Its been almost a decade since Americans have launched war against terrorism read Muslims, these years have seen blood like none other, millions of tons of TNT has been thrown on common people of Iraq and Afghanistan, millions of innocents who even didn’t knew who America is and what bad they have done to be killed liked this… Millions are handicapped and are good or nothing, economies of regions have suffered, more innocents have suffered then in the ww1 or 2.
So what was the out-come or conclusion, after having these many massacre, is the world specially the western world safe? can the people of west now say that because they have been able to kill millions in east now they are safe???
Can they get into a plane, building or tube considering themselves safe?
Is Afghanistan better? Yes. Much better. Actually much much better. The different military groups are establishing proper democratic roots. Giving women equal opportunities and more importantly they are supporting the local Afghanistan Government.
And the Afghan people are much better off than when they were with the Taliban.
Is Afghanistan better? Yes. Much better. Actually much much better. The different military groups are establishing proper democratic roots. Giving women equal opportunities and more importantly *they are supporting the local Afghanistan Government. *
And the Afghan people are much better off than when they were with the Taliban.
Snookums since I am based in Afghanistan these days I see first hand what they are doing, and they have done some remarkable work ensuring women representation at all levels of government and making sure corruption is tackled.
Whils i'm all for womens rights.. and generall equality and good will, harmony if you like... among all peoples and nations.
I do not agree with this war on terror bit. For a start it's not even a war on terror... no one has ever been able to defeat terrorsism so to declare war on terror would seem stupid furthermore it's highly ironic for the Americans to gadabout in the middle-east after real or fictional terrorists when thier own back yard is full of them... quite literally.
Also America isn't quite as clean as they want us to think... not just the USA but every state uses some form of terrorism. Ok you may not believe this but virtually every nation these days has it's own SOF... Special operations forces... and death squads. the US is no less involved in this game than any other state... they just prefer not to talk about this state tool.
With regards to Iraq and Aghanistan the innital invasion even if it was for reasons of good, officially ended within weeks. It is most prudent to let countries come to terms with thier problems through thier own ways... whatever the costs... it is like a river running it's course or like the growth of a plant.
By continuing to remain in countires all that is happening is the war becoming increasingly lenghthy as generations down the line begin to see liberation as occupation.
Snookums since I am based in Afghanistan these days I see first hand what they are doing, and they have done some remarkable work ensuring women representation at all levels of government and making sure corruption is tackled.
having govt in 2-3 cities with lots and lots of army (countries own and foreign) always present to force people to "support the govt" actually doesn't count
try traveling to mazarsharif, kantar, nooristan, to extreme south and to extreme northwest, and then come back to tell us how much the afghan people support this govt and the occupation forces
and "women rights" may be one the many goods a govt should deliver, but "women representation at all levels" is one of the least important deliverable in a country like Afghanistan in current situation
I was based on Kandahar recently, been to Herat and Farah. Its not 2 or 3 cities. Out of the total 34 provinces a good 15 have relatively solid government structures, with functioning Directorates and PCs.
who asked saddam hussein to invade kuwait
who asked osama bin laden to attack cole
who asked al qaeda to hijack planes and smash into wtc & pentagon
who asked taleban to provide refuge and power for al qaeda
the most unfortunate of all is that Dick Cheney and W happened to be in power on 9/11 and they reacted the way they did. But they did not trigger the war. Terrorists did.
It is also unwise and incorrect for you to equate WOT as a war on muslims. why would you equivocate all muslims this way?
who asked saddam hussein to invade kuwait
who asked osama bin laden to attack cole
who asked al qaeda to hijack planes and smash into wtc & pentagon
who asked taleban to provide refuge and power for al qaeda
the most unfortunate of all is that Dick Cheney and W happened to be in power on 9/11 and they reacted the way they did. But they did not trigger the war. Terrorists did.
It is also unwise and incorrect for you to equate WOT as a war on muslims. why would you equivocate all muslims this way?
America
Israel attacked the cole, they have no evidence of Osama involved.
Again no evidence of Al-Ciada linked with 9/11. If there were evidence, why didn't they try Osama when Taliban were ready to hand him over? Anyways, all smart people say it's an inside job.
Again what wrong did Osama do? He helped the Americans by fighting the Soviets and then he's blamed for 9/11 with no evidence. Taliban were ready to hand him over but no evidence no prisoner!
Terrorists did indeed trigger the war and those terrorists are the ones in suits not some villagers.
It's easy to say it's not a war on Muslims when you're not a Muslim.
I request you watch independent news and do your own research. Stop the AajTak propaganda on GS.
Israel attacked the cole, they have no evidence of Osama involved.
Again no evidence of Al-Ciada linked with 9/11. If there were evidence, why didn't they try Osama when Taliban were ready to hand him over? Anyways, all smart people say it's an inside job.
Again what wrong did Osama do? He helped the Americans by fighting the Soviets and then he's blamed for 9/11 with no evidence. Taliban were ready to hand him over but no evidence no prisoner!
Terrorists did indeed trigger the war and those terrorists are the ones in suits not some villagers.
It's easy to say it's not a war on Muslims when you're not a Muslim.
I request you watch independent news and do your own research. Stop the AajTak propaganda on GS.
I guess you may have conditioned yourself to believe the above because the truth is too painful to admit for you. I wish the same energy and creativity will be directed at stopping the terrorists instead of deflecting and defending the undefendable.
I guess you may have conditioned yourself to believe the above because the truth is too painful to admit for you. I wish the same energy and creativity will be directed at stopping the terrorists instead of deflecting and defending the undefendable.
Me and conditioned? Buddy, you're the one spewing mainstream media* facts*.
Is Afghanistan better? Yes. Much better. Actually much much better. The different military groups are establishing proper democratic roots. Giving women equal opportunities and more importantly they are supporting the local Afghanistan Government.
And the Afghan people are much better off than when they were with the Taliban.
interesting. do you thing the americans/nato should stay in afghanistan? iraq?
Israel attacked the cole, they have no evidence of Osama involved.
Again no evidence of Al-Ciada linked with 9/11. If there were evidence, why didn't they try Osama when Taliban were ready to hand him over? Anyways, all smart people say it's an inside job.
Again what wrong did Osama do? He helped the Americans by fighting the Soviets and then he's blamed for 9/11 with no evidence. Taliban were ready to hand him over but no evidence no prisoner!
Terrorists did indeed trigger the war and those terrorists are the ones in suits not some villagers.
It's easy to say it's not a war on Muslims when you're not a Muslim.
I request you watch independent news and do your own research. Stop the AajTak propaganda on GS.
You need to add the following.
Eyraqs WMD, big big WMD that can be deployed in just 45 minutes.
interesting. do you thing the americans/nato should stay in afghanistan? iraq?
As a military force? No. As a economic development force? Yes.
The problem with the Americans is that they are too near sighted. Recently ISAF agreed to let the Warlords in the North of the Country from Mazar to Badakshan provide security to the people. In essence you are going back to what they refer here as the Mujahideen days.
The period before the Taliban, where the Warlords had their own small kingdoms and ran the governments as they wished. They have absolutely no control in any area south of Pansher and Herat. All the Pashtun areas are essentially at war with ISAF.
That doesn't mean they have not done good work. Where there is safety and security they have built dams, provided electricity and more importantly basic freedoms that every human being deserves.
As a military force? No. As a economic development force? Yes.
The problem with the Americans is that they are too near sighted. Recently ISAF agreed to let the Warlords in the North of the Country from Mazar to Badakshan provide security to the people. In essence you are going back to what they refer here as the Mujahideen days.
The period before the Taliban, where the Warlords had their own small kingdoms and ran the governments as they wished. They have absolutely no control in any area south of Pansher and Herat. All the Pashtun areas are essentially at war with ISAF.
That doesn't mean they have not done good work. Where there is safety and security they have built dams, provided electricity and more importantly basic freedoms that every human being deserves.
They would argue though that in order to remain as a development force they have to remain as a military force. even the ISAF example of making deals with warlords might be put down to them wanting to reduce their military footprint in the area and therefore giving over to whoever can manage the security.
Of course they can argue that but that doesn't make it right or true. Take Farah as an example, there if the tribal warlords come back to power so does the poppy and opium production. Does that benefit the local Afghans? Nope. Not at all.
Does it allow the US to leave? Yup.
The over all aim should be to benefit the average afghan.
But to whom does the power go in order to allow the US to leave? no question the warlords are an awful group to handover power to. but presumably these warlords only exist as an option because the kabul govt doesnt have control in those areas.
what woud you have the US/NATO do in order to remove their military presence.
to begin with..WAR ON TERROR is a misnomer. Its the most micalculated war in the recent memory instigated by a bunch of fools. Its hard to fathom how supposedly one of the best intelligence agencies failed to foil those terrorist attacks then again invaded a soverign country on false grounds. those *******s should be tried for war crimes.
Actually they have power because ISAF has supported them as some of them were part of Northern Alliance.
A solution? **** if I know. Ask me in 20 years.
Oh yeah BBC stated that NATO has started their discussions today to discuss how to withdraw. Looks like they are leaving anyway regardless of the situation.