Taliban use 8 year old girl as suicide bomb

[K. A. Pital]

Are you serious? In a decade we've made 5 thousand schools? Well over a trillion spent as of a year and a half ago and we've made 5 thousand schools? That isn't progress, that's total epic failure.

That's one new school every 33 hours, for ten straight years, built thousands of miles away, while simultaneously fighting a war and doing countless other public works projects.

Nations with serious education reform funding build tens of thousands of schools (20-40 thousand) in 5-10 years and increased primary enrollment not by a factor of three, but by a factor of ten or more. People correctly noted that absolute numbers don't mean much. You had 1 school and now you have 3. Wow, triple the number - except that's still woefully inadequate.

[Knife]

Okay, what is it with the recent epidemic of well established posters moving the goalposts?

Knife, you wrote:

I would agree with you if we've even had an inch of progress. Not too sure there has been that much.

Magis clearly demonstrated progress has been made. If you want to argue that's not enough progress, fine, but first concede you were wrong originally: it's clearly more than "an inch", as it were.

Sorry, you can quibble and say that building a couple thousand schools is progress, but I disagree. Ten years and 5000 schools? Just saying that fact seems like progress, but couple it with the time, the money, and the other problems having our military in the field negates that progress, imo. I think we would need to define 'progress' first. So no, I'm not conceding that one until it is shown to actually be progress.

[Serafina]

It is clearly progress, things got better.
It isn't really a success, given the comparatively small progress that has been made in relation to the resources spent.

You can quibble about the quality of the progress, but there clearly is some.

[Coalition]

What we and Coalition forces SHOULD do is propagandize the shit out of this, and spray leaflets all over the state of Afghanistan with pictures and words saying something along the lines of "the Taliban use your children as bombs! Do you want YOUR child to be a bomb for Allah? If you don't come talk to us!" It's cliche, but a hearts and minds campaign is effective. On the one hand, you have accidental civilian deaths inflicted on the populace by infidels, which are terrible but not deliberate. On the other, you have deliberate murder of Muslim children by their fellow Muslims. Which is more heinous and polarizing? I hope our troops are smart.

This is about the worst thing the Taliban could have done in the wake of Obama's announcement of a troop drawdown in Afghanistan.

By framing the parents like this, you are basically insulting their honor. The target should be the insurgents who are hiding behind the 8-yr old girls. Drop hints about them being more of a coward than the children they send to fight, and how despicable the insurgents are.

Best is if you can just slightly change the pictures, so it look similar to the insurgent recruiting pictures. Then see who complains about them.

[PeZook]

Sorry, you can quibble and say that building a couple thousand schools is progress, but I disagree. Ten years and 5000 schools? Just saying that fact seems like progress, but couple it with the time, the money, and the other problems having our military in the field negates that progress, imo. I think we would need to define 'progress' first. So no, I'm not conceding that one until it is shown to actually be progress.

You actually demanded to see any progress at all. It was you who did not define which areas or to what level or in what timeframe would satisfy you, so your demand was satisfied by showing progress exists. And it's not "Oh we tripled the amount of schools by building two more", either. Poland has 32 thousand non-university schools of all types on NINETEEN TIMES the GDP and without a civil war to boot.

I'm not saying it's paradise, or that it's not taking long ; The only thing I'm saying is that progress does exist, so Magis did satisfy your demand.

[Knife]

I'm not saying it's paradise, or that it's not taking long ; The only thing I'm saying is that progress does exist, so Magis did satisfy your demand.

That I disagree with it as progress really does say that he didn't satisfy my 'demand'.

Lets remember what was said;

And let the Taliban undo every inch of progress made in pulling the country out of the dark ages? Even if the resulting atrocities don't concern you, there's a practical side as well; the Afghan government is still a mess, and the police and military aren't likely to stay loyal once the pay stops turning up. Guess who the biggest client for private military contractors will be after we pull out? If you need a hint, stick the phrase "ten dollar Taliban" in the search engine of your choice. That'll do wonders for Pakistan's internal security, won't it?

He doesn't want the country to go back to the dark ages, I don't think a couple thousand schools and immunizations really qualifies as bringing them out of the dark ages. And it sure as hell doesn't validate the puny ass numbers he did come up with when put into perspective of ten years and billions of dollars to do so. He hasn't done jack shit to satisfy my 'demands'; though to date the only demand I can think of as making is he outline a reason/mission and outline the criteria in which he thinks we can leave? Noted, he hasn't answered that one yet.

My 'demand' you seem to be focused on is simply my opinion that his idea of progress and my idea of progress seem to be different. I can fly over the country and drop a hundred bucks on it and count that as progress because they have a hundred dollars more than they did before, but we know that that is bullshit and a hundred dollars is nothing. The numbers he supplied, while at bare bones and in context with nothing, do seem like progress, put in contrast of time, money, and effort, I don't think it's progress.

[PeZook]

That I disagree with it as progress really does say that he didn't satisfy my 'demand'.

No, he didn't satisfy your revised arbitrary and undefined conditions that only appeared after he replied to your initial statement. Then you tried to pretend they were always there. That's classic goalpost moving.

Progress is defined as advancement in general. You didn't specify any additional conditions regarding duration, price or anything else. You were shown to be wrong.

He doesn't want the country to go back to the dark ages, I don't think a couple thousand schools and immunizations really qualifies as bringing them out of the dark ages. And it sure as hell doesn't validate the puny ass numbers he did come up with when put into perspective of ten years and billions of dollars to do so. He hasn't done jack shit to satisfy my 'demands'; though to date the only demand I can think of as making is he outline a reason/mission and outline the criteria in which he thinks we can leave? Noted, he hasn't answered that one yet.

No, he hasn't answered that one yet. It's also irrelevant to this particular issue.

My 'demand' you seem to be focused on is simply my opinion that his idea of progress and my idea of progress seem to be different. I can fly over the country and drop a hundred bucks on it and count that as progress because they have a hundred dollars more than they did before, but we know that that is bullshit and a hundred dollars is nothing. The numbers he supplied, while at bare bones and in context with nothing, do seem like progress, put in contrast of time, money, and effort, I don't think it's progress.

Except we're not talking about a hundred bucks here. Enrollment rates are up, the number of schools per population unit is up, access to critical infrastructure is up, all in a statistically significant amount. It's just slow and expensive (possibly to the point it's not justified to continue ; I'm not going to get into a debate about that), that doesn't magically not make it progress.

[Simon_Jester]

Semantics aside, I think everyone gets Knife's point. Can we get back onto whether the cost justifies the results, instead of obsessing over "is this no progress, miniscule progress, or just plain not enough progress?"

[Magis]

That's one new school every 33 hours, for ten straight years, built thousands of miles away, while simultaneously fighting a war and doing countless other public works projects.

Whatever. So, in like how many years do we stay to get them another couple thousand schools? How much more money? How many more lives? Quick Google-fu says there is a little over 98 thousand public schools in the US.

Then on a per-capita basis, Afghanistan already has a comperable number of schools, which you would have realized if you weren't a dumbass. I'm not saying that we should stay in order to continue building more schools. My original point was merely that there has been progress, which some braindead people on this board were denying, including you.

So when is it NOT our problem. At what point is it ok not to be in Afghanistan? What new mission are you proposing and what are the factors that describe victory?

I think it's reasonable that we stay in a security and training role, in order to protect all those schools (and other things) until such time as the Afghanistan security forces can handle that on their own. I don't think they're at that point yet.

We didn't break Afghanistan, why should we fix it? And if we do, what is the moral reason we aren't fixing the other 75% of the world that is a shithole?

If I didn't break some guy's leg, why should my taxes be used to have it fixed as part of a public healthcare system? Oh, I know why. Because civilized people who have the means to help others also have a moral obligation to do so. And regarding other countries where people are brutally oppressed by dictators: I think we will end up fixing those places if it comes down to that.

Whatever. So you're going to go ahead and explain this new mission and the solid points that need to be crossed to declare victory and come home?

See above.

What a bunch of bullshit. If that's your stance, you're going to go ahead and not only make an argument why we should do as you want, but you're also going to need to make the argument of why we aren't doing it in all the other shit holes in the world?

I've addressed this above.

Maybe you should let the "boys and girls" decide for themselves if it's worth the risks.

I'm a vet, I fully understand the reasons why people do and don't reenlist/enlist. Fuck off newb.

So because you're a vet, you're the official voice of everyone in the military, huh? My point was that, statistically, the military tends to support this mission. Are you disputing that or not, you dipshit?

At least in Canada,

So let me get this straight, you're not even American and you want to dictate how, where, and why we spend our money and our military lives? Bwhahahahahahahahaha! Fuck off buddy. How about you step up your lobbying of Canadian government to spend your money and your military lives to get Afghanistan to where you think it should be before Canada can leave.

I'm a dual citizen and pay taxes in both countries, you presumptuous prick. And, as it happens, I do support Canadian political candidates that support the effort in Afghanistan.

Why don't you go ahead and outline an argument of why we, not your country but go ahead and toss one in for Canada too, in the US should stay in Afghanistan and the criteria for 'victory' that we many come home .Because the reason I got from my government was to depose the Taliban and kill OBL.

That wasn't quite the entirety of the original mission. Right from the start, one of the stated objectives was to eliminate Afghanistan as a location from which extremists can have safe harbour. That has only been achieved when the Afghan security forces have the capability to prevent a the resurgence of a Taliban-like authority.

[Magis]

Nations with serious education reform funding build tens of thousands of schools (20-40 thousand) in 5-10 years and increased primary enrollment not by a factor of three, but by a factor of ten or more. People correctly noted that absolute numbers don't mean much. You had 1 school and now you have 3. Wow, triple the number - except that's still woefully inadequate.

And those nations have probably made a priority of doing that, and are dedicating significant resources in their own economy to meeting that single objective, and probably aren't in the middle a war at the time.

What the west, primarily the United States, has accomplished in Afghanistan while simultaneously fighting a war there, I think is pretty remarkable. And about it being "fully inadequate", according to Knife's number of 98,000 public schools in the US, Afghanistan now surpasses the US in terms of the number of public schools per capita. The student capacity of those schools isn't available to me, but I don't think that judging by the number of schools alone you are justified in claiming it to be woefully inadequate.

[Simon_Jester]

I wouldn't say that it's unremarkable, or irrelevant, but we do have to ask: at what point is our obligation to the people of Afghanistan met? Are we obliged simply to spend vast sums on the country "because it's there," and because it's too poor and chaotic and wartorn to do the job itself? Where's the limit?

[K. A. Pital]

The student capacity of those schools isn't available to me, but I don't think that judging by the number of schools alone you are justified in claiming it to be woefully inadequate.

Student capacity is very important. It should also increase in a geometric progression. For example, in the late 1920s the USSR was still reeling from the ravage of Civil War and despite school construction funds being there, only some 13000 were constructed during the first five-year plan (1928-1933). Meanwhile, the number of students rose several times, because schools started getting used a lot more intensively - two-shift education, packed classrooms, increasing class size allowed to increase the number of students several times (in some age cohorts - tenfold).

I think many nations which underwent education reforms show the same dynamics. And I think part of the problem with schools in Afghanistan is that the national government is not willing to commit to a serious education reform and the US is not pouring enough funds into Afghanistan to make it matter.

[Simon_Jester]

Also, the guerilla war isn't helping.

Again, the fundamental question is not "is significant progress being made," I think. It's a question of scale- the absolute size of the effort made, the size of the progress relative to the size of the effort, and the size of the effort relative to the US and its allies' duty to make the effort.