NationStates Jolt Archive

So, looking through wikipedia today I found a slightly interesting news article...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdul_Rahman_%28convert%29

For those who just want the first paragraph, here it is:

Abdul Rahman (born 1965) is an Afghan citizen who in March 2006 was arrested and charged in Afghanistan with converting from Islam to Christianity, which is considered apostasy under Sharia, the law of Islam. Rahman's arrest and trial have brought to the foreground an apparent contradiction in the Afghan constitution, which recognizes both freedom of religion and Sharia law.

Sooo...looks like after we invaded the place, toppled its little terrorist government, occupied it, set up a new government, then occupied it some more...they're still doing the same crap they were doing before we arrived, except training terrorists in schools...

You know, no offense to any Muslims/religious people/other but...shouldn't freedom of religion come before overzealous laws made for fascism? And judging from the article I'm guessing women aren't better off then before we invaded, other than the right of education...

Yes, it gave the British Geological Survey (http://www.bgs.ac.uk/afghanminerals/) more minerals to sell to British aggregate companies. It's like Imperialism - only easier. Huzzah!

Yes, it gave the British Geological Survey (http://www.bgs.ac.uk/afghanminerals/) more minerals to sell to British aggregate companies. It's like Imperialism - only easier. Huzzah!

W00t! Wait...but that's Britain...dammit!

The war in Afghanistan did do something. It convinced me that if we're going to respond to an attack on us with military force we should just pulverize the enemy to make an example of them and not bother to attempt to reform them.

considering what we went into afghanistan for, we didnt do too badly. except for not getting bin laden we did pretty much everything else we set out to do. id give us a D, not quite failing but nothing to brag to our friends about.

i saw a clip on the tv this morning of president bush whining that (paraphrasing) "we liberated afghanistan so that they could have religious freedom and shouldnt they take our wishes into consideration out of gratitude?"

he seems to forget that we didnt liberate afghanistan, no one asked us to go in, no one wanted us there, and that no one there really wanted anything but a strict islamist government (although perhaps most would agree that the taliban had taken it too far)

Actually hardly anyone was killed in the war with Afghanistan. In World War II Germany was essentially pulverised with bombers for precisely the reason you stated, yet fighting and winning WWII is generally viewed as a good thing to have done. Now that's double-think in action, eh?

Did the Afghan War do anything?
Sure it did. It costs alot of money.

Actually hardly anyone was killed in the war with Afghanistan. In World War II Germany was essentially pulverised with bombers for precisely the reason you stated, yet fighting and winning WWII is generally viewed as a good thing to have done. Now that's double-think in action, eh?
Yeah, I guess so. Maybe we've been going about this all wrong. Instead of building precision weapons to minimize civilian casualties we should instead aim to inflict more civilian casulaties and really make the enemy suffer. Maybe that's the only way to pacify an enemy. Particularly one that hides among the common people and not in the military or government.

*prepares for a tidal wave of angry replies*

Afghanistan did a lot because there is no longer a Taliban-controlled government. Is that not enough?

Alright, so we didn't wipe out all of their traditions, even if some of them are entirely barbaric and force the world to look at Islam as a religion that knows no bounds or morality, but was that our job? No, the Afghan war wasn't entirely about reforming their society but reforming their government and making sure that a terrorist organization wasn't being propped up by the funds of a national government.

The conquest of Afghanistan was only a cheap means to meet the USA's urge for revenge after the attacks on the WTC.
By now in Afghanistan everything is almost as it was prior to the war. The scene is dominated by tribal warlords just as before, and the arrogant/stupid US puppet Karzai has no real power at all.
The whole episode is in fact a failure, just like the other failed attempt (you know, Iraq) to strike at the USA's "enemies" without the slightest clue what to do after the military "victory".

This is the way I see it

Soviets Retreat
Taiban can do whatever they want
Osama bin laden moves to Afghanistan
9/11
Afghanistan invaded
Afghans write "new constution", will keep it until foreign infidels leave
Try to do stuff like the new trial, to see how much they can push the foreign infidels

The conquest of Afghanistan was only a cheap means to meet the USA's urge for revenge after the attacks on the WTC.
By now in Afghanistan everything is almost as it was prior to the war. The scene is dominated by tribal warlords just as before, and the arrogant/stupid US puppet Karzai has no power at all.
The whole episode is in fact a failure, just like the other failed attempt (you know, Iraq) to strike at the USA's "enemies" without the slightest clue what to do after the military "victory".
In all fairness Al Qaeda doesn't operate freely in Afghanistan any more. They're in hiding in Pakistan now. That counts for something I guess.

In all fairness Al Qaeda doesn't operate freely in Afghanistan any more. They're in hiding in Pakistan now. That counts for something I guess.
As if Al Qaeda was ever restricted to a single region...
And Al Qaeda never "operated" from or in Afghanistan anyways, they only had some training camps there for their cannon fodder. After all Al Qaeda is a global organization with big money.

And when our last tank leaves Osama will come riding on a camal, start dancing across the Afghan-Pakistan Highway and start humping said camal? We did something, wheather it be flexing our aging military muscles or an attempt to set up a pro-US government in the country.

Maybe the Cold War didn't end? bwahhh? :confused:

As if Al Qaeda was ever restricted to a single region...
No, but the government in Afghanistan was a Taliban government. Meaning Al Qaeda could have a safe haven and funds to fuel their cause, and a government that would support their cause and offer them protection and a population fresh for the picking, all ready to join Osama in Jihad.

They did right in Afghanistan by invading and toppling the government. They did wrong in Iraq for doing the same thing.

Why? Because Iraq is a country with greater economic wealth and a greater population ripe for the terrorists to implement themselves and their ideas into its environment. They're on their way to turning it into another Afghanistan, and while the American effort has helped stave that off, the terrorist ideals and ideas will be engrained into Iraqis for quite some time after this ordeal is over.

considering what we went into afghanistan for, we didnt do too badly. except for not getting bin laden we did pretty much everything else we set out to do. id give us a D,Well.. The OPIUM Lords... give you an "A" ....(thank you very much)

oh and BTW Why did we bomb the shit out of Afghanistan again?
*hint* http://www.madblast.com/binladen.htm

we didnt do too badly?.. we didnt? :confused:

As if Al Qaeda was ever restricted to a single region...
And Al Qaeda never "operated" from or in Afghanistan anyways, they only had some training camps there for their cannon fodder. After all Al Qaeda is a global organization with big money.
Al Qaeda's leadership was based in Afghanistan after Sudan kicked Bin Laden out. The training camps are important because that's where angry religious fundies with no skills learn how to pull off a terrorist attack. If the training camps were not important why did terrorist organizations from Southeast Asia, like Abu Sayyaf send people there? It would be a waste of money if the camps were useless. It was a networking and training opportunity. Afghanistan's taliban government was able to print up passports and ID for Al Qaeda agents. Now false papers are slightly more expensive and slightly less easy to come by for the terrorists.

Like I said, it counts for something that we chased them out of Afghanistan.

No, but the government in Afghanistan was a Taliban government. Meaning Al Qaeda could have a safe haven and funds to fuel their cause, and a government that would support their cause and offer them protection and a population fresh for the picking, all ready to join Osama in Jihad.

They did right in Afghanistan by invading and toppling the government. They did wrong in Iraq for doing the same thing.

Why? Because Iraq is a country with greater economic wealth and a greater population ripe for the terrorists to implement themselves and their ideas into its environment. They're on their way to turning it into another Afghanistan, and while the American effort has helped stave that off, the terrorist ideals and ideas will be engrained into Iraqis for quite some time after this ordeal is over.

Al Qaeda funds never depended on the Taliban. The Taliban are only a religiously fundamentalist regime that was easy to use (not only by Al Qaeda but also by the US during the Soviet adventure in Afghanistan). And as I said, by now Afghanistan is no different from what it used to be, even the Taliban are back in most areas. Al Qaeda on the other hand has not really suffered any significant losses.
The fact of the matter is that the US just have no answer to global networks like Al Qaeda (parts of which were once endorsed by the US).
The US cannot even clean up their mess in a tiny and militarily weak country like Iraq (the dictator of which also was once endorsed by the US).

Al Qaeda on the other hand has not really suffered any significant losses.WTF?? Dont you watch/read FOX/CNN/AP??

We have captured/killed AlQaueda #2 or/and #3 at least a dozen times... :D

WTF?? Dont you watch/read FOX/CNN/AP??

We have captured/killed AlQaueda #2 or/and #3 at least a dozen times... :D

How funny. #2s and #3s are replaceable, even #1s.
And the Saudis still rule the country that bears their name...

Gah! The news! Those r341 l1F3 hax0rz!

Soooo, how does that go again?

Well.. The OPIUM Lords... give you an "A" ....(thank you very much)

oh and BTW Why did we bomb the shit out of Afghanistan again?
*hint* http://www.madblast.com/binladen.htm

we didnt do too badly?.. we didnt? :confused:
no we didnt do too badly

we wanted to destroy alqaeda in afghanistan. we did that. we got several of the big boys of alqaeda. we toppled the government that allowed them free reign in the country. we closed their training camps and blew up their hideyholes

we didnt get binladen

its sorta like you wrote a really good essay but it didnt really cover the assignment. so you get a D because you did a pretty good job that wasnt quite what was wanted.