Australians are in Afghanistan at the invitation of the Afghan government

I did not know this, I have never read any news report where Australian troops were invited into the country by the Afghan government. I thought they had accompanied the US invasion force.

Why did the Afghans invite the Australians rather than say, their neighbors and allies, the Pakistanis? In fact, why did they invite the European NATO force, rather than the Arabs as they did in the war with Russia?

When was this invitation issued? By whom? To whom?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Probably the "official" government.

For the most part they'd like Canada to stay also, as we are using our engineers to build schools etc in Kandahar and area. I can only imagine it is the same for Aussies, the military philosophies are very similar.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

come now james
you guys have been good little troopers
you guys have proven your solidarity with your anglo kin and now...
its time to go home rather than propping up a corrupt govt

What the Australian government is debating this week is a continuation of a one-sided military intervention — with the people of Afghanistan excluded from the process. The Afghan people did not ask for this war and they are not being consulted now. This is a breach of human rights in the same way as refusing a young girl an education.

Denying Afghans a voice in this debate is contradictory to the objectives of Australia's mission. The people of Afghanistan deserve the right to determine their own destiny​

http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/socie...in-the-afghanistan-debate-20101019-16rt9.html

can i see the invite?

Karzai said: "The time has come to reduce military operations [and] boots in Afghanistan … to reduce the intrusiveness into the daily Afghan life."

Nato's military commander in Afghanistan, General David Petraeus, responded to Karzai's demands by warning that his criticisms threaten to undermine the war and could make Petraeus's position "untenable", the Post reported. ​

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2010/11/15-4

despite that....

THE Coalition has proposed a major expansion of Australia's military role in Afghanistan, saying the nation should send in hundreds more troops as well as tanks, helicopters and artillery.

Setting the scene for heated debate in the new Parliament over the war, the Coalition says a boosted force in Afghanistan would mean Australian troops no longer have to rely on protection from other nations as they train Afghan troops​

http://www.theage.com.au/national/libs-in-afghan-troops-switch-20100929-15xg4.html

funny shit, ja?

 

lets eyeball some invites....

The US has reportedly been asking the Australian Government for more troops in Afghanistan for years and for them to take over command of coalition forces in Oruzgan province. Former US Commander in Afghanistan General Stanley McChrystal made three written requests in 2008 and in 2009 after the Dutch Government decided to withdraw its troops from the Province, The Sydney Morning Herald reports. According to one Australian Defence source, US officers have repeatedly said they are ''sick and tired of Australia not doing enough … they'd like us to be doing more''. The US has also been pushing for Australia to take the lead in Oruzgan province. ''Any discussion on leadership [in Oruzgan] is quickly terminated by Australian politicians,'' said another source.
​

http://www.news.com.au/national/us-...ps/story-e6frfkvr-1225956244272#ixzz16peKHt7V

but its different now eh?

JULIA Gillard has hardened her commitment to the Afghan war, leaving open the possibility Australian troops could be engaged for at least another decade.

The Prime Minister has warned against a rigid adherence to handing over responsibility for security in Afghanistan to its government by 2014, insisting the transition must be tailored to the conditions on the ground. Writing an opinion piece for The Australian today, Ms Gillard seeks to recast expectations about the length and intensity of Australia's commitment to the war, ahead of a NATO summit on Afghanistan she will attend in Lisbon this weekend that will consider conditions for the transition.

"It's important this (transition ) process is not started until we are confident it will be irreversible," she writes. "We must not transition out only to transition back in. "Australia will remain engaged in Afghanistan for the next decade at least. So, too, must the international community.​

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/nat...gh-on-afghan-war/story-fn59niix-1225956024854

/eek

you go girl!

/nonplussed

it ain't mine to give,fella

 

thats ok
thinking aint really your forte

once again it aint mine to give
nor do i give a shit about the place
the afghanis can decide their own fate

 

So they were invited by the government they helped install. That makes more sense. Its quite usual in the case of occupied countries for installed governments to require protection from their own people. In fact I'd say thats usually how you can identify the lack of self determination - by the presence of a foreign military which protects the government from its people.

You're confusing the government of Afghanistan with the people of Afghanistan. Also the people of Pakistan with the government of Pakistan. The Pashtuns who live in the NWFP of Pakistan are all part of the same "clan" which makes up the Pashtuns which inhabit the majority of Afghanistan. Moreover, the Shias of Afghanistan are all part of the same "clan" which extends into Iran. In either case, as an ethnocentrically bonded community, they do not recognise political borders over tribal links. It would be like the US asking Iran for aid in case of attack, rather than the Australians. Presumably it will be met with the same degree of credulity as that move would invite in Americans.

 

I'm not sure what you are referring to - you do realise that the Taliban are not the Shia tribes of Afghanistan? And that I was referring to anti-Taliban groups as well? That would be the Hazaras and if you must include the Pashtuns, then probably the Turi as well. Consider it a parallel to the Hispanic population of the US and its continuity with the Mexicans and South Americans. The Hezbe-Wahdat is an excellent example of the kind of group I am referring to, the Shiite mujahideen groups

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hezbe_Wahdat


And that the government of Iran is separate from the people of Iran? In the eventuality of the tribes needing help, they would get volunteers from their own "people" regardless of which side of the border they came from. This would have literally zero input from the governments on either side. For the current government to call on Europeans for aid, is akin to [as I stated] Americans calling on Iran for aid. Its not a situation which will stabilise the country. But it has been clear from the outset that the people of Afghanistan or the stability of the country is not a priority of the "peacekeeping" troops.

 

Yeah we heard about the elections. Who selected the candidates?

 

In this case, by Karzai and his brother who wield enormous power in Kandahar due to the support they enjoy from US backed warlords. Surely, this very important aspect of the elections was debated by all those so concerned with the future of Afghanistan? Essentially all that NATO does is help support those warlords who play ball with them as they have done in Iraq and the muscle power of the foreign troops and local militia trained by them make sure that the choices available are limited to those who play the Great Game.

Is it any wonder then, that they need the foreign troops to maintain control of the populace and anyone who does not support this corrupt government is an insurgent and a target for those same foreign troops?

 

This is how Australia went to Afghanistan:

Australians were never invited into Afghanistan by the Afghan government nor the US government. Australians ingratiated ourselves on the Americans, once again, to facilitate a freetrade deal with America. Prime Minister John Howard volunteered Australia would be there as a loyal ally, no debate in Parliament. Just as with WWI and WWII because England went to war, our leaders declared war on Germany without even being asked too by England. Even Vietnam PM Menzies lobbied America to allow Australia to send troops there. We are a nation of brown nosing gutless wonders who are to frightened to stand on our own, we must look for a protector.

 

Yes, I know this. It is usually why all Australian "peacekeeping" urges correlate so strongly with US foreign policy actions. The Americans have been trying to wheedle India into similarly training their "peacekeeping" forces for future milirtary interventions. They are excited at the prospect of US bases in the Indian ocean. Watch this space for what I think of that.

http://www.rediff.com/news/2003/apr/21josy.htm