The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Afghanistan: can we justify being there? > Comments

Afghanistan: can we justify being there? : Comments

By Scott MacInnes, published 19/10/2010

There have to be very good reasons to justify what would otherwise be regarded as murder.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All
Pete,
al Qaeda also has training camps in many other countries and as they are found, they tend to move on again. Do you recommend that “we” the coalition of the bemused, invade every country they might be in?
The other point is that, if Australia had not joined the US & UK in this ill-conceived invasion, we might not now be targets of the extremists.
The truth of the matter is that the US did not learn from Viet Nam that you couldn’t EVER win against dedicated fighters, if they think they are defending their homeland against an occupying force, especially if that force treats the population brutally.
Posted by sarnian, Wednesday, 20 October 2010 9:04:15 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
LOL Sarnian

>>…dedicated fighters, if they think they are defending their homeland against an occupying force, especially if that force treats the population brutally.>>

I agree that we should exit Afghanistan for the reasons I stated in my previous post which boils down to that what happens in Afghanistan is NONE OF OUR BUSINESS.

But the way you frame the issue is RIDICULOUS. If anyone treats the Afghan population brutally it is the TALIBAN.

So far as I can see the Afghan people don’t want a return of the Taliban anymore than the South Vietnamese wanted to be ruled by the Communist North. Remember Vietnamese refugees were the ORIGINAL “BOAT PEOPLE”. They fled the by the million. For reasons of geography most Afghans won’t even have that option. Certainly the poor women won’t

Having spoken to Afghan women I get SICK TO MY STOMACH at the thought of their fate at the hands of the Taliban.

The Taliban are not freedom fighters defending their homeland. They are not even “war criminals”. They are monsters.

So yes argue we should leave but can we PLEASE have less moral posturing. It is going to be VERY UGLY for the Afghans generally and for the WOMEN in particular.
Posted by lentaubman, Wednesday, 20 October 2010 9:23:18 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
lentaubman,
I agree that the Taliban are the pits but if you’re not ever going to win, what is the point of throwing more lives away?
I recently posted on this to another article and this may cover your objections to "leaving the woman"

* For what it costs to keep the Nato coalition in Afghanistan perhaps a solution would be to spend that amount on providing a system for allowing the people who want to opt out of the Afghan conflagration to other countries. Any one who did not want to leave would be left in Afghanistan to tough it out with whoever is left to run it, after the inevitable civil war.
I am sure that if the amount of population that wanted to leave could be absorbed into all of the countries worldwide,*
Posted by sarnian, Wednesday, 20 October 2010 9:34:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
sarnian, then what happens when everyone left is a taliban, after the inevitable civil war, or wants to be a Taliban, and then people from all over the world start arriving to be trained and be a Taliban.

then all these trained thugs decide they need something to do with all their training and new found charm and skills.

So they spill into the next country and you decide, hey let everyone who doesn't want to be there leave it to them and be absorbed into the next country .. and so it goes

so eventually you have abandoned countries to thugs and terrorists who get it now, that you can win against the west by getting them to abandon regions because they are threatened and can't be bothered doing anything about it .. essentially you reinforce that the west is weak, and has no moral fortitude, just like their holy books tell them

this is how small armies become large armies and eventually a horde .. read your history, if you don't stop people like this, they will eventually roll you up

hey, you could try building a wall .. oh
Posted by Amicus, Wednesday, 20 October 2010 10:04:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thank you for the article, it is important to focus on the morality of the latest western invasion of Afghanistan.

The only point I would make is that when the author discusses "our national interests" or "our troops" or "Afghanistan's security" etc, there should be a critical view of such statements.

WHOSE INTERESTS are are we talking about?

A critical view of an overwhelming number of wars would discover the beneficiaries are a small number of elites, on both sides of the conflict. The LOSERS continue to be the common people, soldiers, workers, mums and dads, and children workers of both sides.

Let's distinguish for whose interest (financial, power and otherwise) the invasion and current occupation of Afghanistan are.

- International war corporations, substantially subsidized by the taxpayers of western countries( at the expense of investment in health and education)
- High level military planners, commanders with open links to the same corporations and politicians approving war
- Multinational Corporations which stand to profit from a western takeover of Afghan markets and natural resources
- Western politicians with open links to corporations set to benefit from the takeover and Afghan politicians in collaboration with them.

The above extreme minorities decide on war by weighing the benefits to THEMSELVES against risks to THEMSELVES, for example that war could result in economic losses.

These minorities then using the marketing arm of their corporations, the mass media to sell TO US a plausible reason for the upcoming invasion.

Risks to us, the average people(for example CIA admissions that Afghan and Iraq wars will increase risks of terrorist attacks against westerners (NOT decease), are obviously not part of the equation, let alone risks to poorly equipped solders , let alone the increased RISKS of millions of innocent Afghans continuing to be malnourished, dying of preventable disease, made homeless or out rightly killed.

Let's be clear about whose INTERESTS the current invasion of Afghanistan is, and LET US the common people unite to say NO TO WAR AND TO MURDER OF INNOCENT MEN, WOMEN AND CHILDREN in OUR NAME.
Posted by Nigel, Wednesday, 20 October 2010 10:54:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Nigel..'who's interests ? well 'ours' of course :)

"our/we" being free Australians.(and Americans and Brits)

You, along with various others seem oblivious to the potential for a nuclear Islamic holocaust against the West (America primarily) if the Taliban ever got hold of Pakistans Nukes..and if you think they aren't interested.. you are living in lala land.

Refer my earlier post.. about the true situation and strategic interest.
Nuff said.
Posted by ALGOREisRICH, Wednesday, 20 October 2010 1:05:09 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. Page 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy