# GENERAL FORUM > IN THE NEWS >  American troops may remain in Afghanistan until 2024

## Public Enemy

*US troops may stay in Afghanistan until 2024*

America and Afghanistan are close to signing a strategic pact which would allow thousands of United States troops to remain in the country until at least 2024, The Daily Telegraph can disclose.

The agreement would allow not only military trainers to stay to build up the Afghan army and police, but also American special forces soldiers and air power to remain.

The prospect of such a deal has already been met with anger among Afghanistans neighbours including, publicly, Iran and, privately, Pakistan.
It also risks being rejected by the Taliban and derailing any attempt to coax them to the negotiating table, according to one senior member of Hamid Karzais peace council.

A withdrawal of American troops has already begun following an agreement to hand over security for the country to Kabul by the end of 2014.
But Afghans wary of being abandoned are keen to lock America into a longer partnership after the deadline. Many analysts also believe the American military would like to retain a presence close to Pakistan, Iran and China.

Both Afghan and American officials said that they hoped to sign the pact before the Bonn Conference on Afghanistan in December. Barack Obama and Hamid Karzai agreed last week to escalate the negotiations and their national security advisers will meet in Washington in September.

Rangin Dadfar Spanta, Mr Karzais top security adviser, told The Daily Telegraph that remarkable progress had been made. US officials have said they would be disappointed if a deal could not be reached by December and that the majority of small print had been agreed.

Dr Spanta said a longer-term presence was crucial not only to build Afghan forces, but also to fight terrorism.

If [the Americans] provide us weapons and equipment, they need facilities to bring that equipment, he said. If they train our police and soldiers, then those trainers will not be 10 or 20, they will be thousands.

We know we will be confronted with international terrorists. 2014, is not the end of international terrorist networks and we have a common commitment to fight them. For this purpose also, the US needs facilities.

Afghan forces would still need support from US fighter aircraft and helicopters, he predicted. In the past, Washington officials have estimated a total of 25,000 troops may be needed.

Dr Spanta added: In the Afghan proposal we are talking about 10 years from 2014, but this is under discussion. America would not be granted its own bases, and would be a guest on Afghan bases, he said. Pakistan and Iran were also deeply opposed to the deal.

Andrey Avetisyan, Russian ambassador to Kabul, said: Afghanistan needs many other things apart from the permanent military presence of some countries. It needs economic help and it needs peace. Military bases are not a tool for peace.
I dont understand why such bases are needed. If the job is done, if terrorism is defeated and peace and stability is brought back, then why would you need bases?

If the job is not done, then several thousand troops, even special forces, will not be able to do the job that 150,000 troops couldnt do. It is not possible.
A complete withdrawal of foreign troops has been a precondition for any 

Taliban negotiations with Mr Karzais government and the deal would wreck the currently distant prospect of a negotiated peace, Mr Avetisyan said.

Abdul Hakim Mujahid, deputy leader of the peace council set up by Mr Karzai to seek a settlement, said he suspected the Taliban had intensified their insurgency in response to the prospect of the pact. They want to put pressure on the world community and Afghan government, he said.
=======================================


"I will promise you this, that if we have not gotten our troops out by 
the time I am president, it is the first thing I will do. I will get our
troops home. We will bring an end to this war. You can take that to the
bank.  Barack Obama October 27, 2007

----------


## Nooomoto

This doesn't surprise me. Once we go somewhere, we never really leave. It also doesn't surprise me that Obama is full of shit.

----------


## brad1986

> This doesn't surprise me. Once we go somewhere, we never really leave. It also doesn't surprise me that Obama is full of shit.


agree. Weve already beent there too long. btw we seem to be fighting for everybody elses freedom and never our own.

----------


## toothache

That sucks!!!

----------


## Twist

We built a permanent embassy in iraq, we have no plans of leaving. We want anyone who poses a threat to us gone and we want to rule all choke points and especially oil rich areas. This was never about 911, we should all know that by now

----------


## terraj

Having a SF presence is standard US practice in places that pose a threat, but they have learnt the hard way that leaving SF troops to do training and not fighting is pointless...as in colombia and PI. 

Did you know that SF troops conduct ops in over 100 countries yearly, the heighest number was conducting in 2002-03, post 9/11.

It's the price and power of been an empire.

----------


## gixxerboy1

We will never ever ever leave.

----------


## Panzerfaust

Good, keep expanding the Empire so it can fall sooner rather than later.

----------


## Public Enemy

Now there is talk that U.S. military will stay beyond 2011 in Iraq. 


And guess what else!...


"*Anybody, who stays in Iraq as occupier will face armed resistance, Sadr says*"
http://en.aswataliraq.info/Default1....&id=144154&l=1

We all saw what Sadr's group did in 2006, over 1,000 soldiers killed in one year. This president will have the blood of every young man on his hands that is killed beyond the deadline for withdrawal. ****ing asshole, pull out of these states and end the ****ing wars already.

----------


## Shol'va

I thought our country was broke. They keep saying we don't have the money for Social Security and Medicare. We don't have the money for other social services. We don't have the money for NASA, we don't have the money for education. We don't have the money to fix our infrastructure, but we have trillions of dollars to start and support wars all over the world. We have billions to give to countries that hate us and want to do us harm. We are trillions in debt. That about sums it up. It's ironic how people have paid into a system that refuses to pay them back, but would rather give all that money away to another country instead of helping it's own people. What is up with that?

----------


## dec11

> Good, keep expanding the Empire so it can fall sooner rather than later.


^^^x2

----------


## JBlue

STUPID!! 2024 is STUPID on so many levels.

----------


## Armykid93

This is ridiculous. Training foreign countries to fight has come back to bite us before, Politicians need to get their shit together and stop lieing to us.

----------


## Armykid93

Also I just recently learned that out of 193 known countries in the world the US supports over 150 of them with foreign aid, how about we start worrying about our suffering people rather than sending money to countries with their own problems. I may be wrong but I dont remember any countries coming to help us with Katrina, did any?

----------


## Times Roman

My absolute biggest concern beyond anything else is our lack of sufficient funds to finance nation building. Remember, we MUST borrow the money from the Chinese so that we can spend it abroad.

Most politicians have no economic sense. What they fail to realize is that an ecomonically weak America puts us at risk as well.

----------


## wmaousley

Guys for some of you, I would question your patriotisim after reading this thread. This is exactly what the US doesnt need, a bunch of whinny people who havent served a day in our Military trying to have a debate on whether the US should pull of Afghanistan & Iraq. If you knew what was best for your security you would zip it and support the soldiers that keep you free.

Just a combat vets opinion  :Smilie:

----------


## terraj

> Guys for some of you, I would question your patriotisim after reading this thread. This is exactly what the US doesnt need, a bunch of whinny people who havent served a day in our Military trying to have a debate on whether the US should pull of Afghanistan & Iraq. If you knew what was best for your security you would zip it and support the soldiers that keep you free.
> 
> Just a combat vets opinion


So you have to serve to have a say? Paying taxes for these wars carries no weight?

No offence to you wmaousley, but IMO one the problems with the US today is the mentality shown in your post.

----------


## Times Roman

> Guys for some of you, I would question your patriotisim after reading this thread. This is exactly what the US doesnt need, a bunch of whinny people who havent served a day in our Military trying to have a debate on whether the US should pull of Afghanistan & Iraq. If you knew what was best for your security you would zip it and support the soldiers that keep you free.
> 
> Just a combat vets opinion


I hope you wouldn't question my patriotism? I did my six in the regular army and was probably out before you were born.

Here's how I see it mate.

I am against war. But I don't fear it either. IMHO, it is sometimes a necessary evil, something we sometimes have to do.

I can support the soldiers with boots on the ground, and at the same time, be against the politics driving the war.

As I continue to watch the events before me, I will admit that there is SOME element of national security involved with the troops being over here. But the main reason, IMHO, is NOT national security. This is the BS that is being fed to the sheep. We are here protecting our national interests, which is much different than our national security. An example of our national interests could be political stability in the region, to ensure no interruptions in our oil supplies, to maintain the balance of power (think Isreal and Turkey and to a certain extent Egypt).

Pakistan does scare me to a certain extent. They are a first level nuclear power (bomb but not much of a delivery system as of yet). If Pakistan were to fall, insurgents could get their hands on the bomb. But we really have already crossed this threshhold with the collapse of the Soviet Union. Much of their fusile material is still unaccounted for!!

----------


## JimmySidewalk

Dont worry guys. You americans have the money printer, thus all the world will go broke before you do.
All this is for oil, they dont give a shiiit about peace in a monkey thrid world country on the other side of the globe.

It is sad because that money could be spent for something better(as shol'va said) but i think the profit you'll get from ocupying all the oil fields/countries will set the balance right in the long term run.

How on earth could a bunch of cave people, who just learned they can whipe their assses with something else rather than their hand, pose a threat to the biggest military(and economic in my opinion) power in the world ? 

But at the end of it all, we're just dead weight that gets moved around acording to certain interests. Its never our call, so your opinion does not count. Best thing you can do is to not get affected by such things and live your life the best way you can under these conditions.

----------


## AndrewD54

I am a combat veteran of both afghanistan and Iraq. I am going to share a few things i have learned on this subject.

My first reaction is good we need to finish the mission, my friends should not have died in vain we have to accomplish something, but then I look at it more closely, and see what's really going on here.

America sees many countries in the region as a threat, and also that region exports vast amounts of oil (the entire modern world needs it to exist.) The idea that SOF units are there strictly to train the locals in probably bogus, it will be a price we pay in order to have a strategic forward base in an area that is extremely important to our national interests, but not the main priority. Is it sad that our young men will die for this? absolutely, however the government does not think of it like that. the deaths of soldiers are no concern to the ruling elite because most of them have never served, and only associate with the high ranking brass who themselves have forgotten what its like to be on the line... they think of the big picture.

Furthermore the afghans (on our side) are for the most part lazy, stupid, cowardly, drug addicted cavemen with AK47's even with the best soldiers in the world teaching them what to do they will never be able to take on the taliban and the rest of the guerrillas who are motivated, brave, crafty (not smart) and good fighters. The mission was to destroy the Al queda network, and for the most part we have succeeded. islamic extremists remain a very dangerous threat, and should continue to be watched and destroyed by intelligence services and SOF forces, but the greatest threat to our nation has now become the global economy.. we need to tackle that first before we agree to stay there for 15 more years.

an interesting conversation that I had with a former pilot in the Iraqi air force while guarding him and his workers during a humanitarian mission that I believe explains our issues with the middle east:

Iraqi: let me ask you a question, why does America always take israel's side in every argument and problem they have, refusing to see the other side?
Me: In america the Jews tend to be well off, and wield a lot of financial power and public opinion through the media, plus they lobby the government a lot.
Iraqi: That is why we will never be your friends.

----------


## wmaousley

> So you have to serve to have a say? Paying taxes for these wars carries no weight?
> 
> No offence to you wmaousley, but IMO one the problems with the US today is the mentality shown in your post.


I didnt make my post clear, what I meant to say was we dont need to whine and complain about the wars whether your for or against them. We need to hold our heads high and support the soldiers who were ordered to these wars. Complaining makes the situation worse for them.

----------


## wmaousley

> I hope you wouldn't question my patriotism? I did my six in the regular army and was probably out before you were born.
> 
> Here's how I see it mate.
> 
> I am against war. But I don't fear it either. IMHO, it is sometimes a necessary evil, something we sometimes have to do.
> 
> I can support the soldiers with boots on the ground, and at the same time, be against the politics driving the war.
> 
> As I continue to watch the events before me, I will admit that there is SOME element of national security involved with the troops being over here. But the main reason, IMHO, is NOT national security. This is the BS that is being fed to the sheep. We are here protecting our national interests, which is much different than our national security. An example of our national interests could be political stability in the region, to ensure no interruptions in our oil supplies, to maintain the balance of power (think Isreal and Turkey and to a certain extent Egypt).
> ...


I dont think I would question your patriotism, hell your working as a civilian in Afghanistan living away from US Military Security. lol I would be more likely to question your sanity.

----------


## terraj

> I didnt make my post clear, what I meant to say was we dont need to whine and complain about the wars whether your for or against them. We need to hold our heads high and support the soldiers who were ordered to these wars. Complaining makes the situation worse for them.


I got it and agreed.

----------


## Times Roman

> I dont think I would question your patriotism, hell your working as a civilian in Afghanistan living away from US Military Security. lol I would be more likely to question your sanity.


I may be transitioning to Pakistan sometime here in march.... maybe?

----------


## HellRiserPL

Nuke the place, save thousands American Lives, feel so bad that they have to be there just for oil

----------


## wmaousley

> I may be transitioning to Pakistan sometime here in march.... maybe?


Yeah I was right, I am officially questioning your sanity at this time.

----------


## wmaousley

> Nuke the place, save thousands American Lives, feel so bad that they have to be there just for oil


Look guy, your post is retarted to say the least. Afghanistan only has an estimated 1.8 Billion barrels of oil, which is in no way a reason why we are there. Thats a small reserve!

Also saying to Nuke the place is a very immature solution on your part. I am willing to bet you have never been outside of the US and think of FOX news is the Gospel. Grow up and know what your saying before you say it.

----------


## Tonys72

everything becomes a rotation for our soldiers, every new place we send troops we end up keeping atleast a small force there. I was in Bosnia back in 95-96 and I believe (last I heard) we still have troops there. Not saying its right just saying thats the way it is messed up really.

----------


## AndrewD54

Not to mention a nuke wouldn't be very effective in a mountain country where the majority of the people live in valleys between huge peaks.....
We're there because Iraq and Afghanistan are on both sides of Iran... haven't you ever played Risk?

----------


## Times Roman

Karzai just anounced tonight that the PSC's are here to stay until at least 2013

----------


## Flieloadoceri

Every one of the hops you listed is an American variety. How exactly does that beget an English IPA?

----------


## Thenard

Doesn't come as a shock at all. The ANA is like a bunch of JROTC kids with weapons.

----------

