NationStates Jolt Archive

http://asia.news.yahoo.com/070915/afp/070915204901int.html
GOETTINGEN, Germany (AFP) - Germany's Green party, which when in power helped launch their country's peacekeeping mission in Afghanistan, on Saturday failed to agree a common line on the deployment of troops there.

A raucous party congress, aimed at bridging a deep rift over whether to pull out the military contingent, came five days before the parliament in Berlin is to discuss the issue.

A majority of the 800 delegates disavowed their leadership, rejecting a motion to unconditionally approve the planned extension of the troops' mandate.

Instead they adopted a motion setting conditions for the participation of German troops in any military operations in Afghanistan.

They also rejected any use of German Tornado reconnaissance jets in the war-torn country and sending German troops to fight in operations against the Taliban and Al-Qaeda.

The conditions it speaks about are basically things involving civilian casualties, which in turn implies that they will be opposed as long as NATO uses its current tactics in the south.

All that is of course just fancy talk for the fact that the Greens (now that their leader Joschka Fischer is gone) are split between their leadership (which is sorta committed to staying in Afghanistan) and their base (which prefers to think in terms of "no war" and "fuck the US"). And because a number of high-ranking Green politicians can't become too unpopular with the base and still hope for the leadership some time in the future, apparently the speeches in favour of the deployment were deliberately muted and unconvincing. No one wants to be seen to be taking a strong stance.

Since the Greens are not in government, this has no immediate ramifications - they can still be outvoted (along with the Left Party, which is against everything).

But it poses a question: What do you think about Afghanistan? What's the best solution to the situation there? Would you be prepared to support troops staying for a decade more or longer?

If you read German, this article fits in with my position on this quite well: http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,505969,00.html

"Die Beschlüsse der Grünen zu Afghanistan sind ein gefährlicher Rückfall in fundamentalistische Zeiten" - Quite.

The deployment of just about everyone in Afghanistan is pretty spiffing. Germany included.

(along with the Left Party, which is against everything).
Apart from a recreation of the DDR on a whole-of-Germany scale, pretty much, aye.

Most Germans want an immediate withdrawal.

let me post that again
Most Germans want an immediate withdrawal.

Most Germans want an immediate withdrawal.

let me post that again
Most Germans want an immediate withdrawal.
Statistics to back this up?

did you read the OP?
...

Yes, of course I did. Oh, sorry, some members of the Green Party want to pull out. Well fuck me, that pretty much shows what the whole population of Germany thinks, eh?

Statistics to back this up?
I think it's true. Forsa did a poll a while back.

To be honest, I don't understand why. Maybe it has to do with history, but I think it'd be a cop-out to just blame it on that.

I think that the esteemed leadership has done a crap job explaining why German troops are in Afghanistan and what they're doing there. So you don't hear much good news.

On the other hand, people aren't happy when they hear about yet another engagement with Taliban fighters that ends up with dozens civilian casualties.

Question is: what happens if German troops, or NATO troops in general, leave?

Statistics to back this up?did you -fully- read the OP?

...

Yes, of course I did. Oh, sorry, some members of the Green Party want to pull out. Well fuck me, that pretty much shows what the whole population of Germany thinks, eh?It looks to me like you did read the title, wich gives you the impression that only the Green Party wants out. (of course when I say the green party I mean to say most of..)

But in reality its Germany that wants out.. not just the green Party -most of-.

BTW, when you say "of course I did read the OP".. I hope you read the linked News article too (because that is the base of his OP).

But in reality its Germany that wants out.. not just the green Party -most of-.
Which then leads me to the actual question I am posing with this thread:

What do you think should happen with ISAF and OEF, and why?

Which then leads me to the actual question I am posing with this thread:

What do you think should happen with ISAF and OEF, and why?What I think it should happen is this:
All and every Country with large number of troops in another Country -for extended periods of time- should have to be subject to referendums and polls to keep the intervention going.

To keep costs low we should use elections (parallel poll) to ask for the peoples approval.

In these case -at least- Canada and UK are free to go home.. and maybe Germany too.

What I think it should happen is this:
All and every Country with large number of troops in another Country -for extended periods of time- should have to be subject to referendums and polls to keep the intervention going.
That's not an answer.

I'm not asking you to defer your opinion to the mob. I'm asking you how you would vote in such a referendum, and why.

That's not an answer.

I'm not asking you to defer your opinion to the mob. I'm asking you how you would vote in such a referendum, and why.I would vote for an immediate withdrawal of course.

why? for several reasons.
The first one being that I was against these wars in the first place.

The first one being that I was against these wars in the first place.
No, quit with the plural. Iraq is irrelevant here.

But, if you were against Afghanistan, that's fine. I was too, back in '01 (but that was during a very anti-American phase).

Still, it seems like leaving has a 100% chance of not improving the situation, while staying has some probability of success. All it would take would be to get the Pakistanis on board properly (no idea whether a Bhutto/Musharraf combo would be more likely to tackle the issue), and a much more open commitment.

The problem right now is that things are being allowed to just drag on. Soldiers and civilians are being killed while the situation remains unchanged. That's crap, NATO has to make a serious effort not to keep the status quo, but to actually improve security. If that takes more troops, then so be it.

That's not an answer.me bad.
.
I'm not asking you to defer your opinion to the mob. ok ok.

I will answer.. relax :D

Still, it seems like leaving has a 100% chance of not improving the situation, while staying has some probability of success. while i dont agree with "leaving has a 100% chance of not improving the situation"

I am 100% sure staying has a 100% chance of prolonging the War.

Germany should withdraw, along with any other country dragged into Bush's ill-concieved wars.

Germany should withdraw, along with any other country dragged into Bush's ill-concieved wars.


But Afghanistan is different. The Taliban greatly aided the 9/11 hijackers. This war isn't just about bombing hostiles. It's about showing the world that no one gives Bush an excuse to invade a country. NO ONE!!!!!

I am 100% sure staying has a 100% chance of prolonging the War.
And what was going on in Afghanistan before the invasion? A few pacified areas ruled by maniacs and the rest of the country - war.

I have my doubts that the fighting involving NATO right now is that much harder on the civilian population than the fighting going between the Taliban and the Northern Alliance before the invasion.

Stay in Afghanistan.

Leave Iraq, Germany, and Japan.

All it would take would be to get the Pakistanis on board properly (no idea whether a Bhutto/Musharraf combo would be more likely to tackle the issue), and a much more open commitment.

bwahahahaha

It was under Benazir's regime that the taliban was formed. She was an avid cheerleader for the Kashmiri "freedom fighters" too.

Now that the US looks upon their former blue-eyed boys in a different light, these Pakistani politicians (Nawaz, Benazir etc) too mouth the nice little sound bytes about how they are against terrorism blah blah blah.

NOTHING is going to change in the ground UNTIL Pakistani army lets go of their "Strategic depth" policy. There is no evidence that they will let go of that yet or will do so in the near future.

It's about showing the world that no one gives Bush an excuse to invade a country. NO ONE!!!!!nigerian cake