Afghan Presidential Election

**Celsius** · September 08, 2009, 11:55 PM

Since it has been confirmed of ballto stuffing ofr Karzai, who are you in favor of in the election.

What also surprise me is that Obama didnt like it when Iran was going through this, but he has yet to say a word in this one where American troops are involved.

**magickyleo101** · September 09, 2009, 12:15 AM

There's not really a lot we can say. We're really in a bind with this. We need to work with Karzai to fight the Taliban but and it's hard to do so if we undermine him publicly. At the same time, if we don't do that we're defeating a lot of the purpose of our presence and we're probably undermining the country in the long run.

It's just a crappy situation...

**Admiral Piett** · September 09, 2009, 12:18 AM

Who would you say you'd support? Just from what I've briefly read, both Dr. Abdullah and Dr. Bashardost seem like good candidates.

**TheTrainee** · September 09, 2009, 12:25 AM

Non-Karzai candidate. I don't know enough about the candidates to specifically pick; however, I believe it's essential for Karzai to be outed for the validity and the future health of Afgan democracy.

**Admiral Piett** · September 09, 2009, 12:35 AM

While Abdullah seems to have good heart in his campaign and seems to have a very clear platform, I think he's had a lot of ties to the Taliban and seems a traditionalist.

I like that Bashardost is more of a true independent and far more secular and an outsider from both the Taliban and the current corrupt regime and has pretty much no ties to any militia or organization.

**YuriVII** · September 09, 2009, 01:15 AM

Since none of us are Afghans, we shouldnt really comment on who WE think the Afghan president should be. You are treating it like it is the West's puppet state, which maybe it is. But at the same time you want to make the impression that it is not. This thread doesn't really disprove that Afghanistan is not a puppet state of the West because a bunch a suburban Americans and Europeans are voting on it. What do you think the Afghan people want. Afterall, chances are you have never been anywhere East of the Urals, yet they live there. Their opinion on the matter is paramount to all others. As for Karzai camp stuffing ballots I have one thing to say, WELCOME TO CENTRAL ASIA, BIT.CHES!

**Admiral Piett** · September 09, 2009, 01:18 AM

Originally Posted by YuriVII

Since none of us are Afghans, we shouldnt really comment on who WE think the Afghan president should be. You are treating it like it is the West's puppet state, which maybe it is. But at the same time you want to make the impression that it is not. This thread doesn't really disprove that Afghanistan is not a puppet state of the West because a bunch a suburban Americans and Europeans are voting on it. What do you think the Afghan people want. Afterall, chances are you have never been anywhere East of the Urals, yet they live there. Their opinion on the matter is paramount to all others. As for Karzai camp stuffing ballots I have one thing to say, WELCOME TO CENTRAL ASIA, BIT.CHES!

Don't take this too literally, it's just a poll asking who we'd support.

**YuriVII** · September 09, 2009, 01:20 AM

It is a pet peev of mine. Asking foreigners who they would support. Foreigners should have no voice in a sovereign nation's internal policies. Of coarse I am not gonna take a TWC poll literally. I just wanted to make a point.

**Babur** · September 09, 2009, 11:24 AM

Originally Posted by YuriVII

Since none of us are Afghans, we shouldnt really comment on who WE think the Afghan president should be. You are treating it like it is the West's puppet state, which maybe it is. But at the same time you want to make the impression that it is not. This thread doesn't really disprove that Afghanistan is not a puppet state of the West because a bunch a suburban Americans and Europeans are voting on it. What do you think the Afghan people want. Afterall, chances are you have never been anywhere East of the Urals, yet they live there. Their opinion on the matter is paramount to all others. As for Karzai camp stuffing ballots I have one thing to say, WELCOME TO CENTRAL ASIA, BIT.CHES!

well in both India and Pakistan,there is a large population of people descended from Afghans,who knows I could have Pathan blood.Afghanistan used to be a puppet state of the USSR during a part of the Cold War hence the intervention,so perhaps in this respect things have not changed very much except elections or something like one has been held.What a silly claim, I have travelled much further east than the Urals, I think Pathans are quite a conservative bunch and don't take insults very easily (or so I hear from some who has family in the NWFP).

Originally Posted by YuriVII

It is a pet peev of mine. Asking foreigners who they would support. Foreigners should have no voice in a sovereign nation's internal policies. Of coarse I am not gonna take a TWC poll literally. I just wanted to make a point.

but your country didn't bother with elections when you intervened in Afghanistan 30 years ago

, they were considered foreign invaders too.

of course as an Indian I am naturally concerned with what happens in Afghanistan since we both share a border with Pakistan and some Pathans (Pashtuns) did settle down in the lands of what is now the Republic of India (such as in UP ) over the past centuries and have ruled India a few times from Delhi,Karzai spent some of his years of exile in Delhi.In 1994 this was said however:

There is compelling evidence that elements of the Pakistani government have sponsored a significant flow of arms to Kashmiri militants [from arms bazaars in the North West Frontier Province], as well as an extensive training program.

the NWFP borders Afghanistan obviously

a map to illustrate my point:

On topic, Ghani is probably the best option, sadly he isn't in the poll

.

**~~TheXand~~** · September 09, 2009, 12:12 PM

Hamid Karzai, because noone is voting for him and Abdullah Abdullah is a silly name

**YuriVII** · September 09, 2009, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by Chinggis Khan

well in both India and Pakistan,there is a large population of people descended from Afghans,who knows I could have Pathan blood.Afghanistan used to be a puppet state of the USSR during a part of the Cold War hence the intervention,so perhaps in this respect things have not changed very much except elections or something like one has been held.What a silly claim, I have travelled much further east than the Urals, I think Pathans are quite a conservative bunch and don't take insults very easily (or so I hear from some who has family in the NWFP).

but your country didn't bother with elections when you intervened in Afghanistan 30 years ago

, they were considered foreign invaders too.

of course as an Indian I am naturally concerned with what happens in Afghanistan since we both share a border with Pakistan and some Pathans (Pashtuns) did settle down in the lands of what is now the Republic of India (such as in UP ) over the past centuries and have ruled India a few times from Delhi,Karzai spent some of his years of exile in Delhi.In 1994 this was said however:

There is compelling evidence that elements of the Pakistani government have sponsored a significant flow of arms to Kashmiri militants [from arms bazaars in the North West Frontier Province], as well as an extensive training program.

the NWFP borders Afghanistan obviously

a map to illustrate my point:

On topic, Ghani is probably the best option, sadly he isn't in the poll

.

Let's not bring my country in to this since it is not part of the topic at hand. Last thing we want is a Russian thread redux. The topic at hand are the Presidential elections, let's keep it that way or all the usual suspects are gonna come.

Either way, how can a natural consensus be made, when large parts of the area are without government control. The election will lack legitimacy and the winner's opponents are going to claim that. Anyways, you want an Afghan President who is going to be privy to India's interests vis a vis issues concerning NWFP. What can the Afghan state do anyways with regards to that? No matter who is President, they are not going to have the tools to enforce the state's will, they barely have enough power to enforce their will outside of Kabul and the Tadjiks are there because they are more or less complicent, as they have a large hand in forming the current regime. You start to wonder if a democracy such as this is even good for Afghanistan. It's not, its just the US placing their tools into power. The election is not anything but a show. It won't really change anything. I am thinking, what works for Afghanistan? The last time Afghanistan had any semblence of stability was when it was a monarchy. Maybe this would be a better option. Either way, not really anyone is asking the Afghan people, and it will continue as such, because the Afghan people's interests are not of real concern to the powers that be. Again....life goes on in Central Asia much as it has.

That being said, having a Panjshiri in power would be interesting.

**Celsius** · September 09, 2009, 07:13 AM

You're are right. But I highly doubt there is a teenager living in the Taliban filled Afghan mountains that visits TWC

**Central Asian Qaghan** · September 09, 2009, 10:33 AM

None. That is clear. This election as well as the candidates are a farce. There isn't any democracy when only 6% of south afghanistan voted because they think the north of afghanistan which is in control of the Tajiks and other minorities are in cahoots with the Western forces. The Pashtuns have seen though the farce and know what lies if they vote for anyone. Considering that the Taliban is gaining rather than losing membership makes this clear.

Fact is, the West is stuck and the only way is to partition the land which will lead it into another civil war as Iran who has backed most of the Tajiks take control of Northern Area while the Southern Area want their afghanistan back. I see it as a dead end and the west is stuck dead in the middle of it.