Congresswoman Barbara Lee tried to warn people about the impacts of war in Afghanistan by her vote and speech in US Parliament.

Three days after the September 11 attacks, the California Democrat stood on the House floor and implored her colleagues to vote against a resolution that would give President George W. Bush a sweeping, open-ended authorisation to use military force.

She was the only politician to vote no. If only Governments and others had listened to her, things in Afghanistan could be different and the world could be different.

See her speech via the link. Personally, I think she was right.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DOs0OdUPUPY

Hi Nathan,

If only.

It's easy for us to criticize now but at that time
9/11 was a very emotional time for Americans and
politicians especially felt that action was required.
I believe that they went in with all good intentions
to make a difference against terrorism. The rest as
they say is history.

Afghanistan is a tragedy. There is no happy ending.
What the future holds? Who knows. We shall have to wait
and see. I feel so sorry for the Afghan people. I don't
have much faith in the Taliban. But the West had no other
alternative but to leave.

Foxy,

She was right. That's the issue at hand. I mean how many people on this website are trying to get people to change their position and not simply support the status quo?

You're one of those people aren't you? That's the impression I've got and I understand it's not easy.

Yes it was easy at the time to simply vote 'yes' to go to war in Afghanistan, but Congresswoman Barbara Lee took a bold move, voted 'no' and faced a lot of criticism and threats in terms of her move at the time.

We need more brave people out there like Barbara Lee, modern versions of Martin Luther King. That is why she is now getting a lot of media coverage.

I only wish she would stand for President. She would do a much better job than Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden combined. Why? Because she actually stands for something and her interviews I've seen online have been well articulated.

Good Morning Nathan,

Unfortunately in politics very few brave voices are listened
to unless they are in leadership or positions of power
and influence. Still as you rightly point out we need those
brave voices so badly.

Had the US not entered this war, there'd be no hundreds of thousands of refugees infiltrating the West. The rest will be history !

We would not be getting sympathetic refugees to democratic values but we would be getting more 911 terrorists infiltrating our society. The USA went into Afganistan not to nation build or colonise but to eradicate terrorists threatening them. Should we just allow terrorists to mass murder 3,000+ of our most able citizens without eradicating the continuing threat? Ask if those seeking refugee status prefer the democratic values they experienced over the last 20 years under USA + management or under the Taliban. Their panic says it all!

Josephus,

<<The USA went into Afganistan not to nation build or colonise but to eradicate terrorists threatening them.>>

In terms of nation building and imposing their own values, yes they did.

If the U.S Parliament wanted to simply target terrorists "threatening" them (U.S people I assume or themselves only), by all means do so, but do so by finding each one individually and address as appropriate.

Too difficult, some would say, so target a whole area of people as a result. For myself, the Afghan war has pretty much proven to be a complete failure when looking at the current circumstances and the U.S can't claim they were not warned, with the comments put out by Congresswoman Barbara Lee at the time.

So NathanJ, I assume you were happy to leave women oppressed in the name of religion and be abused as they have this week by burning a woman who was a poor cook. You are happy to have this abuse in our world. There are 5,000 christians in Afganistan who face having their eyes cut out or murder.

Josephus,

<<I assume you were happy to leave women oppressed in the name of religion and be abused as they have this week by burning a woman who was a poor cook>>

The U.S Government did not go to Afghanistan in 2001 because they were concerned about women. Neither did the Australian Government.

It was a war initiated by the United States, starting as "Operating Enduring Freedom" (a terrible term cooked up at the time) and during the war in Afghanistan (2001–2021), over 47,245 civilians, 66,000 to 69,000 Afghan military and police and more than 51,000 Taliban fighters have (were) killed as of April 2021. Overall the war has killed 171,000 to 174,000 people in Afghanistan. However, the death toll is possibly higher due to unaccounted deaths by "disease, loss of access to food, water, infrastructure, and/or other indirect consequences of the war.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civilian_casualties_in_the_war_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%932021)

So any claims (suddenly now?) about womens rights don't cut it. Such claims are simply used to justify bad behaviour. Such claims don't stack up to reality. One only needs to consider issues affecting women internationally and I could go on about those or I could argue why Australian and other western world Governments keep cutting the foreign aid budget here, leaving women if difficult circumstances but I won't.

As Congresswomen Barbara Lee put it: "Let us not become the evil that we deplore", but that's what happened in terms of the Afghan war and it's still occurring as of this day.

The USA went into Afganistan to eradicate terrorism, that the cost was 174,000 lives was the price of conflict to bring about cultural change for freedom and education for half the population. That the Afgan soldiers did not want to fight the Taliban, meant they were happy to surrender to the opressive religious regime, while half the population wanted to flee the oppression. On which side of the conflict are you happy to support? Cultural freedoms or repressive religion?

Stop talking about what might have been and accept the current facts.