DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post - Can Democrats Be Trusted with Foreign Policy?

**Hoijdxvh** · 09-30-2009, 09:24 PM

A "target" for what? The Taliban are nationalists, not "terrorists". They have no agenda outside of a unflinching devotion to rid their country from foreign occupation... a job they're VERY good at as history illustrates.

You forget one very important point-the Taliban gave safe harbor to a man that provided the inspiration, funding, and manpower for the worst attack on US civilians in history. By doing so, they declared war on the US. There were no foreign occupiers on the Taliban's soil on Sept 11.

And no, what you read is completely false. The Taliban are mostly Pashtun, a religious group that vehemently prohibits the use of opium. It was the Taliban that completely eradicated the drug trade throughout the 90's thanks to a healthy stream of U.S. funding. That was then. The Taliban have sold themselves to the opium trade in order to finance their insurgency.

The mercenaries you speak of are OUR current allies: The northern alliance. A motley crew of drug dealing rapists and warlords... primarily comprised of Uzbeks and Taijks with a close affiliation to Karzai and his cabinet. These cancerous individuals have corrupted whatever central government does exist. Yes this is true. But these warlords assisted us in deposing the Taliban from power. They also defeated the Soviets with US-provided weapons.

What we need is exactly what you protest. The 'old ways'. Afghanistan is a TRIBAL entity and the dynamic is not one which will ever cater to a strong central government. The Uzbeks, Taijks, Pashtuns, and Hazaras will ultimately require a solid degree of autonomy linked by a weak central government. I agree.

And spare me the harboring terrorism BS... 9/11 was hatched in Saudi Arabia, Hamburg, San Diego, UAE, Pakistan, and god knows where else. This is wrong. Osama Bin Laden trained the 9-11 hijackers in Afghanistan. He raised money which funded the operation in Afghanistan. He provided the inspiration and ideology for it from Afghanistan. He was aided with freedom of movement in Afghanistan under the umbrella of the Taliban. After 9-11, the US demanded that the Taliban hand over Bin Laden and they refused. They are our enemy, and are partly responsibile for 3000 US civilian deaths.

If you want to curtail Anti-American sentiment, we need to stop killing innocent men, women, and children with the utterly ineffective unmanned drones your hail as prudent policy and rely on police action and strong intelligence (i.e. the arrest of Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan in Somalia last week). While I agree with eliminating civilian casualties-and the new US strategy in Afghan. is doing this somewhat effectively now, those drones are hardly ineffective. Baitullah Mehsud would probably disagree with you if he were alive.

09-30-2009, 09:24 PM	#34
Hoijdxvh Join Date Oct 2005 Posts 438 Senior Member	A "target" for what? The Taliban are nationalists, not "terrorists". They have no agenda outside of a unflinching devotion to rid their country from foreign occupation... a job they're VERY good at as history illustrates. You forget one very important point-the Taliban gave safe harbor to a man that provided the inspiration, funding, and manpower for the worst attack on US civilians in history. By doing so, they declared war on the US. There were no foreign occupiers on the Taliban's soil on Sept 11. And no, what you read is completely false. The Taliban are mostly Pashtun, a religious group that vehemently prohibits the use of opium. It was the Taliban that completely eradicated the drug trade throughout the 90's thanks to a healthy stream of U.S. funding. That was then. The Taliban have sold themselves to the opium trade in order to finance their insurgency. The mercenaries you speak of are OUR current allies: The northern alliance. A motley crew of drug dealing rapists and warlords... primarily comprised of Uzbeks and Taijks with a close affiliation to Karzai and his cabinet. These cancerous individuals have corrupted whatever central government does exist. Yes this is true. But these warlords assisted us in deposing the Taliban from power. They also defeated the Soviets with US-provided weapons. What we need is exactly what you protest. The 'old ways'. Afghanistan is a TRIBAL entity and the dynamic is not one which will ever cater to a strong central government. The Uzbeks, Taijks, Pashtuns, and Hazaras will ultimately require a solid degree of autonomy linked by a weak central government. I agree. And spare me the harboring terrorism BS... 9/11 was hatched in Saudi Arabia, Hamburg, San Diego, UAE, Pakistan, and god knows where else. This is wrong. Osama Bin Laden trained the 9-11 hijackers in Afghanistan. He raised money which funded the operation in Afghanistan. He provided the inspiration and ideology for it from Afghanistan. He was aided with freedom of movement in Afghanistan under the umbrella of the Taliban. After 9-11, the US demanded that the Taliban hand over Bin Laden and they refused. They are our enemy, and are partly responsibile for 3000 US civilian deaths. If you want to curtail Anti-American sentiment, we need to stop killing innocent men, women, and children with the utterly ineffective unmanned drones your hail as prudent policy and rely on police action and strong intelligence (i.e. the arrest of Saleh Ali Saleh Nabhan in Somalia last week). While I agree with eliminating civilian casualties-and the new US strategy in Afghan. is doing this somewhat effectively now, those drones are hardly ineffective. Baitullah Mehsud would probably disagree with you if he were alive.
	Quote