I wouldn't even know where to begin. Let's just say that it's pretty stupid to take foreign policy advice from socialists who at one time thought it was a great idea to exterminate a race of people.
All the free education in the world is worthless if your mind remains closed. Now go away.
Was there anything accurate in his list of questions?
We can't fix Islam, and we sure aren't required either morally or legally to rebuild Afghanistan or to ignore it when it is controlled or is harboring people who want to kill Americans. The Afghans have a female general over there now. She's an ex-communist or maybe a current communist; if the former, good for her, if the latter, she's probably useless, but she's a general nonetheless. Afghans have some women in their equivalent to our congress. Women and girls are able to go back to school as students or as teachers now and widows are able to work in Afghanistan and provide for their families, something the Taliban didn't allow. . They can leave their homes to go to the market without an escort. There are still problems but only a fool would think that things are 'still the same.' There is food now and with law and order on the rise there is more opportunity for them to become self-sufficient again and not require massive infusions of US food.
Nothing is better now.
Millions of smiling Afghans prove you are wrong. Granted, it would be better is there was no such thing as Islam, but we can't change their religion by force and we can't give them the benefit, overnight, of hundreds of years of western thought on the subject of individual liberty, so it is up to them to figure it out We can only give them the freedom to choose freedom. If they make a mistake and choose not to accept freedom, they have only themselves to blame from here on.
Wasn´t this only a senseless strik full of revenge?
No.
Thoise kinds of have laid waste to Afghanistan, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and the place would hadropped a nuNUKED The US doesn't act out of revenge. We act because strecgth prevents more violence.
Obviously we don't act against Afghanistan out of revenge. If we were interested in something as silly as revenge, we would not have sent special forces to do surgical strikes and would not have risked our own troops trying to keep the damage limited to just the bad guys. If we wanted 'revenge' we would have used nuclear weapons and Kabul, Pakistan, Syria, Iran and so on would no longer exist. And everyone would be stunned and afraid; they would keep their mouths shut with no whining from Europeans... the Europeans would instead be tripping all over themselves to get on our good side and would beg for their lives and our goodwill just as they cowered to the Nazis decades ago. They'd probably even offer us their European first-born as a sacrifice. (Jews first, in European tradition, of course...) If we were after revenge we wouldn't have bothered with getting the Northern Alliance to join up with us, we wouldn't have bothered to fly in tons upon tons of food to feed people, we wouldn't have bothered to help them set up a functioning Afghan government to reestablish some semblance of order, and we wouldn't have bothered with putting troops in harm's way when we have the ability to turn the entire country into a shiny glass parking lot. .
Who would we take revenge on in Afghanistan, anyway? The country wasn't ruled by Afghans- it was ruled by Pakistanis and Arabs who were occupying Afghanistan against the will of the Afghan people. We get our 'revenge' from killing any al Qaeda who don't surrender and if we add Arafat and the PLO and Hamas and Hezbollah to the list that's OK with me too. BUt if we were getting revenge we wouldn't be taking prisoners, letting the Red Cross talk to them, and we wouldn't be feeding them halal meals or 'Froot Loops' children's cereal or fretting about whether their butts are pointed the right way when they pray. To say things 'have not changed' in Afghanistan though, is simply ridiculous.