Zipperfish:
So I went back and read the post I ignored and I must admit that ironically you
did answer one of those questions directly...
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
We imposed a democracy on Afghanistan. Did we force them to vote? No. Many did vote. But that democracy is, at this moment, on very thin ice. Now gargantuan efforts are being expended on keeping the democracy alive. Perhaps the analogy is that of protecting a young sapling that it might grow into an oak, I don't know. We are also spending a lot of effort on the "hearts and minds" campaign--schools and such.
The expectation is that they will see that we are the good guys and reject the tyranny of the Taliban. But is that necessarily the moral mindset from which Afghan people operate? Many people here kept saying that teh Taliban "are not anything like us." A lot of people said that. And, contrary to popular opinion, the Taliban, and Taliban sympathizers are part of the fabric of Afghanistan culture. They come from it; they did not come from outside it. You cannot separate the two as easily as many here would like to think.
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
No NATO is not forcing people to vote...but they did impose democracy. I'm thinking that took some money, blood and effort. Money, blood and effort that could have been spent killing Taliban or finding Osama bin Laden.
And this democracy they imposed is not taking. So, we will need more money, blood and effort to keep it going--money, blood and effort that could be going to towards killing Taliban and finding Osama bin Laden. And now we see the effort to civilize them is overcoming the effort to kill the Taliban and Al Qeada. I don't even remember the last time anyone talked about capturing Osama bin Laden. It's like he's become irrelevant to the whole thing somehow. oF course the whole 9/11 thingt was basically engineered and delivered by Saudi Wahhabis anyways--another thing people conveniently forget. All the Taliban did was let these yahoos use their backyard.
I don't give a rat's ass if Afghanistan is free democracy or an anarcho-syndicalist commune. And if I did care, I'd at least put some effort into understanding their moral predispositions before I embarked any course of change, not just assume (like in Iraq) that when we invaded them they would throw roses at our feet; not just call them ingrates for not appreciating all we've done for them.
What I do care about is the threat Afghnaistan represents to me, my family, my country. I don't see them as being much of a threat at this point. SO let the missionaries go over there and preach the gospel of capitalism and democracy. I'd rather my tax dollars went to more rational security measures. Like the US offing that Somali Al Qeada guy--that was a cost effective elimination of a real threat to American interests.
Ok I'm not sure why I find it easier to accept the word 'impose' over the word 'force' but I do. It's true we didn't ask Afghans if they wanted democracy, but you have to remember that after the initial invasion it would've been supremely irresponsible and counter productive for both the West and Afghanistan to leave it in a power vacuum. That's one of the reasons we got into this mess in the first place. The US (and Pakistan) funded and supplied a Mujahedeen to fight the Soviets and when the Soviets left the US couldn't drop Afghanistan fast enough. The ensuing vacuum led to pretty much continued conflict and Pakistan (ISI actually) used that fact to create this proxy force to 'bring stability' to Afghanistan. After removing the Taliban there wasn't much choice: something, some kind of structure had to be left there. We could've reinstalled the King. The royal family is still out there (living in France?) and the monarchy was the last leadership that could maintain a pax between land lords and the people. The reason democracy fills the bill is because it is essentially the most 'free' and most open system we have. If Afghans aren't happy with something (assuming long after we've left) they can, as the theory goes, change it themselves. It's one of the perks of democracy. And yes, the democracy is on thin ice at the moment but then most new governments are, and every new democracy faces challenges in its time. That's another property of democracy -- it is essentially a place for citizens with differing opinions on how things should be run to actually 'fight it out' and come to an agreement. So it often looks shaky. Heck even in Canada we roll our eyes at it often.
$1:
The expectation is that they will see that we are the good guys and reject the tyranny of the Taliban.
Well, you and I are going to disagree a little here. One I think most people, partly because of the kind of stories run in the media, underestimate just how much Afghans actually reject the Taliban. What I mean is they dont really need a lot of convincing about their 'tyranny. They lived under it. they were the heros on the block in the beginning because they brought rule of law, but they went from hero to zero pretty quick -- before we arrived -- much in the same way you see them go form hero to zero in Pakistan recently.
$1:
And now we see the effort to civilize them is overcoming the effort to kill the Taliban and Al Qeada.
I don't really see that but ok. Many of the infrastructure and school building was done at their request. It may be true that Afghans are 'uncivilized' but I think that's a word people use when they don't want to figure them out anymore. Afghans do look out into the world and see things others have that they want. They do have family and friends who recently repatriated and they hear about life outside of Afghanistan. I think people underestimate their ability to say "I want a future for my children. I want them to go to school", or "I want a museum in Kabul", or just in general want to see Afghanistan - in its own way - to 'grow up' as it were.
$1:
And if I did care, I'd at least put some effort into understanding their moral predispositions before I embarked any course of change, not just assume (like in Iraq) that when we invaded them they would throw roses at our feet;
While that definitely was an assumption in Iraq I don't think it was ever an assumption by people in the driver’s seat in Afghanistan. Bush & Co. figured -- incorrectly -- that Iraqi's would be more 'civilized' and that Afghanistan wouldn't. I think that assumption proved incorrect. Afghans are salt of the earth in so many ways.
$1:
What I do care about is the threat Afghnaistan represents to me, my family, my country. I don't see them as being much of a threat at this point. SO let the missionaries go over there and preach the gospel of capitalism and democracy. I'd rather my tax dollars went to more rational security measures. Like the US offing that Somali Al Qeada guy--that was a cost effective elimination of a real threat to American interests.
[/quote]I don't necessarily agree with that but it is a lot more articulate than bras=burkas
and I don't really blame you or anyone else for looking at Afghanistan and being pessimistic. But I will continue to preach that things are better there than they look, and more promising than they sound.
CKA Uber 
CKA Uber 
CKA Uber 
