Afghan Religion And Democracy Collide

[gerryh]

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.

First.. baby bush was NOT in power in 1996, that would have been Clinton. baby bush didn't become president untill January 2001. Diplomatic efforts had already been going on for 5 years, and 9.11.2001 was the last straw. It was obvious with that attack and the subsequent reaction by the taliban that they had no real interest in turning binladen over to the u.s. At NO TIME did the taliban offer to turn binladen over to the u.s. directly.

 

[gerryh]

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.

DId you bother reading the links and quotes provided? Didn't think so. For over 6 years the u.s. tried the diplomatic route.

 

[pegger]

Fine - replace Bush with US Government. My assertion stills stands - whether you agree with me or not.

 

[gerryh]

Fine - replace Bush with US Government. My assertion stills stands - whether you agree with me or not.

Your original assertion was that the taliban had offered to turn binladen over to the u.s. and the u.s. refused. You have NOT proven this assertion at all and infact have proven the exact opposite.

 

[pegger]

Your original assertion was that the taliban had offered to turn binladen over to the u.s. and the u.s. refused. You have NOT proven this assertion at all and infact have proven the exact opposite.

OMG. Forgive me for actually working at my job, as opposed to spending my time trying to prove you wrong.

Maybe when I have nothing better to do than prove something that at the end of the day changes nothing about what is happening today, I will devote the hours of time that it will take to find the newpapers, etc... from 9 years ago, which, for some unknown reason, I decided to recycle, or throw out some time ago.

 

[mabudon]

Don't feed the trolls, gerryh is right and everyone else is wrong. The history of the afghanistan stupidity isn't germane to the discussion as posted in the OP

 

[elevennevele]

OT. Don't worry gerry. Eventually the only thing I'll be able see at Canadian Content will be nothing more than a blank page containing the phrase 'Please register to see links'.

http://forums.canadiancontent.net/troubleshooting/83084-please-register-see-links.html#post1073947

 

[elevennevele]

There is context that the Taliban were ready to hand over Bin Laden and the US refused. We can stipulate that they refused the terms, but there was still the offer.

Taliban 'ready to discuss' Bin Laden handover if bombing halts

The Taliban would be ready to discuss handing over Osama bin Laden to a neutral country if the US halted the bombing of Afghanistan, a senior Taliban official said today.

Afghanistan's deputy prime minister, Haji Abdul Kabir, told reporters that the Taliban would require evidence that Bin Laden was behind the September 11 terrorist attacks in the US.

"If the Taliban is given evidence that Osama bin Laden is involved" and the bombing campaign stopped, "we would be ready to hand him over to a third country", Mr Kabir added.

But it would have to be a state that would never "come under pressure from the United States", he said.

Mr Kabir urged America to halt its air campaign, now in its eighth day, and open negotiations. "If America were to step back from the current policy, then we could negotiate," he said. "Then we could discuss which third country."

Large explosions caused by American bombs and missiles have been reported to the south and east of the Afghan capital, Kabul, this evening.

The sky above the city has been filled with tracer fire from Taliban anti-aircraft guns once again.

Before the start of the air campaign, the Taliban had demanded evidence of Bin Laden's involvement in the attack and had offered to try him before an Islamic court inside Afghanistan - proposals that the US promptly rejected.

.

If the US had evidence that Bin Laden was responsible, I don't really see what is the problem. They could of had Bin Laden tried at the Hague. This offer doesn't appear to be unreasonable.

 

[gerryh]

Like I said, the americans had tried the diplomatic route ever since the bombing of the Cole in '96..... the taliban refused to hand binladen directly to the u.s. At one point early on the u.s. had tried to get the Saudi's to allow binladen into their country and then the americans would take posession of him. The saudi's refused.

 

[L Gilbert]

There is context that the Taliban were ready to hand over Bin Laden and the US refused. We can stipulate that they refused the terms, but there was still the offer.






.

If the US had evidence that Bin Laden was responsible, I don't really see what is the problem. They could of had Bin Laden tried at the Hague. This offer doesn't appear to be unreasonable.

I thought the US had tapes of Bin Laden claiming responsibility. Confessions goa long way in courts. Especially if there is further supporting evidence.

 

[elevennevele]

L Gilbert: I thought the US had tapes of Bin Laden claiming responsibility. Confessions goa long way in courts. Especially if there is further supporting evidence.

.

That's what I mean. If they had the evidence they could of had Bin Laden easily and held to account in an international court of law which should have sufficed. I don't see the problem with this.

 

[Machjo]

Until now I was on the fence as to whether we should stay in Afghanistan beyond 2011. Our work is not finished there and I could see arguments for continuing beyond 2011. I thought that Americans need our help, and it may be appropriate to help them.

No more. With this law, I am not sure there is much difference between the current regime and the Taliban. I see no reason why Canadian soldiers should die, just to prop up Taliban type regime.

Now I fully support Canada getting out by 2011 (earlier, if possible). I think Afghanis and the Taliban deserve each other.

So do we trump democracy to protect the rights of Afghan women?

If so, what do we replace democracy by?

Monarchy (with a monarch sympathetic to equality of the sexes of course)?

Colonial parliamentary system, whereby the legislative branch is democratic but the executive branch remains in the hands of an allied military tribunal sympathetic to the equality of the sexes?

Another variation on the colonial system could be that the state is democratic except for the constitution, which would guarantee Anglo-Saxon values and could be amended only the US Senate,the UK's Parliament, the Canadian Parliament or some other similar solution?

Or do we accept democracy at all costs, even if it means suppressing equality of the sexes? What's the solution?

 

[Machjo]

Let's not forget that even in the West, some women will vote in favour of banning the right of women to work' so can we necessarily count on women voters in Afghanistan to fight for their own rights if they choose to vote based on their beliefs about the will of God?

 

[Cannuck]

Rabbit dog.... 'sat like a bird dog?

 

[Machjo]

I agree. Its time to pull out.... You can't teach old dogs new tricks....

You can, but not by beating it over the head every time it doesn't do you're will. That's a sure-fire way of getting bitten. It might work better with patience and doggy treats, something few conservatives understand well.

Most consevatives prefer the beat-with-a-stick apprach and expect results right away and, incredibly enough, are always surprised then the dog shows his teeth and growls, to which a typical conservative responds with a slap to the muzzle and then is surprised when the dog bites.

 

[Cannuck]

Until that time, we are wasting OUR soldier's lives and OUR tax dollars for a PR campaign that is failing miserably.

Shouldn't we be asking the soldiers if they feel lives are being wasted. They are, after all, the ones that are putting it on the line.

I've often wonder why people aren't asking for an end to police departments. We keep spending million and millions of dollars every year. Police officers get killed and injured and there is still crime.

 

[talloola]

It is not the decision of soldiers to stay or go, it is a political decision, they follow
orders, and if left to them, they would stay there, they are brave and able, and
will help wherever they can, someone has to make them leave.

 

[Johnnny]

if you ask me we should be bombing karzi's house

 

[Machjo]

if you ask me we should be bombing karzi's house

But he was democratically elected, so we should worship him according to the western religion of democracy.

 

[talloola]

But he was democratically elected, so we should worship him according to the western religion of democracy.

I wonder how much u.s. currency he has in his swiss bank account by now.