The Situation In Afghanistan

I've often wondered about the opium/heroin issue in Afghanistan. On one hand, it's in our (America's) interest to decimate the drug cultivation business in Afghanistan. On the other hand, when we do this, we take away the farmers' ability to support their families in a successful way that is natural to the region. We force them out of a profitable profession/way of life that has spanned generations, which is not going to lend itself to creating American supporters of these farmers.

I have not read a lot on the topic (as you can probably tell by my comment) so there may be major pieces of information or perspective that I'm missing. I don't have a solution or any idea about what should be done in regards to this, but I do see it as a major dilemma for both the US and Afghanistan.

I've often wondered about the opium/heroin issue in Afghanistan. On one hand, it's in our (America's) interest to decimate the drug cultivation business in Afghanistan. On the other hand, when we do this, we take away the farmers' ability to support their families in a successful way that is natural to the region. We force them out of a profitable profession/way of life that has spanned generations

Historically the mountain territories of the Hinu Kush are not known to have been opium or narcotic producing areas. When the Soviet Invasion took place the second source of funding for the ant soviet struggle was narcotics and the USA being the most ardent and enthusiastic supporter then of the Mujahadeen turned a Nelson's eye to the whole issue of opium and narcotics. The logic being anything is justified against the "Evil empire". Now the USA has woken up but it is too late to change the course of the vested interests here in Afghaistan. I do not think offering cash incentives to give up cultivation is a good idea because such incentives only pertetuate the problem.

Now I remember when I was a graduate student at UH Manoa Gov George Ariyoshi then faced a similar dilema both in Molokai and Oahu, especially in the Pearl City area, Effective policing was done by the HPD and the trffic put down. I think offering cash incentives is not a solution, it only adds to the problem.

Cash payments to not grow opium is a little like feeding and they get hungry the next day or teaching them to fish to feed the person in the future. We need to try and find a way to replace the economic system with something else. The problem is there may not be anything that will produce the same level of income as the opium crop!

The events in Afghanistan is not stable. The Karzai government ,who we support, does not have control of that country. We have never committed the resources to capture Bin Laden or eliminate the Taliban from Afghanistan because we went into Iraq that used the forces required to peoperly deal with Afghanistan. The policy we are following is not working and If we were to leave, it would not be long before the Karzai government would fall and who knows what would replace it! The Bush policy in this part of the world is a failure and our military struggles with too many missions and too liitle manpower!

Cash payments to not grow opium is a little like feeding a person and they get hungry the next day or teaching them to fish so they can take care of themself in the future. We need to try and find a way to replace the economic system with something else. The problem is there may not be anything that will produce the same level of income as the opium crop!

The events in Afghanistan show it is not stable. The Karzai government ,who we support, does not have control of that country. We have never committed the resources to capture Bin Laden or eliminate the Taliban from Afghanistan because we went into Iraq that used the forces required to peoperly deal with Afghanistan. The policy we are following is not working and If we were to leave, it would not be long before the Karzai government would fall and who knows what would replace it! The Bush policy in this part of the world is a failure and our military struggles with too many missions and too liitle manpower!

The Bush policy in this part of the world is a failure and our military struggles with too many missions and too liitle manpower!

You think everything is a failure. You only "research" the things you somehow try to blame Bush for, and totally ignore everything else. Bush policy is not a failure, only your opinions are.

Wrong - I have researched the MAJOR issues facing the US. The issues we can expect our leader will deal with and resolve. Issues like Iraq, The deficit, Trade deficit, loss of American jobs, making SS solvent, making Medicare solvent, education, Border Security, Immigration, Military Manpower. Tell me which of these issues are not important to this country? Tell me which of these issues Bush has improved since January 2001?

Wrong - I have researched the MAJOR issues facing the US. The issues we can expect our leader will deal with and resolve. Issues like Iraq, The deficit, Trade deficit, loss of American jobs, making SS solvent, making Medicare solvent, education, Border Security, Immigration, Military Manpower. Tell me which of these issues are not important to this country? Tell me which of these issues Bush has improved since January 2001?

BS. You only research your side and totally ignore anything that doesn't blame Bush for it. How many times have you responded to all the posts about good things happening in Iraq, or the good things coming from the economy? You never take in account for any other reasons besides it's the fault of Bush.

As always col, you are not going to change anything. Why don't you go help the democrats come up with an idea besides complaining?

The results I report are from sources like the Treasury, BLS, The Fed Reserve, CBO, OMB. They report things as they are. It is just that the results are not good and you Bushies never face the reality of the policies Bush is following are not working to the benefit of this country!

The results I report are from sources like the Treasury, BLS, The Fed Reserve, CBO, OMB. They report things as they are. It is just that the results are not good and you Bushies never face the reality of the policies Bush is following are not working to the benefit of this country!

Again with the BS from the left! Hey COL lets see you explain this away:

From The Washington Post, headline is linked. More bad news for the folks that wish that the economy in the U.S. was tanking.... Buried in the Business section of the paper, rather than front page news, but still at least reported. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link>Economic Growth, Tax Receipts Combine to Reduce Deficit By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, July 2, 2005; Page D01 An unanticipated surge of tax payments may push the 2005 federal budget deficit as much as $100 billion below official forecasts, leaving Republicans to claim vindication in their theory that lowering tax rates actually boosts tax receipts. In addition, this week the Commerce Department reported a solid economic growth rate of 3.8 percent for the first three months of 2005, an improvement on the earlier 3.5 percent estimate and more ammunition for Republican boasts that their tax cuts are the cause of this performance. "Sustained, strong . . . growth confirms that our policies continue to boost the economy and tax revenues," said Rep. Jim Nussle (R-Iowa), chairman of the House Budget Committee. But senior budget analysts, including the Republican who heads the Congressional Budget Office, cautioned this week that higher tax revenues may be a one-time phenomenon that in no way addresses the nation's grave deficit challenge. Much of the increase could stem from temporary factors, said CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former Bush White House economist. The major corporate tax cut of 2004 provided a one-year "tax holiday" for multinational corporations to bring home overseas profits at a reduced tax rate, and companies may be responding aggressively. Also, a large tax break for business investment ended Dec. 31, effectively raising some corporate tax rates this year, Holtz-Eakin said. Finally, strong stock market gains last year, coupled with lingering jitters from the market swoon of 2000, may have produced strong executive bonuses and a rush to cash in stocks and stock options, other economists said. "I find it difficult to get as excited about this as some people" are, Holtz-Eakin said. For longtime champions of supply-side economic theory, the excitement is palpable. Since the political rise of Ronald Reagan, such conservative economists have contended that cuts in income tax rates and in taxes on investment income would generate economic growth that would in turn produce more revenue, possibly enough to pay for the tax cuts. The theory was popularized by economist Arthur Laffer and his Laffer curve. The government's take this tax season validates that theory, conservatives say. On a single day, June 15, the Treasury took in a record $61 billion. Through June 30, three-quarters of the way through the fiscal year, receipts indicate the Treasury will reap $80 billion to $100 billion more in taxes than the CBO predicted in January. Individual tax payments have risen 21 percent beyond their level at this time last year. Corporate tax receipts are 48 percent ahead. Despite slightly higher-than-expected spending, the federal deficit could come in at $325 billion to $350 billion, significantly better than the White House's $427 billion projection or the CBO's $400 billion forecast. Some Wall Street economists say the deficit could be as low as $300 billion. "The numbers are an eye-popping vindication of the Laffer curve and the Bush tax cut's real economic value," anti-tax activist Stephen Moore wrote in the Wall Street Journal.

Of course you won't be able to, but that's okay. It'll be fun to watch. And FYI....Island Dog is 100% correct! You NEVER talk about ANY good GW may have done! Only what you see as bad and can attribute to Bush. Grow up!

The results I report are from sources like the Treasury, BLS, The Fed Reserve, CBO, OMB. They report things as they are. It is just that the results are not good and you Bushies never face the reality of the policies Bush is following are not working to the benefit of this country!

And your "results" have been proven wrong many times. You distort the data you present, you never take anything else into perspective except blaming Bush. When is the last time you blamed Congress? When is the last time you blamed anybody besides Bush? You are totally one sided.

And I report good things coming from the economy and Iraq. Where is your opinion about that? Someone posts an article about something good happening with the economy, but you don't respond col. If you do it's the usual world is ending because of the deficit bs you use.

The results reported by the sources I use are facts. The deficit is as reported. The trade deficit is as I reported. I have not been proven wrong you do not accept the facts that show the Bush policies are not working. Today the market lost 101 points and oil is $61. Have you looked at your statement IRA lately? The market stinks and your great economic situation is, for the most part, in your head!

Let me be the voice of truth and reason again. The Taliban, during the short time they were in power, eradicated over 95% of the opium cultivation in Afghanistan. Yes they executed women in stadiums and yes they demanded women to be outside only with a relative or husband, but let it be known they also rid their country of the opium trade. I find one comment particularly naive. That it's their way of life for centuries and that getting rid of the opium (you know, heroin and morphine which enslaves the users) would hurt the farmer's livelihoods. Does this person extend that attitude to Columbia which provides the US with something like 80% of their cocaine consumption? In fact, that attitude is borderline insane. That people who have a particular way of life should be allowed to continue the tradition/profession that they've always known? Opium is bad. Stopping opium from flourishing is good. End of story.
A sidenote is that the US funded the Taliban with millions of dollars. Not the actions of a nation who oppose a regime is it?

Let me be the voice of truth and reason again. The Taliban, during the short time they were in power, eradicated over 95% of the opium cultivation in Afghanistan.

Prove it please. I have a report from the DEA here Link saying that production went up after the Taliban and that the ban on poppy production only was for the areas controlled by the Northern Allies. A ban that would be hard to enforce when they don't control the land.

If the US would have decided to go into Afghanistan with total force, like Col Gene wants, we would be in a worse state then what the Soviets faced. The reason why foreign powers have failed to fold the Afghanistan is because they have always entered like a bull in a china closet. Let's try something different and let the Afghans rule themselves for a change.

The difference between the Taliban and the present Government is that now a publics works system is in place, commerce is thriving, conflict between the tribes is almost gone and even the warlords have found that being elected fairly at Federal Government polling stations benefits them too.

As for giving money to Afghan farmers to stop producing poppy and produce other goods, IMO is a good idea. It worked for the US Government to slow down farm production of over stocked items during the great depression. You also have to give the new Government a little time to build strength and use some diplomacy first during it’s infancy, or do you think that Karzia should just commit suicide now?

everything is a failure. You only "research" the things you somehow try to blame Bush for, and totally ignore everything else. Bush policy

like Iraq, The deficit, Trade deficit, loss of American jobs, making SS solvent, making Medicare solvent, education, Border Security, Immigration, Military Manpower. Tell me which of these issues are not important to this country? Tell me which of these issues

me be the voice of truth and reason again. The Taliban, during the short time they were in power, eradicated over 95% of the opium cultivation

Starting with the last: Taliban monopilised the cultivation and used the proceeds to further their own nefarious ends. They did not permit ordinary Afghans to cultivater poppy,now it has been democratised.

There are important issyes the Bush needs to focus and Col Gene has rightly drawn attention to they. As for as research is concerned, the American media is ususally slow on reporting the Bad News. Forsinstance the US bombed civillians in Afganistan using "LAser guided smart bombs". 16 women and children wre ki.lled.

The results reported by the sources I use are facts. The deficit is as reported. The trade deficit is as I reported. I have not been proven wrong you do not accept the facts that show the Bush policies are not working. Today the market lost 101 points and oil is $61. Have you looked at your statement IRA lately? The market stinks and your great economic situation is, for the most part, in your head!

And we have proved your "facts" wrong many times col. How many times have you used outdated data? How many times have you distorted the data to suit your needs? Several times col.

I'm not saying all your numbers are wrong col, but you associate a number with one man. That is why you are an obsessed Bush hater. You don't take in account the recession that was started before Bush was elected. You don't take in account for Sept. 11 impact on the economy. We constantly show the improvements in the economy and the only thing you have to complain about is the "deficit".

The results reported by the sources I use are facts. The deficit is as reported.

COL you are soooooo FULL of it that it's pitiful! I have asked you 3 times to try and refute this and you have yet to do so. So I'll ask again. Try to refute this or find something else to whine about.

>Economic Growth, Tax Receipts Combine to Reduce Deficit By Jonathan Weisman Washington Post Staff Writer Saturday, July 2, 2005; Page D01 An unanticipated surge of tax payments may push the 2005 federal budget deficit as much as $100 billion below official forecasts, leaving Republicans to claim vindication in their theory that lowering tax rates actually boosts tax receipts. In addition, this week the Commerce Department reported a solid economic growth rate of 3.8 percent for the first three months of 2005, an improvement on the earlier 3.5 percent estimate and more ammunition for Republican boasts that their tax cuts are the cause of this performance. "Sustained, strong . . . growth confirms that our policies continue to boost the economy and tax revenues," said Rep. Jim Nussle (R-Iowa), chairman of the House Budget Committee. But senior budget analysts, including the Republican who heads the Congressional Budget Office, cautioned this week that higher tax revenues may be a one-time phenomenon that in no way addresses the nation's grave deficit challenge. Much of the increase could stem from temporary factors, said CBO director Douglas Holtz-Eakin, a former Bush White House economist. The major corporate tax cut of 2004 provided a one-year "tax holiday" for multinational corporations to bring home overseas profits at a reduced tax rate, and companies may be responding aggressively. Also, a large tax break for business investment ended Dec. 31, effectively raising some corporate tax rates this year, Holtz-Eakin said. Finally, strong stock market gains last year, coupled with lingering jitters from the market swoon of 2000, may have produced strong executive bonuses and a rush to cash in stocks and stock options, other economists said. "I find it difficult to get as excited about this as some people" are, Holtz-Eakin said. For longtime champions of supply-side economic theory, the excitement is palpable. Since the political rise of Ronald Reagan, such conservative economists have contended that cuts in income tax rates and in taxes on investment income would generate economic growth that would in turn produce more revenue, possibly enough to pay for the tax cuts. The theory was popularized by economist Arthur Laffer and his Laffer curve. The government's take this tax season validates that theory, conservatives say. On a single day, June 15, the Treasury took in a record $61 billion. Through June 30, three-quarters of the way through the fiscal year, receipts indicate the Treasury will reap $80 billion to $100 billion more in taxes than the CBO predicted in January. Individual tax payments have risen 21 percent beyond their level at this time last year. Corporate tax receipts are 48 percent ahead. Despite slightly higher-than-expected spending, the federal deficit could come in at $325 billion to $350 billion, significantly better than the White House's $427 billion projection or the CBO's $400 billion forecast. Some Wall Street economists say the deficit could be as low as $300 billion. "The numbers are an eye-popping vindication of the Laffer curve and the Bush tax cut's real economic value," anti-tax activist Stephen Moore wrote in the Wall Street Journal.

That's an example of how he ignores anything but his own distorted views. He will just come back and scream more about deficits no matter what.

I had rightly predicted that Afghanistan will be the new fronmtier of the War against Terror and the recent Obama shift vindicates what I had predicted 4 yeara back.

Look; I sit here in my home in West Virginia, having spent seven years, secure on my home soil. This is because the Bush Administration had done well; they held down the Islamic nutjobs and savages, keeping them in their own part of the world, by invading Iraq.

Now we have Obama, bleeding heart, socialist liberal who wants us out of Iraq for one reason: Bush was too successful there, despite the negative "this war is lost" rhetoric and blatant legislative obstacles of Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Jay Rockefeller, Jack  Murtha, and the rest of the anti-war Democrat propaganda machine.

Now, with the new president, I'm feeling less and less secure all the time.