The Afghan people will win - part 6

106 posts / 0 new
Last post
Caissa

A Canadian soldier was killed while conducting operations in the Panjwaii district of Afghanistan, the Canadian Forces said on Thursday.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/07/16/canadian-soldier-killed.html

remind remind's picture

Frmrsldr wrote:
My slogan is:

Support the Troops.

Support Peace.

Bring our Troops home Now!

But how are we supposed to do this, when there are people like webgear, and the young soldier on CBC a few days ago, that are propagandists for the killing of Afghans under the guise of:

"oh why, won't we think of the women and children?"

Frmrsldr

remind wrote:

... the young soldier on CBC a few days ago, that are propagandists for the killing of Afghans under the guise of:

"oh why, won't we think of the women and children?"

This is an example of how we are socially conditioned by the state to support war and the state (government). This was a propaganda piece by the Canadian military. If one is a soldier and (Sieg Heil!) unquestionably supports the war, then you get to step before the mike and the cameras and make public statements about how much you love smoking er, war - activities that are injurious to one's own (and that of others) life and health. If one is a soldier, or the family of a soldier, who are critical of the war - look at all the obstacles the military puts in the way to either intimidate (discourage) or shut these persons up altogether.

The argument has an obvious internal contradiction: Soldiers are not 'built' to do humanitarian work. Soldiers do not 'do' humanitarianism. Soldiers are 'built' to kill. Soldiers 'do' war. It's all part of George Orwell's "1984" "goodspeak": War = Peace. Hate = Love. Murder = Humanitarian Assistance.

If we really gave a damn about the women and children of Afghanistan, then where were we during the years 1990 - 1996 when the Afghan civil war raged? Where were we during 1996 - 2001 when the Taliban were in power - assisted by the CIA, the U.S. State Department, the Pentagon, Pakistan's ISI, and the Saudi and Iranian governments? Why did/are we supporting and propping up the puppet Karzai government and the Northern warlords with our zoidbot troops rather than allow the Afghan people to form and elect the government they want?

Slumberjack

remind wrote:
But how are we supposed to do this, when there are people like webgear, and the young soldier on CBC a few days ago, that are propagandists for the killing of Afghans under the guise of: "oh why, won't we think of the women and children?"

In fairness, if that is of any recognizable interest to you, I seem to recall Webgear stating more than once on the board that he opposed the ongoing military actions in Afghanistan.

Slumberjack

Frmrsldr wrote:
The argument has an obvious internal contradiction: Soldiers are not 'built' to do humanitarian work. Soldiers do not 'do' humanitarianism. Soldiers are 'built' to kill. Soldiers 'do' war. It's all part of George Orwell's "1984" "goodspeak": War = Peace. Hate = Love. Murder = Humanitarian Assistance.

Actually, they do a lot of what looks to be on the surface humanitarian work, in many areas of the world.  Schools, roads, bridges, hospitals, clinics, water purification, etc.  In actuality, when it's done, it forms part of either a PR campaign, good will gestures as part of official visits to other nations, or in the Afghanistan context, Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) as one of the vital components of the three block war.

remind remind's picture

Really, see above where he says he believes he is stopping war crimes.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Slumberjack wrote:

remind wrote:
But how are we supposed to do this, when there are people like webgear, and the young soldier on CBC a few days ago, that are propagandists for the killing of Afghans under the guise of: "oh why, won't we think of the women and children?"

In fairness, if that is of any recognizable interest to you, I seem to recall Webgear stating more than once on the board that he opposed the ongoing military actions in Afghanistan.

Well, it really doesn't seem to be getting a lot done. In fact the war has expanded as opposed to settled.

Slumberjack

remind wrote:
Really, see above where he says he believes he is stopping war crimes.

Taken in the context of the example provided regarding the Vietnamese receiving outside assistance in their struggle against American fascism, it seemed not so much of a means of casting doubt on the inevitability of western defeat as it was a recognition that other players are involved behind the Afghan insurgency on the battlefield  The observation is a legitimate one, which doesn't take anything away from the effectiveness of people to defend their own country against invaders, but that recognizes other influences as well.  It isn't the same at all to describe it as support for war crimes.  You really should get beyond insinuations of this sort, which if my memory is correct, were similar to the ones you've subscribed to me not so long ago.

Slumberjack

Cueball wrote:
Well, it really doesn't seem to be getting a lot done. In fact the war has expanded as opposed to settled.

Let that be a reality check for him then about the extent of his influence.

Unionist

More interesting stuff from the EKOS poll linked by Caissa above:

Quote:

The survey suggests the strongest opposition exists in Quebec, with 73 per cent of those polled saying they didn't support Canada's participation. Fifteen per cent offered their support. [...]

Opposition was very high among women across the country, with 60 per cent saying Canada should not be involved in Afghanistan and 27 per cent saying it should. [...]

When it comes to political leanings and support for the mission, Conservative voters were on top with 51 per cent saying Canada should be in Afghanistan. Liberal voters were second with 31 per cent, and Green voters were at 26 per cent.

Twenty per cent of NDP voters said they supported participating in the mission, while 11 per cent of Bloc Québécois voters did.

Hopefully the Bloc will unblock its ears, hear this message, and call for immediate withdrawal - which they have never done - and hopefully the NDP will recall the resolution they adopted in September 2006 and stay the course.

 

Frmrsldr

Everyone is guilty of war crimes, except the dispossessed, destitute and disfranchized people of Afghanistan. They are the ones victimized.

Our policy of handing over POWs to Afghan authorities where we know they are tortured, is a war crime. Sure the policy was stopped from December 2007 - March 2008. When it was resumed, Harper stated that adequate reforms had been made and prisoner abuse was no longer an issue. The mainstream media has certainly dropped it as a hot topic.

Our policy of 'dial-a-strike' whenever we take hostile fire near a village and civilian casualties result, is a war crime.

Our policy of 'popping' white phosphorus around where Afghans are injured or killed, is a war crime.

Some Taliban and insurgents are guilty of human rights atrocities and war crimes committed either in this war or the civil war.

Some Northern warlords (some MPs in the Karzai government) are guilty of human rights atrocities and war crimes (mostly) committed in the civil war.

http:www.warlordsofafghanistan.com/mohhamad-qasim-fahim.php

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/the-warlords-casting-a-shad...

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_EastKD10Ak04.html

http://www/rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/06/01/haqqani-network-the-most-dead...

jttp://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/08/03/03/malalai-joya-canada-should-change-its-...

 

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Quote:
It's very possible, [says Steven Staples], that the feds already have a clear idea of their post-2011 mandate - and that air strikes, which the Canucks haven't used so far, could be a major component.

Case in point, he says, is the March announcement that DND will be spending half a bil on new armed drones (unmanned aerial vehicles, UAVs) to be available in 2012, similar to the Predators and Reapers used by the U.S. in its air strikes in Pakistan.

"While the role of ground troops may diminish simply because the army is exhausted from years of war, the air force could be called upon to support the U.S.-led combat mission through air strikes by CF-18 fighter bombers or armed drones," says Staples.

He predicts that Canada is about to repeat the mistakes made by our NATO allies, whose aircraft killed more than 500 Afghan civilians in 2008 alone, and by the U.S., whose drones used for assassination attempts in Pakistan are also responsible for hundreds of civilian deaths.

[url=http://www.nowtoronto.com/news/story.cfm?content=170447]Source[/url]

Unionist

Staples has been pushing this CF-18 rumour for months as part of his fundraising drive, with no credible source for this rumour except one crank (Sullivan) and some solicited speculative interviews, none of which confirm this. But he keeps pushing, for some odd reason.

Frmrsldr

"My own judgement... quite frankly is we are not going to ever defeat the insurgency. My reading of Afghan history is that it's probably had an insurgency forever, of some kind." Prime Minister Stephen Harper in a CNN interview, March 1 2009.

After the body politic (the political leaders) has acted, it takes a while for it to sink into the consciousness of the brain (the people).

Frmrsldr

While the British public is starting to question the war, it seems the war fools never learn.

http://fairuse.100webcustomers.com/thatseemsfair/ft02.html

http://news.antiwar.com/2009/07/16/gates-us-may-send-even-more-troops-to...

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Unionist wrote:

Staples has been pushing this CF-18 rumour for months as part of his fundraising drive, with no credible source for this rumour except one crank (Sullivan) and some solicited speculative interviews, none of which confirm this. But he keeps pushing, for some odd reason.

Yes, who would be so crazy as to think Stephen Harper wants to find a way to keep the war going after 2011, while giving the ground troops a rest?

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

[url=http://www.dawnblack.ca/news/the_toronto_star_22nd_september_2006]Dawn Black broke this CF-18 story three years ago,[/url] based on credible government sources.

At that time, the government was spending $34 million to acquire drone technology. Now they're upping that to half a billion.

You can laugh it off if you like, but it's clear the military is ready to deploy aerial forces to Afghanistan on short notice, on Harper's say-so.

Unionist

M. Spector wrote:

Unionist wrote:

Staples has been pushing this CF-18 rumour for months as part of his fundraising drive, with no credible source for this rumour except one crank (Sullivan) and some solicited speculative interviews, none of which confirm this. But he keeps pushing, for some odd reason.

Yes, who would be so crazy as to think Stephen Harper wants to find a way to keep the war going after 2011, while giving the ground troops a rest?

I'm talking about the CF-18 unsubstantiated rumour, Spector, if you could slow down and hold back the cynicism for a minute. Did you think I was running cover for Harper? Oh, and for your information, could you show me specifically where the Rideau institute maintains a position for complete immediate withdrawal of Canadian and NATO troops from Afghanistan? I have trouble with someone preparing the groundwork for political "victory" when we find out that the CF-18s will not be deployed after all.

Fidel

Herr Harper and Obomba are simply defending Canada and America from "al-Qa'eda" and Taliban terrorism. It's just that, like the Nazis, our troops and mechanized military units have to fly in and march across sovereign borders  into far away resource-rich and militarily strategic countries occupied by interesting people of exotic cultures, and murder them in order to defend Ottawa and Washington several thousand kilometres removed from the actual scene of the crime. 

But this is half of the story. The overall lie for this phony humanitarian war waged by a US-led NATO contingency is none other than 9/11. And some lefties suggest that we are not supposed to question the validity of 9/11 as a pretext for phony war on the other side of the world so close the borders of our cold war enemies - and officially considered enemies as recently as 1991 or so. In effect they are supporting the false pretext for imperialism when they suggest, in roundabout ways, that these colder war enemies are legitimate enemies of today's colder war hawks and embeded cold warriors still lurking behind the scenes in Warshington, London, Ottawa etc

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Fidel wrote:

And some lefties suggest that we are not supposed to question the validity of 9/11 as a pretext for phony war on the other side of the world so close the borders of our cold war enemies...

I don't know of anyone on the left who accepts 9/11 as a pretext for the war on Afghanistan. So you can lose that particular straw man.

Unionist

[url=Body">http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/07/17/courcy-ramp-ceremony-kandahar01... of fallen Canadian soldier on way home[/url]

Do you think when we said, "Bring the troops home!", we ought to have been more specific?

 

Slumberjack

Although I support the manner that you choose to describe these events, I just can't bring myself to share in the humour.

Unionist

Slumberjack wrote:

Although I support the manner that you choose to describe these events, I just can't bring myself to share in the humour.

I respect your feelings. As for me, I'd rather joke about the cadavers than send replacements. These murderer commanders who shed crocodile tears over our young people should be in the front lines.

Fidel

M. Spector wrote:

Fidel wrote:

And some lefties suggest that we are not supposed to question the validity of 9/11 as a pretext for phony war on the other side of the world so close the borders of our cold war enemies...

 

I don't know of anyone on the left who accepts 9/11 as a pretext for the war on Afghanistan. So you can lose that particular straw man.

 

[url=http://www.counterpunch.org/chomskyintv.html]In 2001, Chomsky suggests[/url] that OBL was responsible for 9/11. He says the CIA recruited, armed, and financed Osama bin Laden and other "Afghans" for holy old CIA orchestrated an anti-communist jihad against the then Soviet-backed government of moderates in Afghanistan.

But then Chomsky says that bin Laden's relationship to the CIA is not particularly important after Soviet withdrawal in 1989 - and that the "Afghan" holy warriors simply moved on to other holy jihads, like Chechnya and Bosnia. Chomsky doesnt seem to be aware of the Clinton administrations involvement in helping create a militant Islamic state of Bosnia in the 1990s. Chomsky seems to acknowledge the CIA's anticommunist jihad of the 1980's but then suggests that bin Laden and "Afghan" mujahideen began to take on anti-Russian jobs of their own designs. The CIA's database of expendible jihadi assets began taking the CIA's destabilization effort to America's only recently retired cold war enemies to Russia, Russia's faithful ally and formerly sovereign country of Yugoslavia, as well as China's front gates. Chomsky bought-in to the idea early on that the CIA was once allied with bin Laden and slid more money and effort to operation "stir up a few muslims"(operation cyclone) than any other CIA covert operation in the company's history. It's not important, said Chomsky. Well it is important to the CIA and Pentagon, because now theyre using their former Islamic gladio allies - some who were trained in the black art of terrorism either there in the USsA or one of the many schools for terrorism they funded in Pakistan and Afghanistan in the 1980s - as a pretext for a military occupation in Central Asia and even an oil-rich MiddleEastern country that had zero relationship with the Islamic wing of the CIA ie. "al-Qa'eda" There is no straw man argument here just a gatekeeper and a few stirred-up Muslims now fanned-out across Central Asia and running around Iraq and putting hits on the true anti-American insurgents in that country devastated by a well known Osama bin Laden ally for a number of cold war years - the US military and CIA.

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
Slumberjack wrote:

Although I support the manner that you choose to describe these events, I just can't bring myself to share in the humour.

I respect your feelings. As for me, I'd rather joke about the cadavers than send replacements. These murderer commanders who shed crocodile tears over our young people should be in the front lines.

And I'd rather joke about "al-Qa'eda", and America's only recently besmirched former proxy government in Kabul, the Taliban - today's replacements for the evol Soviets and who we're all supposed to fear and loathe all the way back here in Bananada.

Slumberjack

Unionist

No fears, SJ. Provocateurs need brains, skill, and a sense of humour to draw blood. No such caution needed here.

Fidel

Good one, SJ. DAY-O!

NDPP

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan: Khanjar or the Last Nail in the Coffin of Obama's Strategy

http://theunjustmedia.com/

"A few defenseless Afghans pushed the Americans and 46 other countries of the world to the wall. Talib, Mujahid, farmers, old men, women, children and the climate have fused into one, dealing a dashing blow to the enemy, giving them an exemplary lesson...

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan reminds them of the statement of Amir Momineen some eight years ago when he addressed them on Shariat Radio saying "your cutting edge weapons have the power to kill but no power to protect you from death. Do not be over confident about your weapons.."

Fidel

I think our troops should be more fearful of the cutting edge training in guerilla warfare and terrorism the Taliban received in US taxpayer and Saudi funded public school systems created in 1980's Pakistan and Afghanistan. Again they know not to leave the really important stuff to private enterprise.

Unionist

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/07/17/kandahar-bombing.html][=re... air strike blamed for civilian deaths in Kandahar[/color][/url]

Quote:

Residents of a small village north of Kandahar in Afghanistan say a NATO air strike Wednesday night killed at least four civilians.

The people were killed in Shah Wali Kot, a village about 30 kilometres north of Kandahar and an area where Taliban insurgents have been operating for months.

"There were some casualties. There was a total number of 17. Four were dead," Kandahar Gov. Tooryalai Wesa said Friday.

"Thirteen were wounded people. That includes, unfortunately, very young kids like one-year-old, three-year-old and six years old."

 

Fidel

But Unionist, what are dirt-poor Afghan men, women and children doing to win this war? They seem to be falling down on the job and still living in misery and despair and phony war.

When will an Afghan style Tet offensive happen? Today's equivalent of the doctor and madman, Cheney and Bush, are long gone. And the Liberal democrat-changeling Obama is running the show now supposedly. And yet the less he talks about change, the more things remain the same and worse for the majority of desperately poor and oppressed Afghans without basic health care or schools or even enough to eat year round.

Unionist

[url=http://www.rawa.org/rawa/2009/06/06/get-out-of-afghanistan.html]"Get Out of Afghanistan" - RAWA[/url]

Quote:

That was the blunt message to Australia _ and the US _ on Sunday from Shazia Shakib, a member of the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA). [...]

She told the Hobart meeting Afghanistan’s best hope was for the US and its allies _ including Australia _ to pull their troops out and stop backing the Hamad Karzai government which she said was dominated by warlords.

A civil war would then erupt between the Islamic Fundamentalist Taliban and the Northern Alliance, made up of warlords and drug chieftans.

She believed that was better than occupation by foreign powers which led to increasing alienation of the people from any democratic possibility.

 

Fidel

But Yanqui imperialists are using the Taliban as an excuse for the military occupation. Malalai Joya said an Afghan report of some months ago indicated that the Taliban are being sold weapons and ammo by Karzai's Northern Alliance warlords in government - the same government backed by the US military. I dont think this Yanqui-led NATO occupation will be pulling out anytime soon to be perfectly honest.

Unionist

When will they get the spam filters working here?

 

Frmrsldr

Unionist wrote:

As for me, I'd rather joke about the cadavers than send replacements. These murderer commanders who shed crocodile tears over our young people should be in the front lines.

Outstanding Unionist!Cool

I would add Stephen Harper, Peter MacKay, Stockwell Day and all those never were/are not/never will be soldier wannabe armchair military strategist glory scavenger blood sucking vampires who use war and the death of our troops to further their own political ends.

And this coming from a former soldier.

Fidel

Unionist wrote:
some really clever comment about spam

[bullshit detector on] I forgot that those of us with pink skin pigment and suffering white man's burden dont actually care what actual Afghans have to say about what's happening in their own country, and especially the women of that country.  This is KAOS, and we only point to RAWA.org when making our favourite political points around here.

 

 

Unionist

Fidel, a substantial majority of Canadians want Canada out of Afghanistan now. So does RAWA. You could consider getting on board, after all these years.

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Fidel, a substantial majority of Canadians want Canada out of Afghanistan now. So does RAWA. You could consider getting on board, after all these years.

There you go again suggesting falsely that I am some kind of groupee for the military occupation when I am not. So you can quit trying to smear me and changing the subject in your usual off-topic into the rhubarb manner. 

 I support Malalai Joya and the women of RAWA, and what they have to say about events in their own country. I suggest you do the same.

Unionist

Quote:
I support Malalai Joya and the women of RAWA...

Good for you. I support the people of Afghanistan, who will surely win and make their own decisions as to whom to elect, without your kind assistance.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

I hear also that all these world scale shenanigans are orchestrated by a committee of Gnomes, who head up a village at the garden at the center of the Pentagon. These supergnomes, are not only capable of incredible magical acts of illussion, but also run their own village, but also micromanage the acts of individual tribal leaders and warlords in Afghanistan, as Karpov manages pieces on a chessboard. Your problem Fidel is you can't tell the difference between an interational conspiracy and plain old corruption.

Remove the money supply from the US Congress and other allies and remove the corruption.

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Quote:
I support Malalai Joya and the women of RAWA...

Good for you. I support the people of Afghanistan, who will surely win and make their own decisions as to whom to elect, without your kind assistance.

Well score another snarky remark for you. But I dont think you do support RAWA or the people of Afghanistan as much as you think you do. Apparently you think this war is justified if only in the minds of US war hawks stemming the evil tide against "al-Qa'eda" and the USA's former proxies, the Taliban. And there is overwhelming evidence that not even US hawks believe in their own false pretext for this phony war. So where does that leave you?

And apparently youve scoffed at statements posted on RAWA.org which undermine your own white man's attitude concerning this phony war. You refuse to digest the idea that the CIA and Brits, Saudis and Pakistani ISI are still orchestrating this phony war on the other side of the world and have been since 1979. But you know better than I and especially the women of RAWA and Malalai Joya. You should consider going to Afghanistan and Pakistan and preaching your personal political opinions to the tens of millions of people struggling to subsist through this imperialist phony war. Tell them to soldier on and that their time in the sun will happen over the long run. In the mean time, they can take it on the chin, because it's their destiny. 

Unionist

Yap yap yap. Meanwhile, the people of Afghanistan continue to battle the invaders, in what Fidel comfortably calls a "phony war":

[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/8155368.stm]U.K. soldier killed - yes, another one![/url]

Quote:

The head of the Army, General Sir Richard Dannatt, has called for better equipment to protect troops from roadside bombs in the country.

He told the BBC that troops "needed more" and added that he would be compiling a "shopping list" of what was required.

Tough to beat those well-financed high-tech insurgents.

[url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8155324.stm]Afghan blast "kills at least 11"[/url]

Quote:

At least 11 civilians, including five children, have been killed in a blast in Afghanistan's southern province of Kandahar, officials say.

The blast reportedly hit a vehicle travelling towards a shrine in the Spin Boldak district of the province.

No group has claimed responsibility for the attack. Kandahar is regarded as the Taliban's spiritual homeland.

LOL, "spiritual homeland". Fidel thinks it's Washington.

Quote:
More foreign troops have been killed in July than in any other month since the US-led invasion of Afghanistan in 2001.

The Afghan people will win!

Fidel

Unionist, and perhaps you, too, believe Afghans have something to gain by joining up with the Pakistani ISI(CIA) controlled Taliban. Malalai Joya, RAWA, and myself included are not so deluded as to believe in this white man's tale.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Huh? That isn't what the RAWA woman said. What she said is that the US should leave so all those folks can kill each other.

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

Unionist, and perhaps you, too, believe Afghans have something to gain by joining up with the Pakistani ISI(CIA) controlled Taliban. Malalai Joya, RAWA, and myself included are not so deluded as to believe in this white man's tale.

Oh yeah? Weren't you and Malalai Joya seen eating kittens at a New York deli while plotting an aerial attack on the King David Hotel in 1947?

You wanted to know what the poor Afghan people are doing to liberate themselves. They are blowing up increasing numbers of invaders and taking control of increasing parts of Afghanistan. You, like the invaders, call them "Taliban" so as to demonize them and ridicule the struggle of young Afghan freedom fighters. But you know what - they will win. Neither U.S. technology nor young Canadian corpses nor spamming babble threads will stop them. Just you wait and watch and see.

 

Fidel

Cueball wrote:

Huh? That isn't what the RAWA woman said. What she said is that the US should leave so all those folks can kill each other.

 

[url=http://www.rawa.org/rawa/2009/05/07/lets-rise-against-the-war-crimes-of-... on "Huh?" from RAWA[/url] May 7

Quote:
 This administration is bombarding our country and tearing our women and children into pieces and from the other side, is lending a friendly hand towards the terrorist Gulbuddinis and Taliban -- the dirty, bloody enemies of our people-- and holding secret negotiations and talks with such brutal groups...

The only way our people can escape the occupant forces and their obedient servants is to rise against them under the slogans of: "Neither the occupiers! Nor the bestial Taliban and the criminal Northern Alliance; long live a free and democratic Afghanistan!"

That doesnt sound like a ringing endorsement for the bullshit insurgency, imo.

 

Unionist

Fidel wrote:
... the bullshit insurgency ...

I thought I would preserve that frank confession of where you stand so that someday you can snack on those words. It's really unfortunate that a progressive individual can't tell the difference between imperialist invaders and the resistance. Of course, the entire imperialist propaganda from day one has been to demonize the insurgency in order to justify occupation, puppet regimes, and war crimes. But we're supposed to look past that propaganda. Sad.

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Unionist, and perhaps you, too, believe Afghans have something to gain by joining up with the Pakistani ISI(CIA) controlled Taliban. Malalai Joya, RAWA, and myself included are not so deluded as to believe in this white man's tale.

You wanted to know what the poor Afghan people are doing to liberate themselves. They are blowing up increasing numbers of invaders and taking control of increasing parts of Afghanistan. You, like the invaders, call them "Taliban" so as to demonize them and ridicule the struggle of young Afghan freedom fighters. But you know what - they will win. Neither U.S. technology nor young Canadian corpses nor spamming babble threads will stop them. Just you wait and watch and see.

And if shoes were clues, you'd be as be as barefoot as the majority of them are in thirdworld US client states around the world.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Fidel wrote:

Cueball wrote:

Huh? That isn't what the RAWA woman said. What she said is that the US should leave so all those folks can kill each other.

 

[url=http://www.rawa.org/rawa/2009/05/07/lets-rise-against-the-war-crimes-of-... on "Huh?" from RAWA[/url] May 7

Quote:
 This administration is bombarding our country and tearing our women and children into pieces and from the other side, is lending a friendly hand towards the terrorist Gulbuddinis and Taliban -- the dirty, bloody enemies of our people-- and holding secret negotiations and talks with such brutal groups...

The only way our people can escape the occupant forces and their obedient servants is to rise against them under the slogans of: "Neither the occupiers! Nor the bestial Taliban and the criminal Northern Alliance; long live a free and democratic Afghanistan!"

That doesnt sound like a ringing endorsement for the bullshit insurgency, imo.

 

Its not but that has nothing to do with what I was talking about.

[url=http://www.rawa.org/rawa/2009/06/06/get-out-of-afghanistan.html]"Get Out of Afghanistan" - RAWA[/url]

Quote:

That was the blunt message to Australia _ and the US _ on Sunday from Shazia Shakib, a member of the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA). [...]

She told the Hobart meeting Afghanistan’s best hope was for the US and its allies _ including Australia _ to pull their troops out and stop backing the Hamad Karzai government which she said was dominated by warlords.

A civil war would then erupt between the Islamic Fundamentalist Taliban and the Northern Alliance, made up of warlords and drug chieftans.

She believed that was better than occupation by foreign powers which led to increasing alienation of the people from any democratic possibility.

Anyway, feel free to change the subject so you can refer to the facts that support the case you want to make, as opposed to the one made by this RAWA activist.

Pages

Topic locked