Afghan Religion And Democracy Collide
- Thread starter Liberalman
- Start date
That's how I remember it too- that type of thing is prone to falling down the memory hole tho as it doesn't fit the BIG LIE \m/
You're expecting me to go back, pull newspaper articles, etc.. from 9 years ago, and post it within 2 - 3 minutes?
When I get free time I will - as it is, I should be working, and not blabbing on this.
Hey in the meantime Gerryh, could you post a link to your version of events, or perhaps explain what it is that makes you convinced that the scenario 3 of us (so far) agree upon is in fact fantasy??
I am interested in what YOUR "understanding" is
I am interested in what YOUR "understanding" is
The important thing being the US had NO EVIDENCE to make such demands. You can't extradite someone on utter speculation.
And asking for full access to a sovereign country is preposterous as well.
So yeah that's basically what happened
And asking for full access to a sovereign country is preposterous as well.
So yeah that's basically what happened
Here's another one
Google gave a bunch of hits. This story is about a series of meetings both re 9/11 and post to give up Bin Laden.
Diplomats Met With Taliban on Bin Laden (washingtonpost.com)
It comes down to the point the the Taliban were willing to do something - but the US wanted (justifiably) blood. However, Bush's unwillingness to compromise pushed this into a needless war.
Google gave a bunch of hits. This story is about a series of meetings both re 9/11 and post to give up Bin Laden.
Diplomats Met With Taliban on Bin Laden (washingtonpost.com)
It comes down to the point the the Taliban were willing to do something - but the US wanted (justifiably) blood. However, Bush's unwillingness to compromise pushed this into a needless war.
Nope...it doesn't.... your assertion was that they offered to turn him over and the u.s. refused...... the u.s. refused to allow him to be tried in an Islamic court....I would have refused that myself.
What the article "proves" is that the u.s. had been trying to get the taliban to turn binladen over since 1996 after the Cole and the Embasy attack with no luck. You expected MORE restraint after 9/11?:roll:
Anyways back to the topic
The "mission" should now be a mark of shame with this latest development
The "mission" should now be a mark of shame with this latest development
You mean it comes down to the fact that the Taliban was grasping at straws to delay action by the US and its allies. The Taliban offering to try him, ostensibly under their version of Islamic Law? Thats nothing close to a real offer after a country has seen an event like 9/11, and I don't think it mattered who was in the White House.
As for this new law, supposedly being endorsed by the Karzai gov't, I share the outrage: I think most people in the western world do. At the same time, while I don't like it and think our foreign affairs people should be talking to Karzai about it, I can understand where it is coming from: political expediency in appealing to a block of his voters in an election year (just like we see here). I also understand that progress in these types of situations isn't always linear with no setbacks but again our gov't needs to speak out to Karzai and Afghans. I don't see this as a reason to discard progress our people have made and spilled blood for.
Be mad about this but don't just give up because of it. Afghanistan has been let down by the world 20-25 years ago when we failed to help them rebuild after the Soviets withdrew. This led to the rise of the Taliban and the current situation so it leads me to wonder what will happen if we fail them again?
I'd rather just move all but the able bodied men out to live decent lives elsewhere and let the idiots have the place. (Assuming that they would rather live in peace elsewhere than stay in Afghanistan.)
When does the issue with Afghanistan and the Taliban end, though?
.
Don't worry about it. That is the record of events. I remember it well too. The Taliban said they would hand him over and then the US invaded rather than try that route. The US was going in regardless. Moreover, the fact that all those hijackers were Saudi and funded by Saudi backers had no impact on how they would address the issue of 911. The training camps may have been in Afghanistan but the US took those out.
To me when the training camps were taken out, that was really when the mission was over in the military sense other than being a big stick for political leverage to push for other changes.
We instead got sold on spreading democracy, and occupation, and nation building while Bush Jr. went for his real interest which was invading Iraq. All the while humanitarian issues in other places asking for help throughout the world, and places which would have welcomed us were left starving for attention and action.
We could have done a lot more good in the world and it could have cost us a lot less. The voices that pointed this out, or suggested such things however got ridiculed in the 'new political climate.'
What it proves is that the Taliban was willing to turn him over, however needed to do so in a "face saving" manner - which Bush was not willing to give. Bush wanted it his way, or we'll bomb you into oblivion - from day 1 (i.e. 1996)
Also, I did not say that I expected more restraint after 9-11. I understand the reflex of wanting revenge immediately. However revenge is not justice.
Now, because of that "revenge reaction" we have destabilized the entire region, caused an ongoing, never ending war and still do not have Bin Laden. To cover up this mess, they then lie about the reasons why we went there in the first place. We did not go in to bring democracy, or save the Afgani's from the Taliban. We went in out of bloodlust. Period.
Now people act all surprised when they pass laws like this one.
As if the US even took the time set the terms of the handing over of Bin Laden. The bombs starting dropping as soon as the US military hardware was in place for full scale war. I saw no real effort on the part of the US to have any hand off of Bin Laden take any traction. Only media junkies kept that little bit of truth in circulation.
The fact that gerry was questioning such an offer existing tells you how much that route was given an opportunity.