General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsLOL....."We must finish the job we started in Afghanistan"
That line is starting to sound like a parody at this point.
WTF is wrong with this damn government?
DCBob
(24,689 posts)If it means leaving the country with a relatively stable government, military and security force then that makes sense.
Luminous Animal
(27,310 posts)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)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)Kabul is a Potemkin Village of Western feminism.
RZM
(8,556 posts)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)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)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)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)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?
kenny blankenship
(15,689 posts)The subject was Afghanistan.
abelenkpe
(9,933 posts)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)It's simply not possible. The British could not, the Russians could not, and we can't either.
Hell Hath No Fury
(16,327 posts)with any President that will ever be allowed to win the office.
BiggJawn
(23,051 posts)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)progressoid
(49,998 posts)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)to name just a few, managed it so well.
WTF?
Lasher
(27,635 posts)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)Hakims response was quick and cutting: Ghulam would ask the analysts a question they cant answer with their drone surveillance, a question that has much to do with their business, terror: You mean, you dont 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 dont 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."
mmonk
(52,589 posts)sarisataka
(18,767 posts)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)At least, not during campaign season.