Afghanistan

[ZenGum]

I just want to say, I disagree with the idea that Afghanistan can be a strong point or asset in any kind of global political struggle a la Kipling's Great Game. I think it is a liability that will bleed any foreign power that moves into it, until they get tired of the bleeding and go home with loss of prestige, resources, opportunities, and human lives.
The only time the west ever got a benefit from it was when the soviets got tangled up there, and we supported the anti-soviet fighters; but even that turned around and bit us on the bum 15 years later.

[piercehawkeye45]

Originally Posted by ZenGum

I just want to say, I disagree with the idea that Afghanistan can be a strong point or asset in any kind of global political struggle a la Kipling's Great Game. I think it is a liability that will bleed any foreign power that moves into it, until they get tired of the bleeding and go home with loss of prestige, resources, opportunities, and human lives.

I wasn't implying that we are attempting to make a colonial state out of Afghanistan. Afghanistan, while not nearly as important as Pakistan, will most likely play a role in future events. Your and Merc's point is strong, and I agree with it, but sometimes our government can be hard headed.

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

I think Pierce's thinking is a little too limited, too early-twentieth-century in its framing. He's not thinking in terms of the dramatic globalization that is the salient feature of the world's economy. Globalization makes talk of a nation not being "self sufficient/sustainable" moot.

From what I understand, global capitalism is based on the assumption of sufficient global resources. So, if resources are insufficient, we will regress towards a more mercantile mindset assuming we want to keep the same standards of living or don't progress on our needs.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by piercehawkeye45

From what I understand, global capitalism is based on the assumption of sufficient global resources. So, if resources are insufficient, we will regress towards a more mercantile mindset assuming we want to keep the same standards of living or don't progress on our needs.

That looks like a pretty big if. Dr. Paul Ehrlich and the Club of Rome were extrapolating resource exhaustion circa 1980-85. Didn't even come close to happening; their model had its defects. All that really seems to be going on is increased viability of mining lower-grade ores, extracting more and more difficult oil, and so on across the board. Start accessing the Solar System, and iron among other things gets rather suddenly very very abundant.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Arghandab & The Battle for Kandahar

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

That looks like a pretty big if. Dr. Paul Ehrlich and the Club of Rome were extrapolating resource exhaustion circa 1980-85. Didn't even come close to happening; their model had its defects. All that really seems to be going on is increased viability of mining lower-grade ores, extracting more and more difficult oil, and so on across the board. Start accessing the Solar System, and iron among other things gets rather suddenly very very abundant.

There is plenty of iron (and coal) still in the Earth's crust.

Usable water, farmable land, catchable fish stocks ... we're getting squeezed for those already.