RAWA (Afghan women's rights org) opposes the US invasion and occupation.

[ConsAreLiars]

There are some who have bought into the fiction that the US invasion was intended to, or as a side effect would, improve the status and living conditions of women in Afghanistan. RAWA is an organization that formed over 30 years ago to improve conditions for women in their country. They resisted the Taliban, setting up secret schools for girls and so on, and now oppose the US occupiers and their Afghan collaborators. Both the Taliban and the US invaders have intensified the suffering and the degradation of living conditions and reduction in rights for the women and girls of their country. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Association_of_the_Women_of_Afghanistan for more about RAWA.

The situation for women has not improved since the US led invasion, in fact quite the contrary. RAWA, the leading Afghan women’s rights group (which fought the Soviets and the Taliban) says the US-backed regime in Kabul is no improvement for Afghan women:

After the 9-11 tragedy, when the US began bombing Afghanistan on October 7, 2001, the oppression of Afghan women was used as a justification for overthrowing the Taliban regime. Five weeks later America’s first lady, Laura Bush, stated triumphantly: “Because of our recent military gains in much of Afghanistan, women are no longer imprisoned in their homes.”


But unfortunately the reality shows a different picture. The people of the world should know that though the disgusting, ludicrous and oppressive rule of Taliban was over in our ill-fated Afghanistan, but this never means the end of the horrible miseries of our tortured women. Because contrary to the aspirations of our people and expectations of the world community, the Northern Alliance, these brethren-in-creed of the Taliban and Al-Qaida are again in power and generously supported by the US government.

(From http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2008/06/06/afghanistan-why-a-withdrawal-of-troops_9237.html )

[Canuckistanian]

1. I HATE the fact that women's rights are the justification for Afghanistan

Because NOBODY is actually paying attention to the WOMEN of Afghanistan.

I've been following RAWA since before the "great war" and it's disgusting to see no real change in women's lives.

Laura Bush should hide her head in shame.

[Marrah_G]

17. Yes she should

I am hoping against hope that an Obama administration can help to bring about real change for the people there, especially the women.

Returning to Taliban rule is just not acceptable.

I am a huge fan of RAWA.

I just finished a book called Zoya's story. Excellent if you are interested in the topic.

A bed of Red Roses was also an excellent book.

[Freddie Stubbs]

2. We went into Afghanistan because the Taliban was harboring bin Laden

Most rational people agree that stopping the Taliban from retaking Afghanistan is a good idea. That's why Barack Obama wants to increase the number of US troops there.

[EFerrari]

3. Bombing Afghanistan for harboring Bin Laden is like bombing Chicago

for harboring Al Capone. It's propagandistic bullshit on a cracker.

And, where IS bin Laden, anyway? He's not in Afghanistan, is he?

RAWA couldn't be more right. And Obama is wrong. Bombs will not resolve this problem.

[Freddie Stubbs]

6. So, we should have sent in a few police squad cars to get him?

As the nominee, Obama will be be calling the shots when the platform is written. The platform won't denounce Zionism. It won't praise Hugo Chavez and the Castro Brothers.

It will call for an increase in US troops in Afghanistan.

[EFerrari]

7. A few squad cars would have gotten the same result, no?

And you're right. Obama has a lot to learn about Latin America.

And when he increases the numbers in Afghanistan, he will be making a mistake that may tank his second term. I hope he has better sense.

ETA: A few squad cars wouldn't have killed and displaced THOUSANDS OF AFGHANIS and so, wouldn't have recruited a proportionate number of al Qaida or Taliban supporters.

[Freddie Stubbs]

27. The Taliban would still be allowing Al-Qaeda to use Afghanistan as a training ground

That may be acceptable to you, but it is not to Senator Obama or a majority of Americans.

[EFerrari]

31. Oh, bullshit. There are plenty of ways to deal with Al Qaida

without bombing the whole country.

And, by the way, we didn't get bin Laden and al Qaida is just regrouping in the tribal region in Pakistan.

The real problem was the Pakistani ISI all along, not the Taliban. They are the real power brokers in Afghanistan, not the Taliban. And, they still are.

How many people have we killed to no purpose? I guess it's acceptable to most Americans to slaughter people and wind up more at risk not less.

[Freddie Stubbs]

32. How much more risk do we have now as opposed to pre-2001?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

33. Honestly? In the tribal region, al Qaida has put up something like a university

that trains people from all over the world in their own language. Bombing Afghanistan didn't stop al Qaida. It only taught them better what to expect. And then, we went into Iraq and ignored them. For years. Omar has been sitting in Karachi and he still is. While we still are killing civilians in Afghanistan.

BushCo has known about this for years and they don't give a damn. That's why the report about European trainees trying to enter the US just came in last week. Skeletor has known about this threat but it only became politically expedient to roll out now.

And for every civilian that has been killed, maimed, abused or displaced between the invasion of Afghanistan and now, the risk has risen steadily according to people like Richard Clarke.

[Freddie Stubbs]

39. So, they are doing in Pakistan what they were doing in Afghanistan?

:shrug:

[EFerrari]

40. They've regrouped in Pakistan and have improved on what they were doing

in Afghanistan because the invasion did nada to deter them. Now, they're just closer to their sponsors in Pakistan.

Good going, Bushco!

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

37. The same result?

You mean not capturing Osama bin Laden?

Yeah, probably.

[EFerrari]

38. Right. I didn't mean kids getting blown up by bomblets in the same colors

as the peanut butter snacks we dropped on them. :(

[countryjake]

42. "Brutality smeared in peanut butter"

Brutality Smeared in Peanut Butter
Why America must stop the war now
By Arundhati Roy

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/oct/23/afghanistan.terrorism8

~snip~

Aid workers have condemned it as a cynical, dangerous, public-relations exercise. They say that air-dropping food packets is worse than futile.

First, because the food will never get to those who really need it. More dangerously, those who run out to retrieve the packets risk being blown up by landmines. A tragic alms race.

Nevertheless, the food packets had a photo-op all to themselves. Their contents were listed in major newspapers. They were vegetarian, we're told, as per Muslim dietary law (!) Each yellow packet, decorated with the American flag, contained: rice, peanut butter, bean salad, strawberry jam, crackers, raisins, flat bread, an apple fruit bar, seasoning, matches, a set of plastic cutlery, a serviette and illustrated user instructions.

After three years of unremitting drought, an air-dropped airline meal in Jalalabad! The level of cultural ineptitude, the failure to understand what months of relentless hunger and grinding poverty really mean, the US government's attempt to use even this abject misery to boost its self-image, beggars description.

Reverse the scenario for a moment. Imagine if the Taliban government was to bomb New York City, saying all the while that its real target was the US government and its policies. And suppose, during breaks between the bombing, the Taliban dropped a few thousand packets containing nan and kebabs impaled on an Afghan flag. Would the good people of New York ever find it in themselves to forgive the Afghan government? Even if they were hungry, even if they needed the food, even if they ate it, how would they ever forget the insult, the condescension? Rudi Guiliani, Mayor of New York City, returned a gift of $10m from a Saudi prince because it came with a few words of friendly advice about American policy in the Middle East. Is pride a luxury that only the rich are entitled to?




Food Packets, Unexploded Bombs Easy to Confuse Pentagon Warning Afghans, Will Change Color of Relief Cartons

http://www.refugeesinternational.org/content/article/detail/1039/

~snip~

"It is unfortunate the cluster bombs, the unexploded ones, are the same color as the food packets," Gen. Myers said during a Pentagon news briefing.

[Blue_Tires]

51. thanks for that link

[Lydia Leftcoast]

45. The Europeans have done quite well capturing terrorists with police work

:shrug:

What the U.S. did was the tactical equivalent of coming after a housebreaker with sirens blaring and cherry lights whirling. They should have sent in a small tactical force, based on intelligence gathered ahead of time.

[ConsAreLiars]

5. Most informed and rational people know that a military conquest will never

do either of those things. The longer the US occupation forces butcher people in Afghanistan, the stronger the resistance becomes and the stronger the the hold of extremist ideology over the people. Instead of diminishing their power, the "brute force" massacres only increase the reliance of the people on organizations like the Taliban.

It makes as much sense as the argument that the US "liberated" Iraq or Germany Poland.

As for getting bin Laden, how did that invasion work for you and the others who bought that lie? If the intent had not been to occupy the country, but to actually neutralize and de-fang Al Qaeda, there were at least two EASY ways to do that, neither requiring an invasion and occupation. If the intent was merely7 to bring greater misery to the people of the country, well, then it can be called a success, and bringing more trained killers into the picture will certainly hasten that process.

[Marrah_G]

19. Let's hope Obama's admin can do a better job creating a real solution

[Freddie Stubbs]

28. The United States didn't liberate Germany?

Who won World War II?

[Lydia Leftcoast]

46. What does Germany have to do with this...

...a country that was actually invading its neighbors?

[ConsAreLiars]

49. Since you can't read, let me try to put it a bit more clearly.

The US imperialist invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan were no more "liberations" than the Nazi invasion of Poland and Czechoslovakia. They were land/resource grabs for the ruling elite. There was nothing noble or altruistic in either case. You may support those invasions and the elite they were intended to serve, but I don't.

[JohnyCanuck]

10. Yeah that's the official story all right.

Thing is, I think it is mostly bullshit designed to obfuscate the real reason for the invasion, the desire of the US (with http://www.theoildrum.com/node/4172#more">peak oil fast approaching) to be able to exert control over as much of the world's remaining oil and gas reserves as possible.

AT LAST, SOME TRUTH ABOUT IRAQ AND AFGHANISTAN

by Eric Margolis

SNIP

But there are only two practical ways to get gas and oil out of land-locked Central Asia to the sea: through Iran, or through Afghanistan to Pakistan. For Washington, Iran is tabu. That leaves Pakistan, but to get there, the planned pipeline must cross western Afghanistan, including the cities of Herat and Kandahar.

In 1998, the Afghan anti-Communist movement Taliban and a western oil consortium led by the US firm Unocal signed a major pipeline deal. Unocal lavished money and attention on Taliban, flew a senior delegation to Texas, and also hired an minor Afghan official, one Hamid Karzai.

Enter Osama bin Laden. He advised the unworldly Taliban leaders to reject the US deal and got them to accept a better offer from an Argentine consortium, Bridas. Washington was furious and, according to some accounts, threatened Taliban with war.

In early 2001, six or seven months before 9/11, Washington made the decision to invade Afghanistan, overthrow Taliban, and install a client regime that would build the energy pipelines. But Washington still kept up sending money to Taliban until four months before 9/11 in an effort to keep it `on side’ for possible use in a war or strikes against Iran.

The 9/11 attacks, about which Taliban knew nothing, supplied the pretext to invade Afghanistan. The initial US operation had the legitimate objective of wiping out Osama bin Laden’s al-Qaida. But after its 300 members fled to Pakistan, the US stayed on, built bases – which just happened to be adjacent to the planned pipeline route – and installed former Unocal `consultant’ Hamid Karzai as leader.

Washington disguised its energy geopolitics by claiming the Afghan occupation was to fight `Islamic terrorism,’ liberate women, build schools, and promote democracy. Ironically, the Soviets made exactly the same claims when they occupied Afghanistan from 1979-1989. The cover story for Iraq was weapons of mass destruction, Saddam’s supposed links to 9/11, and promoting democracy.

http://www.ericmargolis.com/archives/2008/06/at_last_some_tr.php

The good war is a bad war

by John Pilger

SNIP

The reason the United States gave for invading Afghanistan in October 2001 was “to destroy the infrastructure of al-Qaeda, the perpetrators of 9/11”. The women of Rawa say this is false. In a rare statement on 4 December that went unreported in Britain, they said: “By experience, that the US does not want to defeat the Taliban and al-Qaeda, because then they will have no excuse to stay in Afghanistan and work towards the realisation of their economic, political and strategic interests in the region.”

The truth about the “good war” is to be found in compelling evidence that the 2001 invasion, widely supported in the west as a justifiable response to the 11 September attacks, was actually planned two months prior to 9/11 and that the most pressing problem for Washington was not the Taliban’s links with Osama Bin Laden, but the prospect of the Taliban mullahs losing control of Afghanistan to less reliable mujahedin factions, led by warlords who had been funded and armed by the CIA to fight America’s proxy war against the Soviet occupiers in the 1980s. Known as the Northern Alliance, these mujahedin had been largely a creation of Washington, which believed the “jihadi card” could be used to bring down the Soviet Union. The Taliban were a product of this and, during the Clinton years, they were admired for their “discipline”. Or, as the Wall Street Journal put it, “ are the players most capable of achieving peace in Afghanistan at this moment in history”.

The “moment in history” was a secret memorandum of understanding the mullahs had signed with the Clinton administration on the pipeline deal. However, by the late 1990s, the Northern Alliance had encroached further and further on territory controlled by the Taliban, whom, as a result, were deemed in Washington to lack the “stability” required of such an important client. It was the consistency of this client relationship that had been a prerequisite of US support, regardless of the Taliban’s aversion to human rights. (Asked about this, a state department briefer had predicted that “the Taliban will develop like the Saudis did”, with a pro-American economy, no democracy and “lots of sharia law”, which meant the legalised persecution of women. “We can live with that,” he said.)

By early 2001, convinced it was the presence of Osama Bin Laden that was souring their relationship with Washington, the Taliban tried to get rid of him. Under a deal negotiated by the leaders of Pakistan’s two Islamic parties, Bin Laden was to be held under house arrest in Peshawar. A tribunal of clerics would then hear evidence against him and decide whether to try him or hand him over to the Americans. Whether or not this would have happened, Pakistan’s Pervez Musharraf vetoed the plan. According to the then Pakistani foreign minister, Niaz Naik, a senior US diplomat told him on 21 July 2001 that it had been decided to dispense with the Taliban “under a carpet of bombs”.

http://www.johnpilger.com/page.asp?partid=470

[Freddie Stubbs]

29. "In early 2001, six or seven months before 9/11, Washington made the decision to invade Afghanistan"

Interesting theory, but no proof is provided in the article.

[JohnyCanuck]

44. The author making the statement,

Eric Margolis,has traveled extensively in the region and has extensive military and political contacts in the Middle East and Asia. He has written in newspaper and internet columns on the military and political conflicts in the Middle East/Asia and also in his book "War at the Top of the World". He has also appeared on mainstream US and Canadian TV channels as a commentator on the conflicts in the Middle East and Asia. If he says it, I have reason to trust that he has sources to confirm it and it is not just idle speculation on his part. You of course are equally free to disregard what he has to say and continue to believe whatever you want, including that the US government is telling the truth in this case.

There is too the fact that plans for the invasion of Afghanistan were on Bush's desk on Sep 9 2001 (two days before the 911 attacks). Presumably they would have been the result of several months of work on the part of the military planners. Just a personal observation here - sure was convenient for the amoral, neocon, war mongering, war profiteering junta running the US as their personal fiefdom that those 9/11 attacks happened when they did, i.e. just when they needed the populace to get riled up to go kill some ferriners who were obstructing their potentially very profitable pipeline plans.

September 9, 2001 (F): A formal National Security Presidential Directive describing a "game plan to remove al-Qaeda from the face of the Earth" is placed on Bush's desk for his signature. The plan deals with all aspects of a war against al-Qaeda, ranging from diplomatic initiatives to military operations in Afghanistan. According to NBC News reporter Jim Miklaszewski, the "directive outlines essentially the same war plan ... put into action after the Sept. 11 attacks. The administration most likely was able to respond so quickly to the attacks because it simply had to pull the plans 'off the shelf.'"The plan includes an effort to persuade the Taliban to turn over bin Laden and a military invasion if it refuses. It was prepared through a process of consultation over many months, involving the Pentagon, CIA, State Department and other security and intelligence agencies. Bush was expected to sign the directive, but hadn't finished reviewing it by 9/11. {NBC News, 5/16/02, Los Angeles Times, 5/18/02}

http://www.unansweredquestions.org/timeline/AAafghanwar.html

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

36. Are these rational people rushing to enlist?

No? Then they're probably not that rational.

[annm4peace]

4. I joined Rawa in 1999 and wore their T-shirt

What incredible brave and beautiful women.

The senators and congress people who visit Afganistan,, Especially Sen Obama. should visit this organization and help them

[EFerrari]

9. I corresponded with RAWA right after 9/11.

They are some of the bravest people I've ever talked to.

[ConsAreLiars]

13. Incredibly brave indeed.

They not only advocated, they organized, in secret and at great risk, creating underground networks with the simple single purpose of bringing women and girls literacy and math and science and the power and freedom that such knowledge makes possible.

[Marrah_G]

18. They are true heros- they could run away, but they fight on

[stimbox]

8. The Afghani women would be in a better state if the U.S. hadn't meddled in their civil war.

...In 1965 People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA), a Soviet-backed socialist organization was formed. The same year also saw the formation of the first women's group, the Democratic Organization of Afghan Women (DOAW). The main objectives of this women's group wasto eliminate illiteracy among women, ban forced marriages, and do away with bride price.

The Second Era of Change
The second era of intense women‘s reform occurred in the late 1970s. The 1970s saw a rise in women's education, faculty in the universities, and representatives in the Parliament. (Dupree, 1986) The year 1978 saw the rise to power of the controversial PDPA. It is during the PDPA rule that rapid socialand economic change, echoing some of the 1920s themes, was implemented and mass literacy for women and men of all ages was introduced. (Moghadam, 1997) Massive land reform programs, along with abolition of bride price and raising of marriage age were also part of the PDPA agenda. In October1978 a decree was issued with the explicit intention of ensuring equal rights for women. Minimum age of marriage was set at 16 for girls and 18 years for boys. The content of decree number 7 and the coercion of women into education were perceived by some as —unbearable interference in domestic life.“ (Hanne, 1990) Again, the revolutionary pace of social change caused concern among the mullahs and tribal chiefs in the interiors. They viewed compulsory education, especially for women, as going against the grain of tradition, anti-religious and a challenge to male authority. As Moghadam (1997) reports, incidents of shooting of women in western clothes, killing of PDPA reformers in the rural areas and general harassment of women social workers increased. As Marsden (2002:24) points out, —The PDPA‘suse of force in bringing the changes to fruition, combined with a brutal disregard for societal and religious sensitivities, resulted in massive backlash from the rural population.“ Journal of International Women‘s Studies Vol 4 #3 May 2003 6 Page 7

Interestingly, or ironically, during this turbulent —democratic“ Soviet-supported regime women'sissues moved center stage and implementation of reforms was enforced, up to a point. During this era women were employed in significant numbers in Universities, private corporations, the airlines and as doctors and nurses. But for the nation as a whole, it was a period of anarchy and destruction. Beginning with the Soviet occupation in December 1979, Afghanistan witnessed a decade long war. Fueled by external forces, funding, and political interests by the United States, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and China, the Mujahideen fought against the Soviets. The Afghan countryside was the breeding grounds forthese —freedom fighters.“ Suspicious of the Soviet socialist agenda to annihilate the traditional cultureand religion of Afghanistan, the Mujahideen was able to gather forces to form their own revolutionary army. Their battle cry was a war in the name of Islam, emphasizing a reversal of all socialist policies including those that guaranteed women liberties through education and employment.

In 1989, when the Soviets left Afghanistan, the country was in disarray and became the site for civil war with the government transfer of power in 1992.That year the Mujahideen took over Kabul and declared Afghanistan an Islamic state. According to the US Department of State (1995), —In 1992 women were increasingly precluded from public service. In conservative areas in 1994, many women appear in public only if dressed in a complete head-to-toe garment with a mesh covered opening for their eyes." This was only to be the start of the apartheid against women. As the author of Zoya‘s Story (2002:63) claimed, —Far from rejoicing that the Russians had been defeated, Grandmother told me that a new worse Devil had come to my country. There was a popular saying around this time: —Rid us of these seven donkeys and give us back our cow. The donkeys were the seven factions of the Mujahideen, and the cow was the puppet regime .“ According to Zoya (2002), the Mujahideen entered Kabul and burnt down the university, library and schools. Women were forced to wear the burqa and fewer women were visible on television and in professional jobs. The period from 1992-1996 saw unprecedented barbarism by the Mujahideen wherestories of killings, rapes, amputations and other forms of violence were told daily. To avoid rape and forced marriages, young women were resorting to suicide.

You can thank Charlie Wilson, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan, and George W. Bush for the mess that Afghanistan is today.

http://tinyurl.com/afghan-women

[ConsAreLiars]

20. That is an excellent history/analysis. Thank you.

The original PDF file is at http://www.iiav.nl/ezines/web/JournalofInternationalWomensStudies/2003/Vol4Nr3May/Afghanistan.pdf

(Easier to read than the Google translation to html format.)

Just a note, the US intervention began before the Soviet Union attempted to prop up the failing PDPA government. When working "for" Carter and then Reagan, Brzezinski boasted of using CIA actions to provoke Soviet military involvement and then promoting Islamic extremist groups and ideology to turn that previously ignored country into a killing field and a training ground for religious crazies.

[Marrah_G]

25. I just read Zoya's story tonight and the 7 Donkey's quote stuck with me.

We never should have gotten involved in the 80's.

[spindrifter]

11. It is true that increasing troops in Afghanistan is

not going to result in any appreciable improvement in the situation. How could it when our troops are making way too many mistakes with bombs that hit civilian groups, especially wedding parties.
The biggest problem for Afghan women is the up-tick in conservative Islam--not just in Afghanistan, but in other influential neighboring countries. When boys are being educated in madrassas that provide free education, room and board in many cases and food, they are taking on the conservative ideas of the mullahs. When night letters are posted in villages telling people to keep their daughters home from school or threatening teachers with death, there is not much left to oppose the conservative ideas that have a stranglehold on the hearts and minds of many, if not most, Afghans.
I spent several months in Afghanistan last year. Based on my observations we can help stem the tide by continuing massive literacy training for the national police force, putting money into training more Afghans involved in the legal system--judges, prosecutors and defense attorneys, and working to improve the electrical system in order to make the internet widely available.

[Raksha]

12. K & R, bookmarked.

[annm4peace]

14. If you view, please kick

this should more than 5 kicks. These brave women deserve a lot more attention than this.

[JohnyCanuck]

15. Hunkering down in Afghanistan

Hunkering down in Afghanistan, watching 'NATO bleed to death on the Afghan plains'
By Mike Whitney
Online Journal Contributing Writer
Jul 7, 2008, 00:19

SNIP

At a recent conference at the Middle East Institute in Washington, DC, Michael Scheuer, former CIA chief of the Bin Laden Issue Station, made this statement: "Afghanistan is lost for the United States and its allies. To use Kipling's term, 'We are watching NATO bleed to death on the Afghan plains.' But what are we going to do? There are 20 million Pashtuns; are we going to invade? We don't have enough troops to even form a constabulary that would control the country. The disaster occurred at the beginning. The fools that run our country thought that a few hundreds CIA officers and a few hundred special forces officers could take a country the size of Texas and hold it, were quite literally fools. And now we are paying the price."

Scheuer is right. The violence is only getting worse and the prospects for success are nil. The US is just digging a deeper hole by staying. The problem is more ideological than it is strategic. War is not an instrument for positive social change; it's about killing people and blowing up things. Dolling-up military aggression and calling it "preemption" can work for a while, but eventually the truth comes out. Democracy and modernity don't come from the barrel of a gun.

Scheuer's pessimism is more widespread among military and political elites than many realize. The situation on the ground is hopeless. The Afghan resistance is getting stronger while the US is getting more desperate. A recent article in the Toronto Globe and Mail pointed out that the rising popularity of the Taliban has nothing to do with an "allegiance to Mullah Omar or the Taliban leadership." The people are simply fed up with "the presence of western troops" and the "deaths of relatives or neighbors". This raises the question of whether the occupation is in fact breeding more jihadis than they are killing.

SNIP

The Taliban had effectively eradicated poppy cultivation before the invasion in 2001. Now, after six years of war, the opium trade is back with a vengeance and Afghanistan accounts for 93 percent of world's heroin production. 2007 was a particularly good year yielding 20 percent more opium than a year before. Heroin is now Afghanistan's number one export; the nation has become a US narco-colony.

Bush could care less about drug trafficking. What matters to him is stabilizing Afghanistan so that the myriad US bases that are built along pipeline corridors can provide a safe channel for oil and natural gas heading to markets in the Far East. The administration has staked America's future on a risky strategy to establish a foothold in Central Asia in order to control the flow of energy from the Caspian to China and India.

SNIP

Since neither of the two presidential candidates support the rapid withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan, the killing will likely persist and the country will slip further and further into chaos. The end however, is not in doubt. As Scheuer assures us, the occupation of Afghanistan will end as it did for "the British, the Soviets, and Alexander 400 years before Christ."

http://onlinejournal.com/artman/publish/article_3459.shtml

[Marrah_G]

16. I am hoping an Obama administration can help correct some of the wrongs done there.

[ConsAreLiars]

22. Doubling down on an evil or stupid strategy won't do anything but cause more suffering.

I hope he is not so controlled by "the powers that be" that he will support their geopolitical objective of a permanent military domination of that region. I don't think he is their lackey, but he might be a bit too gullible. In any case, more violence against the people of Afghanistan, any of them, will only empower the reactionary forces there and cause greater suffering. The article posted by stimbox is a pretty good examination of how things work in that country as far as women's rights are concerned: http://www.iiav.nl/ezines/web/JournalofInternationalWomensStudies/2003/Vol4Nr3May/Afghanistan.pdf

Also see the photos at http://www.lukepowell.com/ to help understand what is being destroyed. It's not demons. Just people.

(edit typo and change a couple words)

[slipslidingaway]

23. From your photo link...

"It is important for those living in the industrial world to develop an appreciation for cultures that are sustainable, to learn to see beauty and survival in a world where people walk, live in daily contact with animals, raise their own food, pray, and live in families. Such people have as much to teach us as we have to teach them."

[ConsAreLiars]

24. That is the important message very few can hear.

It permeates every photo. What is being destroyed is lost forever.

One caption that resonated with me and helped me understand my own experiences was this one from http://avalon.unomaha.edu/afghan/afghanistan/A4.HTM :

"For overland travelers arriving from the West, from Meshed and the bright deserts of Khurasan, Herat was the first Afghan city encountered, and this tree-lined street led into the city. As I lay on the bed my first day in Herat, stunned by the journey, an awareness of having entered a different world came slowly and gently. There were canaries and finches singing in the halls. Outside there were few motor or radio sounds. Instead, the klip-klop, klip-klop, chinga-ling-ling of carriages passing by mixed with the vendors voices, the cries and songs of children, and the bleating of sheep and goats herded through wide boulevards. In November, 1971 soldiers still occupied ancient citadels, and men rode by on horseback with flowing robes."

My own experience was a bit different. Arriving later in the day, the first pervasive sounds beyond the marketplace and horses was a night full of tinsmiths, in the cool of the evening, pounding metal into into useful shapes. A cacophony that developed into a symphony as night fell over the town.

I had traveled a fair bit, but for the first time I had entered a world that was unique. Not more or less the same, like the differences between Finland and Romania and Iran or Nepal, but a whole intact world that stood apart from all of that, and was truly one of a kind. And to those who would regard the people and culture as murderous fundie-crazies, that influence came later, after the US began promoting and organizing and arming religious fanatics. At the time I was there, my scarfed but not burkaed companion and I traveled freely, by bus and foot, were never harassed, and were treated as guests.

[slipslidingaway]

30. Yes an important and yet so simple message...

"It is important for those living in the industrial world to develop an appreciation for cultures that are sustainable, to learn to see beauty and survival in a world where people walk, live in daily contact with animals, raise their own food, pray, and live in families. Such people have as much to teach us as we have to teach them."

If you do not mind my asking, when were you in Afghanistan? Thanks for the additional thoughts, especially this wonderful description.


"...Arriving later in the day, the first pervasive sounds beyond the marketplace and horses was a night full of tinsmiths, in the cool of the evening, pounding metal into into useful shapes. A cacophony that developed into a symphony as night fell over the town..."


So true and so sad...

"What is being destroyed is lost forever."

:cry:


Afghanistan’s Growing Refugee Crisis

http://www.blog.newsweek.com/blogs/ov/archive/2008/07/10/afghanistan-s-growing-refugee-crisis.aspx

"Refugees International researchers were surprised when they showed up in Taghi Naghi, an area in northwestern Afghanistan in June to assess one of the country’s 11 “land allocation schemes” for returning refugees. What they found differed sharply from the government’s plans for the hundreds of thousands of people returning from exile in Pakistan and Iran. Despite UN objections, the shelters had been built in the desert, an hour’s trip to the nearest city of Herat. A water pump was hooked up to a dry well, but an NGO trucking in water said their contract was going to run out soon after the visit. Only 12 families were occupying the more than 200 shelters that had been built, none of whom had any means of finding employment. According to one man living at Taghi Naghi, he might be forced to move his family to Herat despite being unable to pay its high city rents, since it was becoming increasingly difficult to feed his children.

The floundering Taghi Naghi project, one of 55 planned across Afghanistan, cost $2 million, and is just one example of how the refugee situation in Afghanistan is bad and growing worse, according to a Refugees International (RI) report published July 10...

“The situation in Afghanistan is worsening, and we’re running the risk of losing the gains we’ve made in the past few years,” said RI advocate Patrick Duplat, who produced the report after traveling with a colleague for a month to meet with refugees in Pakistan and returnees in Afghanistan. “Of course, the situation in general in Afghanistan is quite dire. From 40 to 60 percent of the country is inaccessible, so all Afghans are vulnerable. But that being said, a large percentage of the population--5 million people--are particularly vulnerable.”

The report blames a lack of planning and coordination on the part of both Afghan President Hamid Karzai’s government and its international backers, who provide over 90 percent of the country’s budget. While billions of dollars have been invested in reconstruction projects in Afghanistan since 2001, too few have made their way to real development projects, RI contends; large-scale infrastructure and counter-insurgency efforts have sapped most of the funds..."

[ConsAreLiars]

43. I've tried to help share my understanding of the people and the culture

on and off over the years since my travels there in late summer 1970, but especially since the threat of as US invasion became apparent and the propaganda attempting to paint them as brutal savages began. No utopia, but a intact society that was unlike anything I had experienced or even read about in textbooks. A young English speaking Afghan I met in Peshawer helped me begin to get a sense of what I was encountering and why I felt safe. Luke Powell's photos helped me deepen my appreciation of the life and culture.

Many of my journal entries are attempts to share a few bits and pieces about what those few weeks taught me.

[slipslidingaway]

47. Thank you for sharing and you may never know when someone

is listening.

:) :)

[slipslidingaway]

21. Thank you and there are others who use this as an excuse to

continue the occupation.

[inna]

26. wow, some liberation...

thanks for this post.

from the link in the OP:

The situation for women has not improved since the US led invasion, in fact quite the contrary.
Infant (IMR) and maternal mortality rates (MMR) have worsened since 2001.

While under the Taliban the opium cultivation was almost eradicated, after the US led invasion Afghanistan has become the “opium capital of the world”. A Christian Science Monitor article published in March 2008 states that Afghanistan:

… is responsible for 92 per cent of global output. Each year, the country produces about $4 billion 53 per cent of gross domestic product, making drug production easily Afghanistan’s most lucrative industry. There are twice as may heroin users on the streets of Kabul than just four years ago and about one million of Afghanistan’s 34 million people are drug users - the majority of these living in the country’s principal cities.

Sixty thousand children are addicted to drugs.

[Better Believe It]

34. Perhaps Obama Should Have Met With RAWA Representatives

RAWA, the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan
K&R

[blindpig]

35. Thanks for this.

A fine example of how liberals find themselves promoting exactly what they purport to oppose.

Shit like that happens when you don't apply class analysis.

[ConsAreLiars]

48. Thank you for understanding.

When people are misled into accepting false definitions of "us" and "them" they are easily manipulated into turning into puppets for the real "them." Whether done through "fear of the other" or sports-team-mentality jingoism or religious indoctrination, the result is the same. We, the "we" here here and the "we" there or anywhere, end up dying and hating and killing one another for THEM.

This reality was the source of the power of the Afghan Girl cover photo on National Geographic. Instead of scaring and blinding us, it opened our eyes to our common connectedness.

We. Us. The human family.

[countryjake]

41. Kick, recommend, & thanks for presenting the reality! n/t

[countryjake]

50. one more kick