Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: i-node who wrote (534176)	12/3/2009 9:26:28 PM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1573927

Yes they can operate without Afghanistan, or without open acceptance and support from any government. But if they have the acceptance and support it becomes even easier. And with no containment on the other side of the border, Pakistan would have more trouble with its attempts to deal with Al Qaeda and the Taliban (and if you define those groups narrowly, allied radical militants, which if you define the groups broadly would be included).

To: i-node who wrote (534176)	12/4/2009 12:41:09 AM
From: tejek	Respond to of 1573927

Did you meet with Chuck Norris and he gave you skinny on what's happening in Afghanistan/Pakistan? You're quite the authority these days. One of the reasons for their being so few is that many have fled to Pakistan (another is we've killed or captured a lot of them). Another is likely that the figure is grossly underestimated (i.e., if there are 200 instead of 100 that's missing it by 100%, which would be gross underestimation). The point has been made, however, that AQ today is a different organization than it was 8 years ago. We killed or captured the vast majority of the principal players in the organization, so whatever AQ is today, it is totally re-formed. Coincidentally, the ease of secure communicating has increased substantially. AQ literally does not NEED Afghanistan any longer. Which is one reason an argument could be made for leaving Afg. rather than continuing the war; whether it is an important component in antiterrorism efforts today is doubtful (although there are other reasons for being there). AQ, out of necessity for them, is far more diverse and sophisticated than the organization that attacked us in '01. There is no reason for a significant presence in Afg., where you're under constant threat, when you could just as easily be in Brussels or Rio.