Reply
Sat 20 Sep, 2003 10:44 am
Its about two years since we attacked afghanistan, but should we have done it?
Ok, we overthrew the Taliban, but the rights of the people of afghanistan have barely improved.
Many of the new girls schools have been burnt down and women are still afraid to go out without their burkas.
Most of the new government are warlords with allegations of murder and rape to their names, and are being used as a tool of the US.
There are still millions starving and thanks to the clever stratergy of painting cluster bombs the same colour as aid packages people get blown up in search for food.
So should we have attacked afghanistan?
oh and btw, we never did find osama....
Should we not have an allowed it as a base for Al Qaeda to train and grow stronger? Of course the action in Afghanistan was justified and necessary. As far as girls schools being burned down and women wearing burkes. We cannot change a culture that has to evolve. I should note that the starvation you speak about as well as the destroyed infrastructure that was a fact of life in Afghanistan long before the US ever arrived. I should add that much of the starvation and lack of shelter is related to the 1/2 million refugees that returned to Afghanistan upon the overthrow of the Taliban. Do we have a responsibillty to them? Question are the Afghani's better off now than under the Taliban. I believe the answer is a resounding yes,
Quote:We cannot change a culture that has to evolve.
What racist, imperialist dreck!
Re the question it would ultimately have been necessary. The Taliban was asking for proof that the attack was related to AlQuaeda and at that time we had none that would stand up in any court or would be convincing.
It was either going to be a long drawn out negotiation with the Taliban in which they, IMO, would ultimately have wanted to turn over Al Quaeda but not have had the resources and will power to do so.
The demands made to the Taliban were for the domestic audience, the war was decided upon before any demands were made.
As to the aftermath I think the question should be whether we should have followed through on all our promises to Afghanistan. IMO we should have, Afghanistan is a place that got a worse deal than anyone (more so than the US). We killed far moreAfghanis than deaths we suffered on 9/11 but when it came time to pay for reconstruction and the fulfillment on our promises we shrugged it off and told other nations to contribute more.
BTW, I diagree with Au's comment that we can't change a culture but it's not racist.
hobit, i think you are hung up on the word evolve when it would be good to note that evolution occurs everywhere, even in advanced society. Au did not necessarily mean that the Afghani culture was like that of primates.
Craven, I am "hung up" on coments made by many here that equate relative worth to societies.
I agree that had we engaged in prolonged dialogue with the Taliban nothing would have happened. I do, however, deplore the walk in, break everything, then sit back and do little to nothing approach the US applied in Afghanistan. We are likely to make even more enemies there than we had before.
We didn't break everything. We simply didn't fulfill our promises to fix them.
Hobitbob
Quote:What racist, imperialist dreck!
In what way was that racist. The complaint was that girls school were being burned down and women were still wearing burkes. We cannot change the culture of that if it is to change it will have to through the evolution of ideas.
Time to stop playing your race card it is meaningless bull crap.
Sorry, AU, I thought you were going to go into another one of your "Muslims are subhuman" routines.

The imposition of the Burkha and the disapproval of female educationa re all new innovations to Afghanistan, dating from the end of the Soviet Occupation. The rise of the Taliban allowed these innovations to take hold. The Burkha is a traditional garment used by a few of the Pashtun hill tribes. It was never universal. In many ways Afghan women have the good old USA to thank for their oppression.