Posted on 11/12/2001 2:06:17 AM PST by Ada Coddington
Because we had a disipated hedonist in office. Now that we have actual leadership, it would be remiss to simply allow the murder of 4500 Americans to go unavenged. Or, do you wish us to just continue to accept such violations?
It's at least worth us taking a shot at doing what we can to help the creation of a stable coalition government there, if possible.
Otherwise, the Taliban or some other radical group could well be in charge in twelve months, and we'd be in the same situation we were on 9/11, all over again.
Maybe that's inevitable anyway, but we can't be sure unless we give it a try, and thus we should indeed try.
It's like the old Western movies -- we're kicking out the Taliban because they're like the corrupt sheriff who was actually part of the criminal gang tearing up the town (and the surrounding towns). But just kicking out the corrupt sheriff accomplishes little if you don't make sure to fill the vacuum with an honest sheriff who will nip any future crime in the bud. Otherwise any remaining thugs can just take over the town again as soon as you ride out into the sunset.
It's in our own national interest to try to help the good guys in Afghanistan (or lacking that, the less rabidly anti-American guys) to take and hold power in Afghanistan.
Personally, I'd rather not have to invade Afghanistan every four years to track down the latest band of government-sponsored terrorists. The best way to do that is to try to build the foundations of an Afghani government that will prosecute terrorists instead of support them. The best way to do that is to give the new government more incentive to do business with us than to attack us. But that won't happen if we just kill off their old government then "get the hell out", as you say.
We need to stay, at least in spirit, and build a relationship with the new government there. Or else we'll be back to square one in a few years.
I can be succinct too: You are entitled to your mistaken, uninformed opinion.
Insert poultry "buc buc buc" noises here...
Thanks for the laughs.
Maybe that's inevitable anyway, but we can't be sure unless we give it a try, and thus we should indeed try.
We've "given it a try" too many times to count, from Somalia to Bosnia to Haiti to Kosovo and so on and so on. There simply is no record of a single success; just a ton of wasted taxpayer money, enriched corrupt officials and Western consultants, an impoverished population, and authoritarianism. What is the saying about continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results being the definition of insanity?
Post-WW II Japan, Germany, post-cold-war Russia, not to mention Panama, and a lot of others we had a hand in helping a new government to form, but hadn't fought a war with first.
Would you care to retract your bogus statement?
What is the saying about continuing to do the same thing and expecting different results being the definition of insanity?
And what's the old saying about the dishonesty of mentioning only the things that support your claim, and pretending that counter-examples don't exist?
No.
They are still unavenged. The WTC and Pentagon were attacked by Saudis and Egyptians and we have bombed Afghanis who did not participate.
This is an excellent point he's making. I'm not familiar with this writer; he's good. Is he relatively new?
Post-WW II Japan, Germany, post-cold-war Russia, not to mention Panama, and a lot of others we had a hand in helping a new government to form, but hadn't fought a war with first. Would you care to retract your bogus statement?
What on earth are you talking about? First, Germany and Japan, as already discussed, essentially rebuilt themselves without US assistance, most of which was political (denazification etc).
And post Cold War Russia???? You are holding this up as a great success of nation-building??? Do you have even a minor clue about where our money was wasted in Russia? Corruption is STILL estimated at 15 billion dollars a year. You think Russia is a great success of our nation-building? Seriously, I would really like to know why you feel this way. What is your criteria?
And Panama??? This is your only other example of successful nation-building? You call this a success? Been to Panama lately?
And what's the old saying about the dishonesty of mentioning only the things that support your claim, and pretending that counter-examples don't exist?
THESE are your counter-examples??? Again, what is you criteria for success? Otherwise, I rest my case.
The Northern Alliance will be our next problem.
But "problem" is a relative term. An unruly -- "unstable" -- Northern Alliance will require all the more American/UN presence there, more arms sales, more government-funded NGOs, more high-paid Western consultants. Once the interventionist train is boarded, there are nothing but good times ahead for those who make their living off of the New World Order.
Scapegoating is a hostile social - psychological discrediting routine by which people move blame and responsibility away from themselves and towards a target person or group. It is also a practice by which angry feelings and feelings of hostility may be projected, via inappropriate accusation, towards others. The target feels wrongly persecuted and receives misplaced vilification, blame and criticism; he is likely to suffer rejection from those who the perpetrator seeks to influence. Scapegoating has a wide range of focus: from "approved" enemies of very large groups of people down to the scapegoating of individuals by other individuals. Distortion is always a feature.
Last line in the definition is sooo true. The trouble is 9 out of 10 humans respond to emotional arguments before rational ones. The general masses don't even know it to be the case. Only brainier individuals and those who run the mass media do and act upon it respectively. Should they call you a coward; there is another good read for you.
Post-WW II Japan, Germany, post-cold-war Russia, not to mention Panama, and a lot of others we had a hand in helping a new government to form, but hadn't fought a war with first. Would you care to retract your bogus statement?What on earth are you talking about? First, Germany and Japan, as already discussed, essentially rebuilt themselves without US assistance, most of which was political (denazification etc).
Oh, I'm sorry -- I didn't realize I was dealing with someone who was so massively ignorant of history...
Let's make Japan the object of today's lesson, shall we? You said that they "essentially rebuilt themselves, without US assistance".
I see.
So tell me, just what do you think Douglas MacArthur and the US occupation forces were doing in Japan from 1945 through 1952?
MacArthur was appointed the Supreme Commander of the Allied Powers and set up shop in Yokohama. Most historians describe MacArthur as being the "virtual dictator" of Japan in the post-war years, and they're absolutely correct.
MacArthur ruled Japan by decree, his directives had the force of law.
On September 2, 1945, he issued General Directive #1, ordering the Japanese to disarm. Seven tons of samurai swords were confiscated and shipped to San Francisco.
By decree, he implemented women's suffrage and equality in the workplace, dismantled the war industry, implemented the country's first free elections (April 1946), formed labor unions, broke up monopolies (the Zaibatsu industrial cartels - Nov 6 1945), and implemented open instruction in schools and mandatory school attendance.
He dissolved the existing police forces and released all political prisoners.
He lifted all restrictions on political, civil, and religious freedoms.
He removed Shintoism as a state religion (Directive of December 8, 1945) and oversaw the conversion of two million Japanese to Christianity.
He "encouraged" the emperor to publicly renounce his divinity and reject the Japanese concept of racial superiority (January 1, 1946).
In February 1946 he personally wrote (with the help of his staff) the new Constitution for Japan which went into effect in 1947. It's strikingly similar to the US Constitution (free speech, sovereign power lies with the people, government broken up into legislative/executive/judicial branches, guarantees for human rights, amendment via bills passed in the legislative branch then ratified by the people, etc.) As a result it made the emperor purely a figurehead. The main departure from the US Constitution was Article 9, which outlawed any Japanese army or military action, clearly something the Japanese would not have adopted on their own initiative.
He and his office wrote over 700 new laws which were rubberstamped by the Japanse congress (Diet), including the abolition of the hereditary ruling classes and nobility, liberalized divorce, and massive land reform -- under the latter 89% of Japanese farm land was converted to ownership by the farmers who worked it. Five million acres changed hands.
He implemented public health programs including vaccinations, which saved an estimated two million lives (more than the Japanese war dead), helping to increase Japanese life expectancy by eight years for men, fourteen for women.
During the first half of the occupation, Japan's media was subject to a rigid censorship of any anti-American statements and controversial topics such as the race issue. MacArthur also placed restrictions on the Japanese Communist party.
In 1952, the San Francisco treaty ended the American occupation of Japan and returned the country to self-rule.
At the start of the occupation in 1945, Japan was a feudal dictatorship with a state religion. At the end of the occupation in 1952, due to the directives of American General Douglas MacArthur, Japan was a capitalistic democracy with a bill of rights, and has remained so for the next 49 years.
I'm sorry, what was that you were saying about how Japan "essentially rebuilt themselves without US assistance"?
What was that you were saying about how all the US attempts at nation building have been abject failures?
I repeat -- would you care to retract your bogus claims?
THESE are your counter-examples???
Yes, they are. Unlike you, I actually know a bit of history. I note that all *your* examples date back no farther than the Clinton administration. Gosh, maybe that might explain both the failures themselves, and your own short-sightedness.
A bit of advice -- history extends back just a bit farther than the Clinton inauguration. Go learn something about it (you'll find it those things called "books" in the library), and maybe your next pronouncements won't be so laughably ignorant and wrong.
Otherwise, I rest my case.
Good, because it would be sad to see you dig yourself any deeper.
MacArthur ruled Japan by decree, his directives had the force of law. On September 2, 1945, he issued General Directive #1, ordering the Japanese to disarm. Seven tons of samurai swords were confiscated and shipped to San Francisco. By decree, he implemented women's suffrage and equality in the workplace, dismantled the war industry, implemented the country's first free elections (April 1946), formed labor unions, broke up monopolies (the Zaibatsu industrial cartels - Nov 6 1945), and implemented open instruction in schools and mandatory school attendance. He dissolved the existing police forces and released all political prisoners. He lifted all restrictions on political, civil, and religious freedoms. He removed Shintoism as a state religion (Directive of December 8, 1945) and oversaw the conversion of two million Japanese to Christianity. He "encouraged" the emperor to publicly renounce his divinity and reject the Japanese concept of racial superiority (January 1, 1946). etc etc etc
You made my point entirely: the billions we spent "rebuilding" the world after WWII was primarily focused on de-nazification and de-emperorization. Where did I say otherwise? As far as building their modern industrial societies, they for the most part did it themselves. You can be as sarcastic as you like; that does not change the fact that the core of your argument is a complete non-starter.
You're seriously deluded, aren't you?
Just who do you think you're fooling here? Other than yourself, I mean.
For seven years, the entire nation of Japan was taken apart, politically, economically, and socially, and then reassembled from the ground up into something entirely different by direct orders from the occupying US forces.
Then you come along and laughably call this "rebuilding themselves without US assistance".
Give it up, son, no one's buying your nonsense. Least of all me. You were caught being an idiot, the honorable thing to do would be to retract your original statement. Instead, you say *I* prove *your* bogus point?
Seek help, man.
Tell you what -- I'll start a new thread on this topic tomorrow, and let the history-minded Freepers play referee on this one. This ought to be fun...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.