NA back to their old ways of raping, excecuting and pillaging

[drake]

And there ARE stories emerging of numerous Srebrenicza-style "ethnic cleansing" massacres by the Taliban during their occupation of various towns and villages. The NA are not "worse".

Taliban didn't take the power by asking for it or voting for it. They took it in a most savage and brutal manner. Now the people they took it from want it back, and goddam right they are vengeful. What goes around comes around.

frankly, it doesn't matter at all if people are oppressed by governement A or by governement B. The people are still oppressed. Granted the NA aren't as anti-female as the Taliban, but instead they are very anti Pakistan/Arabia. They don't beat women, now they just beat pakistani and arabs. It's a brave new world alright.

Where are you getting your information mark?
Oppressing suggests abuse of power within a country, upon the people of the given country. Having racist views towards pakistanis and arabs might not be a healthy thing, but it has nothing really to do with the oppression of the afghan people.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Mark L
I take it you're watching CNN USA, and not CNN International. Cause the latter was reporting war crimes in towns like Mazar-e Sharif.

The Northern Alliance wouldn't fire on their own people. I trust the US government's assurance of this instead of your bull**** assumptions.

For his sake I hope Bush doesn't visit Belgium too often. Remember that Sharon has been charged with war crimes there.

Long behold, the communist jackass speaks. Keep your mouth shut.

[quote]Tell that to the people who's brains are covering the walls in Mazar-e Sharif.[/quote

Yes I will. They were taliban terrorist fighters, they deserved what they got for killing 5,000 US civilians and the NA did the killing for us. You ****ing pacifist idiot!

How terrible civilized of you. OBL says the USA deserves it too. But then again, you never seem to know what you are talking about and change your opinion every two seconds, so I'll just leave it at that

**** you, my opinion has remained since September 11th and long before. I may seem paranoid but my views are much better than your ignorance. You never seem to know what the hell you are talking about either.

God you are stupid aren't you? A. Russia captured all Afghani cities yet still lost the war. B. OBL isn't caught still and we have no idea where he is.

15000 Pound bombs changes this. Along with a 45,000 NA.

You're awfully quick to draw conclusions, shouting victory before any objective has been met. LOL. moron

LOL *******. Taliban no longer control the captial Kabul. That was a victory.

US' is in a recesion, world economy is going downhill, OBL is still on the lose, terrorism is still continuing, and you are saying it's going great? What have they done to you poor Giani? Have you been brainwashed by the CIA? LOL

Tell the ****ing stock market the same you damn brainwashed idiotic communist. Look at the stock market, already at 9,700... tell the investors that. Tell the 7.1% increase in Retail sales that for October. Check the facts fool.

[chequita guevara]

Those who think the Taleban retreat from Kabul is strategic are likely incorrect. From reporters in Kabul, it appears that the Taleban fled in a panic. They left behind their personal items in the barricks, they left behind tanks, and APCs and heavy artilery (course the Allies would have pounded that stuff from the air, so it was useless to them).

I haven't heard of any Taleban intiated genocide. Without evidence, I will put that in the same catagory as the claims of genocide by the Serbs in Kosovo, propaganda. We know that the NA have engaged in genocide, rape, torture. We knew it in '96, which was why the US welcomed the fall of Kabul to the Taleban, and why our government was giving the Taleban money up until 9/11. It's why the Taleban were welcomed as liberators throughout the country.

And yes, the NA are being welcomed as liberators now. Part of that is because you always welcome an invading army as liberators if you want to live. Part of it is because the Taleban were so damned restrictive. (The Afgani people traded liberty for security and got neither, just like the folks who welcome the destruction of the Consitution are doing now).

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by Mark L
Granted the NA aren't as anti-female as the Taliban, but instead they are very anti Pakistan/Arabia. They don't beat women, now they just beat pakistani and arabs. It's a brave new world alright.

Don't forget the Chechens.

I suppose they should welcome with open arms foreign mercenaries who fought them and aided in the oppression of their countries?

Pakistan and Musharraf "warned against" the NA, because of regional politics. Afghanistan's largest ethnic group is Pashtun, which were originally Pakistani in origin. Historically, Afghanistan has had sea access, with what is now western Pakistan being part of the kingdom of Afghanistan. The current landlocked borders of Afghanistan (which are economically devastating) are a result of warfare with Pakistani tribes, including the Pashtun, which expanded primarily into the Afghani southern plains which produce 80% of the country's food supply.

There has for centuries been major tension between the Pashtun and the other ethnic groups that were "more native" to Afghanistan. India, in part of it's anti-Pakistan strategic policies, has consistently supported Pakistan-unfriendly groups in Afghanistan, for their own purposes. The biggest beneficiary of supported by India has been the NA, and THAT, not humanitarian whimpering, is Musharraf's biggest concern.

Pakistan does not want an ally of its chief enemy on its northern border.

[chequita guevara]

I must disagree, MtG. The Pashtun are historically part of Afganistan. The Brits lopped off the bottom third of the Hindu Kush, and the Tsars took the Northern third. The rump state of Afganistan is all that is left.

The Afganis only had sea access when they swept out of their kingdom and established the Moghul Empire in Northern India.

[MOBIUS]

As JTB says including bugging out on our Iraqi 'allies' in the Gulf War, the NA have acquitted themselves very well so far considering...

We just have to hope that they can keep things together and not splinter along ethnic and political lines now that their reason for alliance is rapidly diminishing.

That's why we need ground troops in Kabul asap before they get too comfortable there - already Rabbani is on his way to Kabul!

[MichaeltheGreat]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Those who think the Taleban retreat from Kabul is strategic are likely incorrect. From reporters in Kabul, it appears that the Taleban fled in a panic. They left behind their personal items in the barricks, they left behind tanks, and APCs and heavy artilery (course the Allies would have pounded that stuff from the air, so it was useless to them).

Most of those were not their hardcore supporters, but working stiffs who joined up for a paying job. The "panic" was most likely at the prospect of being betrayed by locals, and hung out to dry. Nobody fighting there have been particularly disciplined or well ordered, so orderly retreats are essentially unheard of. (the toughest thing to accomplish with an army is an orderly retreat, and it's impossible with an armed mob)

I haven't heard of any Taleban intiated genocide. Without evidence, I will put that in the same catagory as the claims of genocide by the Serbs in Kosovo, propaganda.

Genocide, no. Large numbers of executions of collaborators with their enemies, POWs, etc., are well documented.

We know that the NA have engaged in genocide, rape, torture.

Ah, yes, if we use two standards for the term genocide. If a Taleban kills a Tajik NA sympathizer, that is of course in a different category altogether than a NA fighter killing a Pashtun Taleban sympathizer.

Rape of captured females and torture have been part of the Afghan warrior culture for a lot longer than the west has been aware of Afghanistan's existence.

We knew it in '96, which was why the US welcomed the fall of Kabul to the Taleban, and why our government was giving the Taleban money up until 9/11. It's why the Taleban were welcomed as liberators throughout the country.

Not quite. The Taleban were a unified force, the Mujahedin and what later became the NA were only unified by opposition to a common enemy, and once "in control" they immediately proceeded to fight each other, at the expense of the unarmed populace.

Any unified control is preferable to unending civil war.

Part of that is because you always welcome an invading army as liberators if you want to live.

Damn straight, bro. You and I would be jumping and dancing in the streets if we were Afghani civilians.

(The Afgani people traded liberty for security and got neither, just like the folks who welcome the destruction of the Consitution are doing now).

I'm just losing soooooo much liberty now.

How about a different, legal solution to detaining foreigners suspected of terrorist acts indefinitely? How about instead the US government acted within it's legal authority, and revised the number of authorized visas on a country by country basis, and told everyone in the US from the countries it didn't like that they had 30 days to leave? Visas are revocable at any time.

Some parts of the "PATRIOT" bill are going to get whacked around in the courts, but most of the bill provisions aren't that onerous, except to the X-files crowd.

[MOBIUS]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Those who think the Taleban retreat from Kabul is strategic are likely incorrect. From reporters in Kabul, it appears that the Taleban fled in a panic. They left behind their personal items in the barricks, they left behind tanks, and APCs and heavy artilery (course the Allies would have pounded that stuff from the air, so it was useless to them).

Yes, it is appearing like a major disintergration after all now that Kandahar appears to be falling or about to fall! Though there will be a number that cannot afford to give up like the leadership and elements of Al-Qaeda who will take to the hills...

I haven't heard of any Taleban intiated genocide. Without evidence, I will put that in the same catagory as the claims of genocide by the Serbs in Kosovo, propaganda.

Then you haven't heard about their retreat from Bamiyan, it's a footnote on the BBC site...

We know that the NA have engaged in genocide, rape, torture. We knew it in '96, which was why the US welcomed the fall of Kabul to the Taleban, and why our government was giving the Taleban money up until 9/11. It's why the Taleban were welcomed as liberators throughout the country.

You're kidding right? They're just as bad as each other! I guess you never saw the 'Beneath the Veil' or 'Unholy War' documentaries - the Football stadium in Kabul was an execution/torture centre for killing anyone that broken their rules. Women included!!!

There's a part where Wakil Motawakil (foreign minister) was literally joking with his interviewer, when the interviewer said that the facility (built by the UN) was supposed to be used for sport. He said that if the UN would build them a torture/execution facility then they'd make it into a football stadium again!!!

BTW, apparently 'Taliban' appears to be the correct spelling - nothing comes up when you search for definitions with 'Taleban'...

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
I'm just losing soooooo much liberty now.

You live in Mexico, bro.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

Originally posted by DinoDoc


I , I'll grant you that, but we most certainly aren't doing this to liberate the Afghani people.

How can you liberate them from themselves?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
How can you liberate them from themselves?

The Taliban were created by Pakistan.

[OneFootInTheGrave]

yes but you cannot say that all the pashtun people will welcome NA as the liberators?

The country has internal problems and in such cases you cannot really free the country. USA/Europe went into the war to get to the terrorist network. NA will help them, the Taliban wont. In that way the west went against the Taliban.

Western forces freed some (or many) but in the same way they are oppressing some other Afghans. I guess that there were some Afghans that were actually happy with the Taliban. But I doubt there were many in the cities. Or a better question how many Afghans actually want a democratic society that the west would want to (try) offer them?

Anyway my point is that this war could hardly been about freedom since it was a quarrel amongst themselves and the neighbouring countries supporting their own groups as usual in such conflicts. Perhaps foreigners come to help the Taliban, but teh majority were mainly Pashtun people anyway. The war was about containing the terrorists. if Sep 11 did not happen Afganistan would continue to be as it was.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by OneFootInTheGrave
The war was about containing the terrorists. if Sep 11 did not happen Afganistan would continue to be as it was.

Why are you arguing with me if you agree with me?

[OneFootInTheGrave]

I am not arguing

this was just an addition.

[Ted Striker]

I predict a multinational force will be in there after the winter is over, mostly as a peacekeeping overseer.

But the Taliban will be hiding in their little corner like chickensh1ts by then...