So the West in now committing thousands more troops to Afghanistan to 'finish the job'. We saw the recent farcical process of a so-called democratic election in Afghanistan in which the incumbent Karzai was re-elected to lead the country. Even his close friends (USA and UK among others) who imposed him on the country in the first place, were disconcerted about the level of fraud involved to get their man in. Nevertheless, it was later described as a victory for democracy. So despite having a 'democratically elected' government, it has not been consulted about the new influx of troops - so much for democracy! Despite making up reasons for the original invasions of both Iraq and Afgahanistan, the real reason is to provide a bridgehead and firm base for the US and western allies in the volatile Middle and Far East. Afghanistan is close to both Pakistan and Iran and as a base can be used to pressure both countries to 'toe the line'. The spurious reason for invasion was to counter the terrorist threat, but all the know terrorists up to now have come from Saudi Arabia or Pakistan and been trained in Pakistan not Afghanistan.
The fact that the most sophistacated and well-armed forces cannot defeat a poorly armed guerrilla force (with old Kalashnikovs and a few rocket launchers)tells us more about teh character of this war than anything else. No such rag-taggle army could hold down the wetern allies unless they enjoyed widespread support among the people - that is a trusim about all gurrilla struggles: without genuine popular support they are doomed to fail, but with it they can never be defeated. Why do historical experiences have to be remade time and time again?
The money spent on waging the war in Afghanistan would be enough, if given to the people, to make every Afghani a wealthy person. Instead the country is bombed back into the stone-age, thousands killed and maimed and women more oppressed than they were under the Taliban. It is more than time to get the troops out and let the Afghanis run their own country.