Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
23 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
LOL....."We must finish the job we started in Afghanistan" (Original Post) Logical May 2012 OP
Depends what that means. DCBob May 2012 #1
It means creating a military and security force that maintains a stable government Luminous Animal May 2012 #4
Because the non-West has worked out so well for Afghanistan? RZM May 2012 #16
Really, you know any feminist organizations that support this occupation? Luminous Animal May 2012 #17
No and that's my point RZM May 2012 #18
I am talking about Afghanistan feminist organizations. Luminous Animal May 2012 #19
I'm contrasting 1998 with the post 9/11 world RZM May 2012 #20
Public enemy #1 for Western feminist to feel good about the invasion. Luminous Animal May 2012 #21
Except 1998 was a far cry from 9/11 and 2001 RZM May 2012 #22
See, now you've really descended into gibberish. kenny blankenship May 2012 #6
Sure you don't mean... abelenkpe May 2012 #12
"Finishing the job" would reqire an occupation of a million soldiers andviolent repression. Odin2005 May 2012 #2
Same thing that is wrong -- Hell Hath No Fury May 2012 #3
Still wondering WTF was "The Job" in the FIRST place... BiggJawn May 2012 #5
The objective is Victory. Lasher May 2012 #9
At this point it means leaving with out hanging our heads in shame. progressoid May 2012 #11
Alexander the Great, the Byzantines, the Romans, The Russians.... DCKit May 2012 #7
+1000 nt abelenkpe May 2012 #13
The job will be finished when we leave the country and stop wasting money there. Lasher May 2012 #8
Afghan Screams Aren’t Heard polly7 May 2012 #10
The pipeline has a few more years I suppose. mmonk May 2012 #14
Look what happened sarisataka May 2012 #15
What's wrong with our government is that it won't admit to losing another war. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2012 #23

DCBob

(24,689 posts)
1. Depends what that means.
Tue May 1, 2012, 09:41 PM
May 2012

If it means leaving the country with a relatively stable government, military and security force then that makes sense.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
4. It means creating a military and security force that maintains a stable government
Tue May 1, 2012, 09:54 PM
May 2012

hostile to its own citizenry but friendly to Western interests. Which makes sense. Its what the West has done all over the globe for centuries.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
16. Because the non-West has worked out so well for Afghanistan?
Wed May 2, 2012, 12:53 AM
May 2012

Give me a fucking break. Once upon a time, before 9/11, liberals (and especially feminists) were as anti-Taliban as it got. Oh my how things change . . .

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
17. Really, you know any feminist organizations that support this occupation?
Wed May 2, 2012, 01:13 AM
May 2012

Kabul is a Potemkin Village of Western feminism.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
18. No and that's my point
Wed May 2, 2012, 01:17 AM
May 2012

Feminists were very anti-Taliban during the Clinton years. I was in college at the time and i received the petitions and the lectures from liberal professors who said 'something has to be done'

Then once something was done, the anti-war and anti-imperialism immediately trumped the feminism. It was a rather fast switch.

BTW, it started with the 1998 bombings of the aspirin factory in Sudan. But it wasn't until 2001 that the left completely switched from hating the Taliban to hating the Bush military actions.

It was some seriously dizzying shit. It was also ironic. Once the calls to action had real consequences, everybody's song changed. All of a sudden Bush went from an isolationist to an intervener and the interveners became isolationists. It's something I'll never forget.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
19. I am talking about Afghanistan feminist organizations.
Wed May 2, 2012, 01:22 AM
May 2012

Yes, they are against the Taliban but they are also against the occupation. I support them on their terms. I'll take my lead from them not weepy Western propaganda.

Go figure.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
20. I'm contrasting 1998 with the post 9/11 world
Wed May 2, 2012, 01:26 AM
May 2012

In 1998, the Taliban was public enemy number one for the feminists. In 2002, it was Bush, who just so happened to be fighting the Taliban.

You can't make this shit up.

Luminous Animal

(27,310 posts)
21. Public enemy #1 for Western feminist to feel good about the invasion.
Wed May 2, 2012, 01:35 AM
May 2012

Afghani feminists toured the U.S. speaking to U.S. feminist orgs to advocate against the invasion. They didn't want western saviors and their war.

You can't make this shit up.

 

RZM

(8,556 posts)
22. Except 1998 was a far cry from 9/11 and 2001
Wed May 2, 2012, 01:51 AM
May 2012

Back then, nobody dreamed of 9/11 and a US mandate to invade Afghanistan. It was all 'those poor Afghan women, when will they break free of those Taliban monsters.' Deny it all you want, but Western feminists were strongly arrayed against the Taliban until 9/11. And why wouldn't they be? It's the same as people opposing Saudi Arabia now. It's all well and good to say you don't like them. It's a different story when the 4th ID is on the border ready to invade. Once the fighting started, the feminists decided that anti-war trumps feminism, so they switched sides. They are still there today. I'm not knocking it, I'm simply pointing it out. 14 years ago was a very different world. You're right that Afghan women opposed strong action in 2001. But what about Western women in 1998?

abelenkpe

(9,933 posts)
12. Sure you don't mean...
Wed May 2, 2012, 12:16 AM
May 2012

If it means leaving the country with a relatively stable government, military and security force so our corporations can profit in a secure environment then that makes sense.

Odin2005

(53,521 posts)
2. "Finishing the job" would reqire an occupation of a million soldiers andviolent repression.
Tue May 1, 2012, 09:47 PM
May 2012

It's simply not possible. The British could not, the Russians could not, and we can't either.

BiggJawn

(23,051 posts)
5. Still wondering WTF was "The Job" in the FIRST place...
Tue May 1, 2012, 10:37 PM
May 2012

Kill American working-class kids and transfer gobs of the US treasury into Raytheon, GE, Colt, and M-D's Swiss bank accounts?

Shit,let's get the "Mission Accomplished" banners out again.

Lasher

(27,635 posts)
9. The objective is Victory.
Tue May 1, 2012, 11:15 PM
May 2012
"So long as I'm the president, my measure of success is victory -- and success." - George W. Bush, on Iraq, Washington, D.C., April 17, 2008

progressoid

(49,998 posts)
11. At this point it means leaving with out hanging our heads in shame.
Tue May 1, 2012, 11:35 PM
May 2012

Apparently, that's going to take a few more years and a few billion more dollars.

Oh, yeah, and a few hundred more lives.

 

DCKit

(18,541 posts)
7. Alexander the Great, the Byzantines, the Romans, The Russians....
Tue May 1, 2012, 10:42 PM
May 2012

to name just a few, managed it so well.

WTF?

Lasher

(27,635 posts)
8. The job will be finished when we leave the country and stop wasting money there.
Tue May 1, 2012, 10:59 PM
May 2012

Bin Laden is dead. Now all we have to do to finish the job is get the hell out. But guess what, we've just signed up to stay another decade past 2014, in what has already been the longest war in US history.

polly7

(20,582 posts)
10. Afghan Screams Aren’t Heard
Tue May 1, 2012, 11:25 PM
May 2012
http://www.zcommunications.org/afghan-screams-aren-t-heard-by-kathy-kelly

I asked our friend, Hakim, who mentors the Afghan Peace Volunteers, if ordinary Afghans are aware that the U.S. has an estimated 400 or more Forward Operating Bases across Afghanistan and that it is planning to construct what will become the world’s largest U.S. Embassy, in Kabul. Hakim thinks young people across Kabul are well aware of this. “Do they know,” I asked, “that the U.S. Air Force has hired 60,000 – 70,000 analysts to study information collected through drone surveillance? The film footage amounts to the equivalent of 58,000 full length feature films. The Rand Corporation says that 100,000 analysts are needed to understand ‘patterns of life’ in Afghanistan.”

Hakim’s response was quick and cutting: “Ghulam would ask the analysts a question they can’t answer with their drone surveillance, a question that has much to do with their business, ‘terror’: “You mean, you don’t understand why I screamed?”

Two days ago, “Democracy Now” interviewed Hakim about on-going U.S. military occupation in Afghanistan.
http://www.democracynow.org/2012/4/19/photos_of_soldiers_posing_with_afghan “If we don’t address the agreements that the U.S. and Australian governments and other governments are making for a long-term war strategy in Afghanistan,” Hakim observed, “we are heading for an increase in violence in this part of the world, in South Asia, perhaps perpetual war, more serious than the Kabul attacks."

sarisataka

(18,767 posts)
15. Look what happened
Wed May 2, 2012, 12:29 AM
May 2012

When we didn't finish the job in Iraq in 91. Whether or not we should have taken action, once started either we need to leave less of a mess than we started or know that bad choices come back to haunt us... At greater cost in blood and money

 

Tierra_y_Libertad

(50,414 posts)
23. What's wrong with our government is that it won't admit to losing another war.
Wed May 2, 2012, 02:08 AM
May 2012

At least, not during campaign season.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»LOL....."We must fin...