With issues like this, there always contains a deconstructive part and a constructive part. That is, pulling apart an issue and stating what isn't working is only part of the issue, there necessarily follows the ability to provide practical solutions to the issue. Tranter, and her follows here, are very good at deconstruction, but fail dismally in construction.
I take it the real problem with Afghanistan is the human rights abuses, after all, Tranter is a human rights lawyer? So even if we grant Tranter et al the position that America has failed to grant Afghans human rights, what is Tranter's solution?

Runner,

You raise a very interesting question. Clearly you are not on the Left. Your question may require answers over the next few years.

James O'Neill: as you note, some people " ....have an amazing capacity to ignore history, or more particularly those parts of history that do not conform with their blinkered and ignorant view of world history."

I regret that I will be holding you to this statement over the next few years, once the Coalition have abandoned the women of Afghanistan to 'history'.

I was born on the Left, and maybe with advanced age, I'm becoming one of those genuinely Grumpy Old Men, but as time passes, I becoming more and more contemptuous of what passes for the Left, in their apologism for the most backward and brutal ideologies - 'as long as it isn't pro-American in any way, it's okay.'

Yes, 'any century but this, and any country but his own.'

Joe

Joe Loudmouth,

One of the points I was making was that there was an Afghan government that made genuine efforts to improve the rights of women among other socially progressive reforms. That government was attacked and undermined by the US. It is staggering hypocrisy for the US (and its Australian apologists) to now lament the supposed backward steps that will occur for Afghan women when the Taliban sweep to power (as they assuredly will) in the near future.

Well there are two lessons from history - one is "don't invade Russia in the winter". And the other is "don't invade Afghanistan" - you won't win.

Tell me James, which part of the Afghan government were trying to improve the rights of women.

Was it the ones kicking them out of schools, or the ones canning them in the street, if they considered they were not complying adequately with the dress law.

I simply don't buy the argument or assertions in the very anti America anti Australia article. If the yanks had simply sat on their hands during the intended invasion by the imperial Nipponese forces, we would all be bowing and scraping and conversing in Japanese? The Americans paid a huge blood sacrifice, which bought and paid for our current freedom.
Yes we made many mistakes in Iraq. We should have sent a few cruise missiles through Saddam's front door during the very first gulf war? Failing that, when we had the republican guard on the run and beaten, we should have simply finished the job? And then occupied the place long enough to usher in free and fair elections and new leaders commanding popular support.
When we failed to do that, we set in train a whole series of far worse consequences, including the sanctions, which cost many entirely innocent young lives. And sure, we can blame an obviously inept American Leadership.
We have declared our intention to leave Afghanistan, with fully trained and competent security forces in place; and an elected parliament. Yes there are problems with the ELECTED parliament and or ELECTED parliamentary representatives; the perceived lack of women's rights etc/etc; ad infinitum ad nuseum.
However, there is no correlation between Afghanistan and Vietnam as claimed? In Vietnam, we imposed a very unpopular and patently corrupt regime at complete odds with the wishes of a mainly Buddhist majority; manifestly, because our "extremely intelligent" American leaders confused Buddhism with communism and in so doing; alienated almost the entire population and several near neighbours. Propaganda is full of half lies and half truths; and is designed to sway/convince the uneducated and ignorant? Rhrosty.