11, 13:09

Originally Posted by Koz

Not really. Go look for the numbers, they are all insignificant compared to the US, except perhaps the British - they have a massive 10% of US troops.

Funny thing is, there has been a 2200% increase in US casualties since 2002 till 2010, I betcha it might just reach 50x by the time they withdraw.

Insignificant !!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10629358

bet their parents, children, wives , mates are well chuffed to find out they were insignificant!

**Bolton Midnight** · 21st Oct 11, 13:10

Originally Posted by Eki

Compared to Bush's fumbles in Afghanistan and Iraq, Obama handled the Libya situation quite well. He didn't piss off his potential allies and didn't send in occupying forces to piss off the Libyans.

No he let the Brits and the French sort it, again.

**Koz** · 21st Oct 11, 20:41

Originally Posted by Bolton Midnight

Insignificant !!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-10629358

bet their parents, children, wives , mates are well chuffed to find out they were insignificant!

Nice, how you turned it around.
I meant their insignificances in number compared to Americans and I clearly gave the British and exception in my post. Of course, you knew this.

I don't believe they were conscripted into their respective service. They all made a choice. A stupid choice.

Your terrorist attacks weren't perpetrated by Afghans. Those terrorist attacks in 2005 were carried out by British citizens. Maybe you guys should have dealt with this crap in home instead of sending significantly more people, than those who died in the attacks, to their graves in Afghanistan.

Yeah, how many weep for these "insignificant" soldiers?
Everyone shed tear in 2005.

Do you think in hindsight their wives and children would still let them go to Afghanistan to die or be dismembered in insignificance as they lost this so called war?

**Koz** · 21st Oct 11, 20:43

Originally Posted by Bolton Midnight

No he let the Brits and the French sort it, again.

Hang on a second there, didn't NATO prove itself incapable of waging war against Libya without American firepower (read Tomahawk missiles) and leadership?

I recall something like that, hum...

What exactly do you mean by "again"?