1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

How about a big "ATTABOY" for a job well, well, you decide.

Discussion in 'Issues Around the World' started by -Ken, Oct 26, 2002.

  1. -Ken

    -Ken Guest

    While trying to better understand the feeling of the Muslim world at
    large and answer the question, why aren't we seeing more protest
    regarding these terrorist acts, I found this story in Pakistan's most
    widely circulated English language newspaper.

    Perhaps, it bothered me more when I noticed the article was published
    on my birthday.

    What did we accomplish in Afghanistan? While we may claim to
    have "struck a blow against terrorism" the reality is we trashed a
    miserable country and our promise to rebuild the country seems to
    have been pretty much worthless.

    If I was forced to do what this man has been forced to do, I would
    support any action which might bring about effective change even
    though I would have a hard time supporting terrorism.

    Haywire on the other hand...
     
  2. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Taliban was better?
     
  3. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    Puhlease Ken, I don't see how you can directly correlate Jawand province and a war on terrorism or what the U.S. has or hasn't done in Jawand province.

    First of all, all the humanitarian aid with respects to food distribution in Jawand Province is done with money and food funneled by all nations, with the U.S. being the heaviest contributor, through the U.N.

    Secondly, direct routes to get this food into the depths of the Jawand Province is at best tricky for the U.N., as there are no roads. And no we didn't blow them up.

    As the article you cited mentions, the currency in that area is those bags of wheat that are clearly marked U.S. If they're being sold, then there's some corruption in between where the U.N. can get to and deliver and the final destination.

    The skies over Afghanistan are still hostile, there are military operations in many areas. You sound as if it's a done deal and we just turned our backs, walked out and left these people starving. How about a more realistic perspective?
     
  4. Sir Joseph

    Sir Joseph Registered User

    But your answer doesn't make the US appear to be evil, therefore it must be incorrect.
     
  5. cdw

    cdw Ahhhh...the good life.

    "Puhlease Ken, I don't see how you can directly correlate Jawand province and a war on terrorism or what the U.S. has or hasn't done in Jawand province. "

    Thank you, thank you, thank you :D
     
  6. drslash

    drslash It's all about the beer

    Believe me, the USA military bombed that country in to the 21st century. Afghanistan is and will be infinitely better off now that the Taliban scum no longer run it.
     
  7. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Hehe, first time I see that being used. :)

    Ken, I will try to find you an article by something a Human Rights activist wrote when he was in Afghanistan prior to 9.11. It will make your skin crawl.

    I'd also like to hear it from Kelly, since she was there (I think) once when Taliban first took over.
     
  8. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    I was just gonna sit back and ride this one out, since Ken's apparent thesis is so wildly ridiculous. Glad I did--I never would have come up with bombing someone INTO the 21st Century!

    SM
     
  9. drslash

    drslash It's all about the beer

    Another ironic aspect to the war in Afghanistan was that the US military used million dollar bombs to destroy hundred dollar buildings and, of all things, stinking caves!
     
  10. -Ken

    -Ken Guest

    I'm having a little difficulty understanding this one.

    We have a country desperately wallowing in misery and you claim the US
    military bombed them into the 21st century? Why don't I find that amusing?
    For the family living in a bombed out building with no electricity, no running
    water or toilet, I'm guessing the 21st century must look a hell of a lot like the
    6th century.

    The point I was raising (which evidently went over everyone's head) is that we
    created the situation, which led to the Taliban's rise to power.

    Just as sure as we created Hitler (and by much the same mechanism) the Taliban
    came to power riding on poverty, desperation and misery. We did nothing (other
    than lob a few cruise missiles) for the country - even though we understood the
    conditions quite clearly.

    Hey, here's a news flash.

    When you take human beings, starve them and allow them to live in squalor,
    they react badly. This is a universal phenomenon documented throughout
    history with little room for challenge.

    So, we allow horrible conditions to exist, push images of well-fed, comfortable
    and decadent people in their faces and then have the nerve to wonder why
    they have several issues with us? No shit, did you get a dump truck to carry
    those huge balls around with you?

    In an effort to clarify any misunderstanding, this is not a US problem but a
    problem for the entire industrialized world. Of course, since we are the self-
    proclaimed leaders of the world, don't we inherit the responsibility with the job?

    As you're wandering through your refrigerator this morning trying to decide which
    of the eight choices you don't feel like for breakfast, you might want to remember
    some of those people we paid billions of dollars to bomb into the 21st century.

    And, while you're at it, why don't you wash those hands. It apparently made
    Pontius Pilat feel less guilty.
     
  11. pupowski

    pupowski Banned

    I don't see the relevance to the US war on terrorism, since the problem existed prior to our our invasion. As I recall, muslim fundamentalists were hijacking UN food convoys or extorting "fees" to allow passage. Millions of Afghani citizens were in refugee camps to avoid starvation, poverty , and Taleban abuses when our troops arrived. They came streaming back when the Taleban and al-queda mercenaries were defeated. Volunteers were harassed, arrested, and threatened with death by Muslim fundamentalists for practicing Christianity. Most Western aid agencies have Judeo-Christian roots, values, and employees. Atheists and agnostics are not big on altruism, and that is reflected in the demographics of charitable agencies. They have bitten the hand that feeds them, and brought this upon themselves, collectively.

    Furthermore, selling children by marriage contract is a Muslim custom practiced for centuries, in good times and bad. Bin Laden married one of Sheik Omar's young daughters under one. The USA didn't cause the poverty and desperation in question, Muslim warlords did. They destroyed 4000 years of Afghanistan's history, not the US or the Russians, and Muslims from other nations supplied weapons, money, and personnel. Muslim nations reward families of suicide bombers(Iraq), fund Madrassas to teach hatred and intolerance(Saudi's), and sponsored the
    Taleban(Saudi's, Pakistan), which used starvation as a weapon.

    We owe Afghanistan nothing, that war was forced upon us by their hostile government collaboration with 9/11 terrorists.
    Prospects for nation building are poor, risks are high and growing, because the people remain bitterly divided, and surrounding nations are hostile, unstable, and heavily armed.
    Others have blamed the backward religious and political practices of the region for exacerbating starvation, poverty, and widespread misery in Afghanistan. I believe those are major factors, but there are others, such as the long drought, irrigation systems destroyed by war, land mines, and lack of infrastructure.

    Don't blame the US because Moslem fundamentalists can't feed their people, blame them. If not for the food aid we supply, a lot more would be starving.
     
  12. -Ken

    -Ken Guest

    Pup,

    With all due respect, you suggest we do nothing? What differences will
    that make? Aren't we allowing the same mindset which "ruled" at the
    end of WWI to continue making the same mistakes all over again?

    We didn't cause the problem? With our manipulation of governments
    and our using them as our proxy to play wargames (the real kind)
    with the Russians, we don't own a piece of that responsibility?

    Then would you kindly explain exactly what responsibilities come with
    being the only superpower? Or, do we make that up as we go along?

    If we state we are acting in our own best interests, isn't that an invitation
    for other countries to do the same thing? And, if we say we are "doing it"
    for the good of the world, aren't we now accountable to the world?

    But to get to the heart of the matter, we have food rotting in silos, they
    have starving people, if you believe there is a God, I think you'd agree,
    he's won't be amused. <i>Yes, that starvation thing really is an asskicker!</i>


    <b><small>Don't forget to wash those hands for that clean,
    guilt-free feeling you've come to know and love.</small></b>
     
  13. pupowski

    pupowski Banned

    That is an understatement, judging from some of your conclusiuons.

    It didn't go over my head, your premise simply isn't true. Although our CIA supplied weapons to the mujahdeen to fight the Russians, we didn't start or prolong that war, nor did we direct the combat. When the fighting ended, Afghanistan was relatively intact. The infighting and anarchy that followed was caused by moslem rivalry, not the US. We didn't create Hitler or the Nazi's either, that is pure revisionist fantasy. The burden of war reparations is an excuse that defies logic and history, since it was repaid with worthless marks, leaving Hitler resources to fund an enormously expensive state of the art military empire. The depression following WW I wasn't fundamentally different than the US great depression, except war precipitated their collapse, and financial practices caused ours. The post Reagan collapse of the Soviet Empire is somewhat analagous, and no Hitler rose there either. Quite the contrary, actually, as they shed Communism for democratic rule and a market economy.
    No, it is a problem for many countries, and the responsibility of one, Afghanistan. Next in line would be neighboring Muslim countries with strategic geo-political interests at stake, or Russia, but certainly not us. Having more money doesn't obligate us to pay their bills, and money won't cure ethnic rivalry or historic hatred. That requires the will of a people motivated for peace and national unity, and there is little evidence of that.
     
  14. pupowski

    pupowski Banned

    1. No, I think we should mop up the Taleban / al-queda stragglers and leave.

    2. No, Afghanistan has neither the strategic importance nor the unified aspirations of the German and Japanese people following WWII. And they had no industrial or economic base to destroy, as it has been a poor country historicly.

    3. No and yes, but our responsibility is trivial, because the main proxy war was that of Islam vs Communism, but that is seldom acknowledged.

    4. No, that is predicated on a political process that is constantly in flux, and there is no "operators manual" except the Constitution.

    5. I'm afraid we do, for the most part.
     
  15. ethics

    ethics Pomp-Dumpster Staff Member

    Wow Pup, you amazed me in this one.

    Ken, Taleban was not directly a result of any of our policies. I would say the Muhajadeen that the CIA helped against the Soviets were our only involvement in the Afghanistan. If I were to blame anyone, it would be Afghanis themselves, as Pup eloquently put.
     
  16. -Ken

    -Ken Guest

    Gentlemen,

    We are all interdependent. If Afghanistan was sitting on a sea of oil,
    we would find a way to "improve human rights" in our own likeness.

    The issue isn't what caused the problem (I will still maintain we have
    some responsibility there) but how do we fix it. Should we elect to do
    nothing (isolationism) we will pay for it later.

    Now, should we wait for more people to starve to death and more
    hatred to be generated or will we do something noble for a change?

    The Marshall Plan worked as we can all plainly see.
    So, again I ask, don't we learn from our successes?
    More to the point, don't we learn from our failures?
     
  17. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Yeah, Pup caught me by surprise as well!

    Leon, you're right about our involvement with the Afghanis during the Soviet invasion. To the very best of my knowledge, we made no promises to them, other than to assist them in getting rid of the Soviet invaders. I never served in that operation, but I know troops who did, both aviation and Special Forces, and they've never told me about any far-reaching promises.

    FWIW, I think we're going to have a big run with nation-building again with Afghanistan. I'm not necessarily against it; I think Afghanistan will likely end up a failure, because of historical grievances between the tribes which no one seems to want to put to rest. This isn't a Muslim thing, it's just an Afghani thing. I do think it's worthwhile to try, however...

    SM
     
  18. ShinyTop

    ShinyTop I know what is right or wrong!

    Ken wants the "have" nations of the world to share with the "have not" nations of the world. On the surface a noble sentiment. In reality the whole world would enter a new Dark Ages if we were to attempt this. Helping those that show a desire to rise above and to encourage this is the best we can hope to do. Somalia and Afghanistan are two places not ready to be helped.
     
  19. Sierra Mike

    Sierra Mike The Dude Abides Staff Member

    Given past history, I'm not really able to disagree with you, Shiny. But I'm all for trying...but then and again, I'm no longer on the line, myself. So easy say, hard do.

    SM
     
  20. Coot

    Coot Passed Away January 7, 2010

    I find your premise that we are somehow doing nothing to be unfounded and absurd. Our first priority is eradicating the scorpions. Food is being supplied, however the 'source' you originally cited came out and told you what the problem in Jawand province is...namely the Afghanis themselves. The Humanitarian aid being provided via the UN, namely those bags of wheat clearly marked U.S. is the currency of the region. The UN delivers it as far as it can into the province, then the Afghanis themselves take it further in and sell it. We did not bomb out the infrastructure in that region. The roads into the interior of the province were gone long before November 2001.

    I find it completely incredible that you believe that 11 months of the U.S. being actively involved in the region will somehow undo 25 years of barbarism, especially since both the ground and the air campaigns are still underway.

    I would submit that your self righteous indignation might be better directed if you wait until real examples of the gross atrocities of our 'evil empire' actually occur....if they actually occur.
     

Share This Page