Jump to navigation
Itís A Good Thing
Whatever you want to say about the Bush administration, is there anyone who does not think the election in Afghanistan is a good thing
? (Except al-Qaeda
and Michael Moore
, of course.)
The future is freedom, not tyranny.
Previous | Next
Unless of course the populus of that so called "democratic Afghani free state" has an economy entirely monopolized by American industry. While the prospect of freedom may be common sense and "inalienable" to us, what is it to them? We're just another ruling class bringing order to chaos. How are the Taliban any different from American occupation forces?
While the moral differences are there, sure, how in relation to all the other occupations in the history of Afghanistan any different from an American? We're trying to conquer and unify an entirely tribal system and replicate it into capitalism. Sure, that can work short term, but only cultural unification within a culture can make it stay that way. The Taliban regardless of what the American public believes (which is subject to constant manipulation and change) was the only key to holding Afghanistan into a remotely coherent society.
This is a very profitable war for the American economy, the Europeans are paying 3 dollars a gallon for their gas and we're only at a cool 1.80, and for that I thank Bush & Associates.
Fucking incredible! Someone who would actually say, think, believe, freedom is only something Americans feel? Deserve?
How are the Taliban any different than the American occupiers? You really donít know? Taliban as heroes!?
It is a truly shocking that someone so fucking stupid would be a Kerry supporter. And yes, it could be understood why you do not understand the concept of freedom; ignorance has bound you so tight only death will bring release.
For some people there really is no hope in life. Have you joined al-Qaeda yet?
An excerpt from Wikipedia: Afghan History: Soviet Intervention:
"The Afghan government invited the Soviet Union to assist in modernising its economic infrastructure (predominantly its exploration and mining of rare minerals and natural gas). The USSR also sent contractors to build roads, hospitals, schools and mine for water wells; they also trained and equipped the Afghan army.
Unfortunately many of these idea's were considered too "western" or secular. A large backlash against these reforms was instigated by predominantly members of the religious/tribal establishments. Many of these establishments formed terrorist groups in an attempted to reverse the modernisation of Afghanistan, usually resorting to violent means and sabotage of the country's industry and infrastructure. The government of Afghanistan responded to terrorist attacks with heavy handed intervention from the army. The government arrested, exiled and executed many mujahedin "holy Muslim warriors". These acts often lead to more terrorist attacks."
Sound familiar? We come on a mission of (forcing) peace but the enemy - radical Islam - is an insidious one. So, once you hear my radical opinion it is immediately discarded to be of a "liberal agenda"? Ignorance! Don't be making such a wounding accusation as that! Woe is me! Like I always say, "People are idiots; if you think you're not one, then you are."
Both parties will get us nowhere but straight to hell, they're two sides of the same coin in a dominantly plutocratic system.
I tend to not see world events in relation to myself but in relation to the entire history of civilization. How about not bellowing "Fool! Fool! This man is incompetent to talk!" and give me some reason. Idiocy begets idiocy.
If you tend to look at things historically, then you understand not only the need for us to be in other parts of the world, but also the need for military strength, used and exercised. If you understand history, then cheers to one who understands that our problems with the world could be mitigated if we were more of a warrior nation. As you know, we are far too kind to achieve a lasting peace in that part of the world. As you understand such, cheers. History shows, peace can be achieved through war.
That is true. But there are different factors now than simple invasion, destabilization within our own countries (rivaling political factions) will screw this entire process up. I don't think this is an ideological invasion or economic parasitism as it is doing what should have been done a long time ago. The Balkans and the Middle Eastern areas have always been through nothing but conflict in their entire history.
But there are different solutions to the same problem. Instead of taking an offensive stance the army could take a more defensive approach in occupation of Iraq by simply doing what was said they were going to do, defend Iraqis, rebuild schools, etc. (By this I mean occupying a neutral town or area) Word would then get around that we're not complete death mongers and we would gain support. Short term violence does not equate into long term solution. As I recall the Soviet assassinations of militant leaders spurred even more conflict in the area eventually leading to the Soviets pulling out.
I have absolutely nothing wrong with this war but how it is being waged. The leftists are intending to turn this conflict into yet another Vietnam for political gain. And if I see a Federalist in power I will be sure that this country is doomed, wars are the best excuse to strip away rights so long as the public thinks it is necessary, WHICH IT IS NOT. And regardless of how stupid people believe Americans are, they will not allow this process to continue once they see what they are losing.
Beg to differ. They are taking a defensive stance, and that is what has been a large part of the problem. Our problem is we would like support, and therefore play political games that do not serve to meet our objectives. History shows that this is folly.
It is better to peruse our objective alone, and let the world do with us as they wish, than to coddle the weak and play into their hand. Also, for the moment, we have the strength, and history shows that is respected. We fall when we become weak and unwilling. Yes, you are right, short-term violence does not beget a long-term solution, but the willingness to escalate the violence beyond what the enemy expects, to a level that decimates the enemy will bring about a solution and a period of peace, though this will not occur in these modern times. Instead, we grind out problems, which is not a solution. It is unfortunate that the power of the military cannot be used to achieve the desired goals. Yes, it would be ugly, but it would be honest and effective.
As for your assertion that we are losing powers to the leaders of this country as a consequence of the war, as a consequence of the terror attacks, cheers again. You are absolutely correct, and there is no need for this. As for the American people seeing this and demanding their rights back, I can only hope you are correct, but I am less optimistic than you. History has shown us that governments tend to accumulate power, until they have so much they must be destroyed to give man the simplest of liberties, the right to determine their own destiny.
To both, specially "The Fool" who quoted Wikipedia's incorrect version of history. The so called "Afghan government that invited the Soviets.." was a puppet government set up by the Soviets AFTER they staged a coup in Afghanistan. That my friend is TRUE history. Please get it straight before you go spouting off and showing yourself to be adequately named by your handle.
To the "Fool" again: Before you go blasting off your keyboard on Federalists, please be kind to know your history and review the fact that the Constitution of our great country was designed, drafted, and signed by MANY Federalists. Do not blame Federalists for dooming our country, as it is ignorant people such as yourself that will eventually doom our country.