Posted on 09/30/2001 9:31:07 AM PDT by annalex
If you look at our foreign policy since the end of WWII, we have tried to install friendly governments in many countries in Africa, the Middle East, and the Far East. In nearly every instance it has failed.
Saddam Hussein and ben Laden are just the latest in a long line of US installed or backed leaders who have come back to bite us. If I remember correctly, the US even backed Pol Pot at one time. The government's record in that regard is enough to steer us away from that course of action.
We do need to rip out terrorism root and branch where ever it may rear its ugly head, but we do need to let sovereign countries run their own affairs. Only when those govenments attack the US are we allowed, or even obligated to intervene. Otherwise, we need to focus on the problem, terrorism and all who harbor terrorists.
Currently, the Taliban is so hated and despised that even their own members are deserting it and heading for high ground. This will not be as difficult a task as the Russians or the British took on. We have millions of Afgan allies that will do the battle for us. Ridding the Taliban is not even in question, we ARE taking them out period. The only thing we must decide is weather we destroy them and leave Afghanistan with another anarchy to deal with, or we assist them in building a democratic government. Bring men and women from Afghanistan over here to go to college and learn how to successfully run a country.
I don't care what your religious beliefs are, nobody wants their fingers cut off if they put fingernail polish on them. No one wants to be tortured and beat to death if they watch television.
The taliban will fall.
As for the other muslim extremists, hopefully they will come to Afghanistan to fight and die with the Taliban. If not they can fight and die with Saddam.
There will most likely be many confrontations over there, but one thing we cannot do is to close our eyes to that area and ignore it. We would be signing our own death warrant. These extremists don't teach to kill only the Jews, Christians, or any other religion that meddles in their affairs, they teach to kill ALL of them.
Why don't you try defending 'imperialism', with more of your hollywood version of reason, instead of empty rhetoric? We need a few laughs around here.
We cannot decare war on the muslim world, or even on selected political parts of it, imo, without bringing on another global war. - WWIII.
Therefore, we should decare war on the fanatics, the individuals responsible. -- We should identify these individuals as it becomes possible, make our case, and announce to the world that no quarter will be given in their personal elimination , collateral death & destructon be damned.
After several such successful actions, killing thousands of these fanatics, the rest will learn our way. -- To live & let live. -- Or learn to die opposing it.
Imperialism, as you have defined it, will never work again unless the enemy is totally defeated, as per WWII.
We cannot fight the whole islamic world for its unconditional surrender. - #15 -
---------------------------------------
You are unbelieveable. -- Obviously, in your first post to me here, you didn't even read ALL of #15, you just made up some pat answer to my last sentence, just to be, --- what? -- Seen as clever?
How weird, to ask me for my solution, when it's outlined above, in my first post .
Therefore, we should decare war on the fanatics, the individuals responsible.
That would be the Taliban.
We should identify these individuals as it becomes possible, make our case, and announce to the world that no quarter will be given in their personal elimination , collateral death & destructon be damned.
Exactly what we are doing to the Taliban.
After several such successful actions, killing thousands of these fanatics, the rest will learn our way. -- To live & let live. -- Or learn to die opposing it.
So you think after we rid the world of the Taliban, we should just leave and allow another just like it to rise?
This stratagy is much like that used to pacify the 'indian terrorists' on the frontier. --- ANYone living as, or with, an outlaw [terrorist], was considered fair game. It worked then in the US.
-- It will now, in the world. ---- IF we make it clear there is no where to run, & no escape.
Pure hubris.
Are you going to declare war on anyone that doesn't meet your moral standards? How about the Chinese? We don't have that kind of power, nor should we exercise it if we did, not because of what it would do to others, but because of what it does to us.
Do you want an example? In this case, in Afganistan, we assumed our right to manipulate regimes toward our preference. That means whoever wishes to corruptly buy influence within our own government gains material advantage as enforced by military proxy. In the case cited, it was Unocal. What did it do? It gave the Taliban the tacit concession of the US government necessary to establish their permanence. How did that result?
It wasn't merely the kind of corruption in the Clinton administration that would sell out our security for a mere $300,000 campaign donation that precipitated these events. The assumption that we have such a right allowed the entire infrastructure of such influence buying to develop. We have seen its fruits all over the world.
How then should we have proceeded? Why was it that Bush lost to Bubba? Iran/Contra? Was that a failure of policy or leadership? In my view the latter. Lacking the ability to communicate why it was necessary to support the Contras such that the Congress would provide the funds, PoppaBush chose to use dealing drugs to our children to illegally finance a legitimate war effort against communism in this hemisphere. When it came to the election and exposing Bubba's corruption, I have a hunch that blackmail was and may still perhaps be involved. Thus the ability to sell influence became the determinant in electability instead of leadership qualities.
It is always harder to see why a system prevents problems than to see how its lack precipitated such. The difficulty is in identifying those principles of governance that would have prevented the incidence of these particular events. In our case the number and scope of elements in which Constitutional principles have been violated are so many that one could spend all day pointing and arguing. This is why so many of the remedial suggestions I have offered are preventative in nature.
It is never too late to start, and the situation is never so urgent as to justify ignoring them. See above.
What are the roots of the Arab militancy?
Whatever the merits of your very practical approach, I still have to say that Mohammed is the root of Islamic militancy. He turned seventh century Arabian culture into a religion.
It is tempting to accuse the Muslim religion of fostering violence against the infidels. The Koran does contain examples of Prophet Mohammed condoning violence against and deceit of infidels, that don't find a direct parallel in either the Torah or the New Testament. Nevertheless, an overwhelming number of the world's Muslims has a heightened religious awareness and do not seem to be particularly violent, and moreover, militant Islam is a new phenomenon in the modern history.
Mohammed did not merely condone violence and murder, he commanded it. The number of Muslims in the world who do not seem particularly violent may indicate the normal bell curve tendencies of groups more than it does anything about the Koran itself. Militant Islam may be a new phenomenon in 'modern history' but it is not a new phenomenon in history.
Cordially,
MORAL STANDARDS!!! WTF?! They slit throats of men who commit adultery. And not just a quick slit, they insert the blade behind the esophagus and saw out through it. It is so common that it has a name: "Qasas". Watch one for yourself here. And if that does not do it for you, FRmail me and I will send you a link to a Qasas closeup where you can watch the blade itself as it inserts into the throat.
You mentioned the Chinese. 2 things. We can eliminate the Taliban quite effectively without going into all out war. Second, the Chinese don't see the best way to go the heaven is to kill Americans.
What do you think of the morality of a nation that foists a global ban on a pesticide on false premises with the published goal of population reduction and watching 3 million people die annually for thirty years? What do you think of the morality of a nation that KNOWINGLY and with FORETHOUGHT routinely conducts "habitat restoration" projects that cause death by starvation and pest borne diseases, in one case 22 million people in Central Africa (it was predicted in the EIS and they went forward with the project)? What do you think of a the morality of a nation that abetted the spread of AIDS by preventing every known and proven public health measure from functioning?
These people don't have AZT and AIDS cocktails. Adultery to them is a society-threatening problem (as if it wasn't to ours). The Islamic world has a lower incidence of AIDS than any other undeveloped area in the planet BY FAR. You judge them because their remedial prevention mechanics are horrible and bloody.
I see. I say that it doesn't trouble you because there is no temperence or consciousness of such realities in your replies. These people fear our loose morality and open sexuality for more direct reasons than you apparently suspect or understand. They hate the progenitors of our popular culture because they see it as a threat to their very existence and have no wish to repeat the experience of southern Africa. They see the promulgation of that culture, the emphasis of "tolerance" sold to them by the UN and they see US.
I am not justifying the Taleban, nor am I suggesting that they not be taken out. I am saying that your bellicose attitude is the very one that has induced much of this stupidity through its LACK of emphasis on these issues that so apparently matter to the people of Afganistan. If we are to successfully assist them in installing a government that respects the rule of law and is friendly to our nation, best that we learn to respect their laws and institutions such that we gain the benefit of the popular will. Without it we might as well kill them all. Is that what you want?
This stratagy is much like that used to pacify the 'indian terrorists' on the frontier. --- ANYone living as, or with, an outlaw [terrorist], was considered fair game. It worked then in the US.
-- It will now, in the world. ---- IF we make it clear there is no where to run, & no escape. - 29 -
-----------------------------------
Do you not understand that the Taliban is no better than the Nazis and we must end it at all costs. Period. The more we allow it to flurish, the more we shall suffer in the future.
=================================
Tex. - Why do you think your nazi/taliban gibberish has anyhing to do with what we are supposedly discussing?
Sorry, but your replies are beyond my ablity, and my patience, to comprehend. I'm outa here.
What is it you think I want? To just recreate our culture in Afghanistan? To copy our government exactly?
If the government that comes into power is TRULY democratic, it will reflect the will of the Afghan people.
However, human rights are inalienable. And when possible, we must defend them. If the Taliban were doing the same things the Chinese government has been doing, I would just as adamantly promote it's demise by military force.
I agree that the imperialist course is replete with perils that you outline. The right imperialist course is one among many wrong imperialist courses. The right course means establishing either an occupation regime or a puppet government that sees as its central function enforcement of basic rights: right to life and property, -- the same rights that the terrorists violate. It should be supportive of indigenous culture and religion, or religion-blind. I believe that we have resources to accomplish that, provided that the silly government programs that waste our money today domestically, are deep-sixed.
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.