Afghanistan: 'Our People Have Suffered So Much...'

Great Debates
141

I seem to remember a Sadam Hussain doing the exact same thing. Did we nuke Iraq, did we completely level the city he was hiding under, did we even take out the hotel full of westerners that was above his command center, ad naseum.

You seem to ignore the point that the Taliban probably can’t give up OBL no matter how badly they want to. The Taliban simply don’t control Afganistan in any traditional governmental sense.

I’m all for going after OBL and hypocritically ready to accept significant collateral damage. I’m ready to hold the Taliban responsible if they don’t start fighting a no-holds barred war against OBL. I’m NOT ready to unleash biological warefare agents, nuke or carpet bomb Kabul just for some sort of misguided thirst for revenge.

To decimate in the Roman empire sense of the word a civilian population with little to zero control over their own destiny is simply genocide.

142

just as an Aside, bin Laden isn’t even from Saudi. He’s originally from Yemen.

Zenster, its scary to think you would like to see my home bombed if it turned out that a terrorist was living in my town.

Thanks.

143

Yes, it is a scary thought. Thing is, I’m not afraid of Zenster’s reasoning.

xenophon41
Thank you for the kind words. I am struggling deeply with ethics right now because physical violence itself pretty much goes agaisnt every single thing I believe in. Thankfully, I don’t have to bring the physical force myself. There are those who would desire to use it, and the terrorists have brought that beast down on their own head in a fittingly Discordian way.

But where do I stand for support of people who would use violence to gain their ends? Same way I’ve always stood: it is an unfortunate necessity. It was unfortunate in WW2 when Churchill had to decide after reading a broken code whether to move thousands of innocents out of an area targeted to be bombed-- and thus let the Nazis know their code was broken-- or to move the people out to safety. Those people died. How many more lives were saved by not letting the Nazis know we had broken their code? Well, can’t prove a negative. It was a difficult decision. But I understand it.

So I support the violence. You cannot reason with a bomb or a plane. There is no debate with a bullet. When the time comes that people dra those things out of their resource bag, the time to reason with them, too, is over.

We have a pseudo-government, the Taliban, who is knowingly harboring bin Laden and threatening their own force should anyone use force to find him. Ding! Civilian casualties already. Sorry, but we need to take this guy and his ilk out. You can get out of the way, or you can stand in he way.

So it will be a series of difficult decisions. Perhaps espionage will be sufficient to knowck out most of them, but what about the governments that harbor them, that made them? Espionage will only serve us for an assasination or coup of some sort… no, I don’t think we want to take over their governments. We want them to get on with their own business, so long as that doesn’t mean being our enemy and so long as that doesn’t mean harboring or creating terrorists.

Some actions I suggest are demanding a free press with full diplomatic immunity from these governments. No more government restrictions on the media. I suggest we expect all these governments who have had terrorists in the past to accept a legal effect guaranteeing the freedom of persecution for religion. That will go far towards eliminating many problems. You can keep your puppet dictatorship, Saddam, but no more are you in absolute control. You haven’t demonstrated that you can run a successful modern nation-state with it, so sorry.

I suggest we enforce the above with military response. I sugeest we enforce the above as a primary goal, and in the end if there are conflicts between those ethics (freedom of press and religion) and ethics disavowing the death of innocents, then the death of the innocents will be an unfortunate necessity. Yes, xen, we are being put in a position where our ethics are no longer constructive, they are opposing each other. So choose it, I say. Choose which concerns are most important and most effective in the long haul, and if others have to be abandoned for those ends then so be it.

Europe is now in a state of peace after centuries of conflict. It took centuries of conflict and two world wars to get them to the discussion table, and now they form a strong community, show some economic solidarity, and generally respect each other. What will it take for this to happen in the middle east? Seriously, this isn’t a rhetorical question. And it is expressed to whomever wishes to respond.

What do you think it will take, using world history as a guide, to bring about peace in the middle east? Well, world history gives little answers to me other than explicit force. I’d be interested in anyone else’s analysis.

144

I really appreciate the fact that people are able to read my mind and know for certain that I am only lashing out from “fear and hate”. Who in Hell are you to know what I am thinking?

We have entered a new world as of last Tuesday. None of the old techniques and methods will necessarily apply. I do not think that a lot of the people posting to this thread have much comprehension as to how the terrorist mind works.

These maggots are not afraid to die, try to understand that! The only concept that will get through to them is extreme suffering and premature death. It is literally a matter of killing them before they kill us. How do you know when a terrorist has changed their mind? The answer is; you don’t! There has to be an extreme price to pay for terrorist activity. All of the financial strangulation suggested by Tris is well and fine, but it is not enough to choke off terrorism. A few sticks of dynamite and a schoolyard are all that is needed for terror to strike again.

You choke off terrorism by choking their throats with the smoke of their burning cities. You make them the source and cause of the surrounding people’s ruination. You reward communities that expel the terrorist centers within them. But first and foremost you pursue the terrorists with every means of force available. If you are lax in any way, then it is merely signals a lack of determination. We have been rewarded for that laxity with last Tuesday’s catastrophe.

Just one week ago I would have thought my own suggestions to be marginal thinking at best. Now I do not. A line has been crossed and those who do not have the stomach for what is to come will be victims and nothing else. There has been a clear demonstration to the world that, as erislover said, it is now down to us saving the lives of untold millions by exterminating several thousands.

Do any of you think that I enjoy espousing such violence? Do any of you think that I get my jollies anticipating the slaughter of people, no matter where they live? For the record, if that slimeball McVeigh could have been traced back to a brainwashed enclave like Waco, Texas, I would just about advocate bombing them too. The old rules no longer apply. As Veb said, “What will we carry forward into this new world?”, or thereabouts.

What I propose that we carry forward is a world where wanton disregard for human life is punished in the harshest manner imaginable. We must make the peoples of nations rise up in fury against the terrorists within their borders. There must be the immediate perception that it is the terrorists who are putting them at risk. The full might of developed nations must be seen as a consequence of terrorism and not as some initiating force. As Scylla said in his own thread debating the use of nuclear arms in the prosecution of terrorism, “The Taleban government has put their own people at risk as surely as if they had thrown them in front of a hurtling truck.”

I would really like to thank pugluvr and erislover for taking my statements within context. I know that the rest of the people here are concerned that I am advocating indiscriminate slaughter. I am not. I propose that we discriminate very clearly between societies that shun terrorism and those that do not, and prosecute the latter ruthlessly. Do we have any choice? How many more Trade Center bombings shall we endure while we choke of the finances of these terrorist scum? Such a process could take years and not guarantee any results in the least. Terror is not an expensive thing to spread. It is an expensive thing to endure! And the price paid last Tuesday was way too high in my book.

There is no alternative. The terrorists have voluntarily ratcheted up the throttle on the level of war involved. We did not! If we do not respond with immediate and overwhelming force, then we are idiots and fully deserve the next catastrophe that is waiting in the wings. Those who claim that we will merely breed another generation of bin Laden’s do not appreciate the fact that there will always be people of that kind in this world. The only solution is to make their type so unpopular as to assure their complete lack of success and expulsion from normal society.

There is little else that we can do. The suggestions of legal prosecution of bin Laden and his cohorts are so much starry-eyed woolgathering. Do you honestly think that legal prosecution serves as even an iota of deterrence to these scumbags? When you are dealing with maniacs who are willing to put entire populations at risk you have no choice but to make their exact intentions as manifest as possible.

I suggest we put their local populations at risk instead of allowing ours to remain in danger. If the world’s people come to understand that the harboring, financing or assisting terrorist has one and only one result, then there will be a sea change in such conduct. Do not think that the condemnation of the world community means one whit to these cretins? It most obviously does not, as last Tuesday proved for once and all.

Again, I do not see any real solutions to the problem being posited here. It is not in our interests to invade Afghanistan with ground forces. It is patently clear that pinpoint bombing of bin Laden’s assets with their borders is of no use either. People here continue to claim that the Afghani people have no responsibility for what has happened and that they are cut off from external contact by their evil overlords the Taleban.

HOGWASH! The residents of Kabul are evacuating the city as I type this. They understand the magnitude of the crime involved. They clearly are aware of the fact that retribution is coming and they expect it. They listen to the radio broadcasts and those who can’t are quickly told by word of mouth. I think many people ascribe far too primitive a nature to their society. The Taleban has been in bed with Osama bin Laden for a long time and the average Afghani more than likely has a strong awareness of bin Laden’s presence in their country. How did the Taleban pass off the previous round of missile attacks? Extra-loud party favors to celebrate the embassy attacks?

The time for niceties has passed. Brutality must be answered with the same in measure. We will not and cannot descend to their level. It is quite impossible to do so. We must merely repay them in kind. Any country that participates in terrorism needs to experience immediate and violent military attack. Don’t mince words with me about which countries have cells in them and which countries are merely financiers of this horrible trade. The solution is quite simple. Start with the obvious participants, let the others see the rain of destruction attendant to the support of terrorism and take their cues from that.

I now support the immediate overthrow, by whatever means necessary, of all Taleban governed countries at this time. They have abdicated their credibility as world leaders and must be treated like the thugs that they are. There must be no pause as we then begin an unassuageable campaign against all elements of terrorist organizations.

I will point out that at least the IRA has had the brains to never make an attack upon the United States in their bloody history of terrorism. I would hope that we would go after them in every manner that I am suggesting as of now. Skin color or religion has nothing to do with this. The preservation of humankind has everything to do with this.

145

During the '40s we were at war with Germany and Japan. We bombed the heck out of Berlin, Dresden, Tokyo, not to mention the annihilation of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

We wouldn’t be here right now, in the greatest country on Earth (let alone posting on the SDMB) if we hadn’t done so.

How is bombing Afghanistan somehow worse than bombing Germany?

How is bombing Afghanistan somehow racist? Was it racist to bomb Japan?

146

Last I checked the IRA disbanded the violence, except for a small (approx 2%) faction that are calling themselves “The True IRA” or “The Real IRA” or somesuch… someone may care to correct me, but that was the last thing I remember hearing about the IRA.

147

Has it ever occurred to you that people are saying this because they respect you as a person and are thus giving you the benefit of the doubt when you come out and say the things that you are saying?

It sort of amazes me that it is those of us on the side counseling a more reasoned, less indiscriminate response to these horrible acts are the ones who are called naive. I mean, do you honestly believe that the bombing the hell out of the Afghanis is going to make them say, “Boy those Americans sure are swell for making us realize how horrible our government is”? Are you really that naive? Incredible!

148

I don’t want them to say how swell we are. I want them to say; “Wow! Was it ever a mistake to support bin Laden!”.

The time for negotiation is over. I hope that it is more than a little apparent that negotiation with terrorists is a waste of time. When you negotiate with them, you are merely giving them time to prepare for more violence while you delude yourself with the thought that you are accomplishing something constructive, which you are not.

How many ways do I need to say this? We are dealing with an organization that has no regard for morals, human life or honorable conduct. How are you supposed to honorably deal with that? Quite simply, one cannot. However honored I should be that people think themselves well enough acquainted with me through our interaction here to believe that they have an understanding of how my mind works, all of my words are not borne of hatred or fear. They come from the disgust that another single life should be lost to the scum that live for such murder.

There is not enough regulatory framework to preclude such psychopathic behavior. What would you do, have us establish a complete police state? That is what it would take to combat terrorism effectively. The only other alternative is wholesale military prosecution of them starting now. Not tomorrow, not in a week, more time simply buys them another chance to perpetrate another atrocity. Remember, they have already attempted to board more planes with the express purpose of hijacking them for a similar crime. Do you need more of an indicator of just how determined and evil these maggots are?

I, for one, do not. I am satisfied that terrorist organizations have outlived any opportunity for rehabilitation and must be dismantled by immediate and forceful action. No laws will prevail upon such ruthless scum. No negotiation will convince them to abate their violence. No deals will satisfy their ambitions to install one of the most repressive theocracies in history.

The measures I advocate are nothing new. They are the methods used throughout history, and used quite successfully I might add. Yes, it took centuries of conflict for Europe to finally sort things out. The Middle East has been in conflict for millennia. They do not seem to have either the desire, tools or ability to settle their differences in a peaceable fashion.

It is up to the more develpoed nations to bring order to the festering political cesspool in the Middle East. However thankless this task may be, they have obviously abdicated their own right to effect any sort of peaceful resolution to the problem. The homicidal rage that so often characterizes their religious zeal can only be dealt with in a military fashion. This much was proven last Tuesday.

149

quoth Jehovah?

150

Well, if you’re simply going to invent your history, then there is probably no point in attempting rational discussion, at all.

The Middle East has had no more long-term, ongoing conflict than anyone else. If anything, they have had longer periods of overall peace than Europe has. The only reason that you can make a centuries/millennia comparison between Europe and the Mid-East is that they have millenia more history than Europe. The peoples in that region have also demonstrated more cross-cultural tolerance than Europeans ever have–and the current cross-cultural conflicts were nearly all introduced from Europe in the 20th Century.

You are also creating a strawman with your rejection of “negotiation.” I have seen no calls for negotiation. Your persistent calls to punish an oppressed people while appearing to explicitly reject the notion of limiting the war (and it will be a war, but it does not need to be your wholesale slaughter) to the oppressing faction, at the same time justifying your position with bogus history, simply makes you appear to be a rage blinded hater, however you may wish to view yourself.

151

There is no honor in bombing cities filled with innocents, be they in America or Afghanistan. There is no honor in wreaking vengeance on those who have no influence over the events that have taken place this week. There is no honor in sinking to the level of the terrorists who have lashed out at us.

And there is no honor in suggesting that we should do this.

http://www.msnbc.com/news/629304_asp.htm

152

Zenster, will you stop with the name-calling long enough to listen to some of the actual facts? What could an average citizen of Afghanistan do to affect the Taliban’s decision making on any issue? Nothing. An citizen who openly defies the Taliban gets killed. Any citizen who attempts to plot with somebody else to everthrow the Taliban gets killed. There is no possibility of communicating with newspapers, radio, TV, the internet or any other means because all means of large-scale communication are in the hands of the Taliban. And yet you have repeatedly stated the any citizen who fails to openly revolt should be considered fair game. So effectively you’re putting the Afghan people in the ultimate catch-22: either die fighting your own government or else we’ll kill you, you don’t deserve any chance to live.

How did you come up with the idea that you’re qualified to decide that fate of every single person in an entire area of the world based exclusively on your (apparently very limited) understanding of politics in the region? The Middle East has hundreds of millions of people and dozens of countries, many of which have had a largely peaceful existance since long before the United States was founded. It is an amazingly racist and ignorant statement to declare that people in this region do not want peace. And who gave you the authority to decide when anybody when an entire region of the world abdicates their rights to self-autonomy? (I also moght point out that “the Middle East” is not well defined. Who’s in the Middle East and who isn’t?)

Where exactly do you get your news from anyway? Kabul is a gigantic city and though a few residents may be leaving, most are too poor to do so. How can you say that “many people ascribe far too primitve a nature to their society”? Are you some sort of expert on current socioeconomic conditions in Afghanistan? The Afghani people only hear what the Taliban wants them to hear, they have know way of knowing what’s really going on in the real world. If you want us to believe your amazing new vision of daily life in Afghanistan, I suggest that you start providing some actual evidence.

On another note, an AP report released today (Saturday) says that Taliban thugs are beating up citizens who are attempting to flee across the border into Pakistan.

When you advocate the systematic killing of a national group, you advocate genocide. Your motives do not matter in defining whether or not it’s genocide, what matters is the program that you are advocating.

Nice one. The article is three paragraphs long and its only cite is one Pakistan newspaper, and apparently that newspaper got all of its information from a single unknown Afghan source, and no other news source that I’ve been reading in the past few days has reported such a thing.
One final note. Who do you suppose said this:
“By agreeing to comply with their government, they have all become part of the evil system, so it is acceptable for me to kill any of them.”

If you guessed Timothy McVeigh, you are correct.

153

I’ll take my lumps on this one. It was a misstatement upon my part to say so. It is just that their current track record is so dismal that it is hard to imagine the region being anything but the political cesspool it is today.

154

The Middle East may not have more warfare than anyone else, but they are currently involved in quite a bit of it when many other nations (Europe itself comes to mind, and all its nations) seemed to have worked out their differences to a stunning degree.

155

Sure, just as long as you don’t count Yugoslavia.
Or Albania.
Or Macedonia.
Or Moldova.
Or Cyprus.
Or Northern Ireland.
Or Chechnya.
Or the Kurdish troubles in Turkey…

What a patently ridiculous and ignorant statement to make in defense of your cause. Europe has been far and AWAY the greatest source of warfare, with its accompanying misery and loss of life, not only in the 20th century (think: WWI and WWII), but most every other century as well.

156

Oh, I’m sorry, did I say everyone was at peace? I said many were. Thanks for the correction in case I didn’t notice the troubles all over the world in the media enough. :rolleyes:

157

“Cry Havoc and Let Slip the Dogs of War.”
~Wm. Shakespeare

As seen on my sig line:
“God may have have mercy on them, but we will not.”
~Sen. John McCain

Let’s blow Afghanistan straight to hell! Fight boys, fight!!

158

Here is a compendium of almost all of the replies that contained some sort of suggested solution. Aside from Triskadecamus’ laudable but glacially slow financial approach, the vast majority of posts boil down to; “Catch him (and his cohorts) and put them on trial.”

While not wishing to seem as though I am merely dismissing out of hand the arguments of those who oppose me, I am obliged to point out that they are to be dismissed because they are ineffectual. Arrest and confinement or execution of Osama bin Laden will do no more to stop international terrorism than a slap on the wrist.

While there have been many well thought out criticisms to many of my oversights or misstatements, very few if any of those same people provide any sort of viable solutions to the problems at hand. Keep in mind that there are solutions, elsewise we are faced with eventual extinction at the hands of terrorists and that outcome is entirely unacceptable to me and many others.

So, what are the solutions? I think that most military advisers and many of the people here as well would agree that legal prosecution does not have sufficient pulsure. If not, then what does have the needed impact to enforce the will of the civilized world upon those who willingly disobey the fundamental tenets of honorable conduct?

Please note how more than a few of those in the second list either recognize or fully support actions that they know will result in the deaths of Afghani civilians. People continue to accuse me of advocating genocide. As I understand the term, it is related to the unabated and intentional extermination of an entire race or population. Nowhere have I suggested such a thing. The closest I have even come to saying such a thing is in another thread, where I suggested that for each attack upon us we level another one of their cities. Yes, after enough attacks upon us a vast majority of their population will be dead or dying, but nowhere have I supported the immediate and across the board slaughter of the entire Afghan citizenry. By suggesting that the Afghani people will come to know the meaning of suffering, I am merely stating the obvious, namely that subsequent to our military reprisal there will be cause for regret among their populace.

Feel free to continue to put words into my mouth that do not belong there, but it will only serve to discredit your own point of view.

I also vigorously maintain that most if not all current military solutions will per force necessarily contain some element of reprisal against the Afghani people. I have been routinely criticized for holding the Afghani people to a standard which they supposedly cannot possibly meet. I maintain that the price of admission to the modern world is organized resistance to all oppresive regimes wherever they may be. Our forefathers did it against England and so it needs to be for any nation with thugs at the helm. There comes a time where proximity begins to constitute complicity. Where lack of rebellion becomes tacit support. To say that the Afghani people are forced or compelled to comply with the evil designs of their corrupt government smacks of the standard WWII war crime excuse of; “But I was just following orders.”

There is a point where compliance constitutes complicity. I may not be entirely correct as to where exactly to draw the line in this moral equation, but the line must be drawn somewhere. I look forward to any suggestions by others as to where that line exists.

I still would like to see some solutions posited that do not involve the likelihood of civilian casualties in Afghanistan. Very few if any viable ones have been posted. We do need some immediate solutions, because any wasted time is further opportunity for more bloodshed like last Tuesday’s, and that is out of the question.

I will also accept all of your brickbats with some degree of pride. Very few, if any people here at these boards has had the moral fiber to step up to the plate and take a swing at this admittedly thorny issue. Having done so, I have made myself a target. Please remember that those of you who take aim at what I have stated without contributing some functional alternative reveal yourselves to be nothing more than armchair quarterbacks and worthy of about as much praise.

I do not take lightly the dire measures that I advocate here. Neither do I take lightly the mass murder of good Americans. I would have a much more difficult go of things were I to find myself mouthing ineffectual, psuedo-solutions at a time like this.
Here are the solutions that (typically) exclude military retaliation:

And here is a list of those that (typically) advocate or recognize the necessity of some sort of military reprisal. I find it very telling that it is usually these posts that more often than not also contain some sort of long term solution.

If I have misattributed any poster’s intentions, please feel free to post a corrective notice.

Again, I wish to deeply thank pugluvr and erislover for both taking what I have said in the exact spirit it was meant.

I would also like to thank John Corrado for his eloquent and quite possibly far better written post. It summarizes all of what I foresee when it comes to dealing with both Afghanistan and the rest of the terrorist supporting nations.

159

According to the news since Friday morning, this is not true. All of those held at New York airports in the aftermath of Tuesday have been released, save for one person who is still being held as a material witness to the original hijackings.

160

Thanks PW, I am always happy to keep this thread on a factual footing wherever possible.

At this point, I would like to give some of you an insight into just how much this atrocity has affected me.

I got home from spending a month in Taiwan on September third. My home is curently being remodeled. I have not bothered to plug in my television since that time and wonder when I ever shall. Merely seeing a few clips on a television at my job of the jet liner being intentionally flown into the building have left me more horrified than even my own verbose personality can express with words alone. Suffice to say that I have still not plugged in my television and do not know when I will.

This has made it more than a little easy to be misinformed (either partially or completely, depending upon who you are talking to). To those who are shocked by the supposedly alien lifeform inhabiting my body, I say welcome to reality. I am a very protective person of the country that I have to come ever deeper to love as I have gained appreciation for what we have won here in America.

We have come too far and sacrificed too much to have a handful of tyrannical maniacs plunge us into a police state in order to adequately protect ourselves from what must be exterminated by harsh military prosecution instead. Short and sweet; we must kill these bastards by whatever means possible before they are allowed to commit even one more atrocity like last Tuesday’s.

What happened in New York must never happen again. I will go so far as to say the the use of nuclear weapons is almost preferable to ever having such a thing happen again. A threshold has been crossed, the veritable Rubicon for our military. A new and uglier day has dawned on this world where we can no longer to have the least shred of complacency. Such horrors now must be countered with previously unacceptable methods as we learn anew how to deal with those utterly bereft of morals and honor.

I do not think that this will be easy or fun. I do think that the world will emerge a better place for all of the suffering that is sure to take place in the coming months and years as we ferret out the last remenants of such scum as the world has never known.

Please do not ascribe any of the worthy tenets of Islam to this villan bin Laden. He is a maniacal megalomaniac bent upon domination and in no way represents so much that is to be revered in the Islamic faith. I am confident that good Muslims throughout the world are recoiling in horror at the very notion of what has taken place in New York.

I look forward to a world that has been rid of the pestilence known as terrorism and hope for a day when security can be the byword it used to be in our own country and should be in so many others.