Subject:
|
Re: The Taliban... some things to mull over
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 19 Sep 2001 17:07:42 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
190 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> > This is a very long article but I found it quite worth the read.
> >
> > http://home1.gte.net/csweet/taliban.htm
> >
> > As far as I am concerned, the Taliban is pretty straightforwardly evil, if
> > only for what it has done to its own people in the name of Islam.
>
> Calling them "evil" proves nothing. It may work for GWB on CNN, but it does
> nothing for me.
Come on now. Did you read the article in the link Larry gave? Have you read
anything about the Taliban?
Among the things that make them "evil"...
- You can be imprisoned for shaving your beard (Or even having it short).
- It is not only illegal for women to drive a car but it is illegal for them to
"ride" in a car. Anyone caught giving a woman a ride is imprisoned (or worse).
- Practicing anything other than Islam is punishable by death.
- Missing one prayer session is a crime.
- It is illegal for women to go to school.
- It is illegal for women to work (except in the medical sector and then they
are kept separet from the men).
- The only schools that exist only teach Islam (no math, science etc.)
- It is illegal to have a radio or TV
- Music is outlawed
- It is illegal to have a photograph (or icons of any kind).
I don't know by it sounds like Afghans are pretty oppressed people if you ask
me. The Taliban is the source of that oppression. They are "evil".
>
> >
> > That said, it is not the duty of the US to free every people enslaved by
> > their government.
>
> Indeed it is not. Neither is it the duty of US to ensure people are enslaved
> by their government. Or is it?
>
> > But I have nothing against side effects... not that it's
> > very likely.
>
> There is nothing to bomb in Afghanistan. There is nothing to destroy. I read
> a report yesterday that 85% of those in Afghanistan will not even know about
> the events of last week yet. Any self respecting terrorist will have long
> vacated their “training camp”. I expect that if Afghanistan is attacked by
> "the west" it will accomplish nothing more than firming the grip of Taliban
> on the country... just like did with SH in Iraq. Do you disagree?
I agree that there is nothing to bomb in Afghanistan. People have suggested we
"bomb them into the stone age", unfortunately that is where they are right now.
I feel more and more that Special Opps troops going in and capturing (where
possible) bin Laden, his aids, and the Taliban is the only way to go.
Unfortunately most of those will die before allowing themselves to be captured.
I also agree that 85% (which I actually think is a low number) will not know
about last week (i.e. laws against radio, TV, etc).
As for the Taliban firming their grip, I personally don't think we can let that
happen. If we go in and bin Laden and his assosiates are gone then we have to
at least take out the Taliban leadership and then help the Afghans back on
their feet by setting up schools and providing aid. That is a huge task and
will require a foreign presance in the country for a long time until they can
be self sufficiant but it is necessary.
As for SH, I think in hindsight we should have taken him out when we had the
chance. I don't think we will make that mistake again.
>
> >
> > Latest I heard, the Taliban is floating an offer to surrender bin Laden if
> > everyone will recognise them as legitimate, and the UN will drop their
> > sanctions. I'd respect them more if they didn't attach all the conditions
> > (which indicate they are trying to gain advantage), or if they said "blow
> > off" to everyone.
>
> The latest I heard is this:
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/south_asia/newsid_1551000/1551913.stm
>
> I think we should do as they ask. Give them the proof they ask for (if it
> exists). Put him on trial in an Islamic court. Televise the case. Let the
> whole world see that this crime has nothing to do with Islam and is
> indefensible.
Well the last I heard is they want the evidence and then, if it is convincing
enough, they will try him themselves. That is a sham if I ever heard one. I
do think however if they give him over and allow an international court in an
Islamic country to then try him under international law that should be
considered. We can't however just "do as they ask", their should be compromise
on both sides to an extent. This is also probably the only hope the Taliban
has of keeping power in Afghanistan.
Of course just "cutting the head off of the organization" (aka bin Laden) isn't
going to do it by itself. Somehow funding has to be cut off. You probably
also need to take out his closest aids as well because I am sure bin Laden has
probably made arrangements for power to pass to them in the event of his
capture, or death.
Eric K.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: The Taliban... some things to mull over
|
| (...) There is indeed the money angle. bin Laden's(1) organization runs on money, and his rather large personal fortune is kept in institutions in the west. Once it is proven that he's involved in this (or other) terrorist actions, (2) it may be (...) (23 years ago, 19-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: The Taliban... some things to mull over
|
| (...) Calling them "evil" proves nothing. It may work for GWB on CNN, but it does nothing for me. (...) Indeed it is not. Neither is it the duty of US to ensure people are enslaved by their government. Or is it? (...) There is nothing to bomb in (...) (23 years ago, 19-Sep-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
6 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
