The Afghan people will win - part 4

101 posts / 0 new

Tue, 2009-04-14 20:41

Unionist

Continued from [url=http://rabble.ca/comment/1008396/Webgear-wrote-I-have-always][color]here....

[url=http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090414.wsoldier0415... Blais's uncle condemns the "mission"[/color][/url]

Quote:
“[b]I am against it. I was against it and I am even more against it today.[/b] I wonder what we're doing there,” Mario Blais told CTV News yesterday, describing her death as a tear-filled nightmare for the family.

“I knew the Russians couldn't win over there so I don't think the Canadian army could win over there. I was more in favour of the blue helmets, peacekeeping missions, not front-line missions.”

This sort of PR disaster has happened before, but the DND goons move fast to do damage control:

Quote:

In a communiqué issued after the uncle spoke, the trooper's parents stated their support for her work.

“Despite the terrible news of her sudden passing, Karine achieved her challenge. She wanted to be part of this adventure. She was proud to serve in Afghanistan. She often asked her mother: ‘Mom, are you proud of me?'“ the communiqué said.

“Yes, we remain proud of you, despite our sadness.”

What they do to the families is almost as criminal as what they do to the children.

Tue, 2009-04-14 21:24

Unionist

Yeah, they're quoting the Toronto Star!

They obviously never heard of her before reading about her in the Canadian media.

Anyway, what do people think will happen to Trooper Blais's uncle Mario?

Notice how the parents' "communiqué" was issued [b]after[/b] he spoke his heart to the media?

How many other bereaved are ready to condemn the murderers of their family members (and no, I don't mean the insurgents), given a little encouragement and support?

Tue, 2009-04-14 21:37

Webgear

Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan is reporting Sitara Achakzai's death.

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/04/13/taliban-slain-afghan-womenand...

Tue, 2009-04-14 21:42

Webgear

Are you applying that RAWA is using Sitara Achakzai's death for some alternate reason?

Tue, 2009-04-14 21:45

Unionist

Ok, I found it - [url=http://www.newswire.ca/en/releases/archive/April2009/14/c9520.html][colo...'s the Canadian Forces news release[/color][/url] allegedly issued in the name of "the Blais family" (no more precision than that - her parents are divorced by the way, and her uncle/godfather has already condemned the "mission" and called on Harper to bring the troops home). The release very conveniently states that the family is not available for media interviews at this time - but of course they pulled themselves together sufficiently to "approve" a jingoistic kudos to the Forces who sent their daughter to her death. These ghouls have no respect for human beings.

And [url=http://qc.news.yahoo.com/s/capress/090414/nationales/2009041420090414_so... is a more detailed story about Trooper Blais's uncle/godfather and his comments.

Tue, 2009-04-14 22:00

Webgear

Speaking of jingoistic kudos, have you seen what Mr. Layton had to say?

http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-from-jack-layton-on-death-trooper-kari...

Tue, 2009-04-14 22:13

Frmrsldr

Personally, I think Achakzai is a victim of Western mainstream media. It seems she thought, like a number of Canadians think who don't look very deep into what's really going on in Afghanistan, that things are better in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban government. I think she felt she could go to Afghanistan and by becoming a member of the provincial government and speaking out, she could change Afghan society and do it freely and in safety.

Tue, 2009-04-14 22:15

Unionist

Yes, Layton can be an ass when he lets the PR types write his material. New Democrats are "praying", indeed. With leadership like this, they haven't got a prayer.

Webgear wrote:
Are you applying that RAWA is using Sitara Achakzai's death for some alternate reason?

Heh heh, no, Webgear, RAWA carries news items from around the world. I just found it sad and troubling that they needed to quote a Canadian newspaper about the assassination of an alleged "women's rights activist" from Kandahar. The message to me was simple: They had never heard of her exploits before we did.

Tue, 2009-04-14 22:33

Webgear

I guess that is what happens when you let the PR types run the party.

Here is another link for RAWA for you.

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/04/14/malalai-joya-a-voice-of-hope-...

Tue, 2009-04-14 22:39

#10

Frmrsldr

Mr. Layton talks about helping Afghans. This is a lie that is used to sell the war.

What is war?

War is killing, injuring and destroying.

How does this help Afghans?

It doesn't.

How does supporting the war support the troops?

It doesn't.

If we wish to support the troops, we need to support peace.

Support the troops.
Support peace.
End the war.
Bring our troops home now!

Tue, 2009-04-14 22:43

#11

Unionist

Webgear wrote:

I guess that is what happens when you let the PR types run the party.

I guess you would know, given your CF experience. PR is everything. It's called the "fog of war". Nothing is real.

Frmrsldr wrote:

Support the troops.
Support peace.
End the war.
Bring our troops home now!

Amen. Some here will recall that the NDP website carried banner slogans: "Support the troops - bring 'em home now!" for a few weeks (or was it days) after the Sept. 2006 Québec City convention. They are long gone. Now we have Layton's mawkish pseudo-patriotism whenever a heavily armed invader is killed, but we must look elsewhere to mourn the daily deaths of Afghan civilians.

There is no opposition to the war in Parliament, unfortunately. Check Hansard. The BQ has never opposed the invasion, while the NDP is back to "there's no pressure so let's not talk about it".

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:04

#12

Webgear

Frmrsldr

Those are all nice PR slogans, a lot of fancy words that hold no meaning.

What's the difference to the common Canadian when all political parties say "support the troops"?

Unionist

The CF is new to the PR front, let's face it no matter what organization you belong to (NDP, Liberal, Conservative) the PR campaign is your most important weapon.

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:08

#13

Unionist

It's not the PR that bothers me, Webgear. It's the lies. The ugly lies. About young people dying for a glorious cause. About Canada being in Afghanistan for ... uh, I forget, the flavour of the day. About New Democrats "praying". To a greater or lesser extent, it is dehumanizing. People are standing up for the truth.

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:14

#14

Webgear

It is all lies. Everyone in positions of powers are lying, always have been all will be.

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:17

#15

Unionist

[url=http://www.radio-canada.ca/regions/Quebec/2009/04/14/004-mort_Karine_Bla... was more truth[/color][/url] before the CF liars leapt into action:

Quote:
La famille de Karine Blais demande au premier ministre de rapatrier les troupes canadiennes. L'oncle et parrain de la jeune femme, Mario Blais, est convaincu qu'elle a perdu sa vie pour rien. « C'est une mort inutile. Les 117 ont été inutiles d'après moi. Il faut sortir d'Afghanistan. On pourrait y retourner seulement pour aider à reconstruire, mais pas pour aller se battre », dit-il.

My translation:

Quote:
[b]Karine Blais's family is asking the Prime Minister to bring the Canadian troops home. Mario Blais, the young woman's uncle and godfather, is convinced that she lost her life for nothing. "This death was in vain. All 117 deaths were in vain, in my view. We have to get out of Afghanistan. We could go back only to help reconstruction, but not to go and fight", he said.[/b]

After that, the CF liars issued their news release signed "the Blais family" without saying which family members they were talking about (note that the mother's name is Simard!). The fog of war, before our very eyes.

No, Webgear, it is not "all lies". The truth is right in front of us and easy to see - for those who care.

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:21

#16

Frmrsldr

Webgear,

This is the problem, the government, the military, the Canadian Legion and the media all talk about "We Support the Troops". The implication being that this means supporting the war and supporting the current government who escalated not once, but twice, Canada's miltary engagement in Afghanistan.

"Support the Troops
Support Peace
Bring Our Troops Home Now!"

De-links in peoples' minds the idea that supporting the war is identical to supporting the troops.

It replaces this idea with the notion that supporting peace is identical to supporting the troops.

Supporting the troops and supporting peace is not a contradiction,

Supporting the troops and supporting an immoral, illegal and unjust war is.

So, my Rabble rousing, Babbling friends, let's spread the word. Convince our friends and neighbors. Convince our fellow Canadians. Let's end the war. Let's do something we can all be proud of!

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:28

#17

Webgear

Sorry Unionist, my French is not all that great. Are portions of family divided on the subject?

Is there a conflict between the mother and father?

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:32

#18

martin dufresne

"The CF is new to the PR front"

Not so. They have been at it at least since the Boer War. From Olivar Asselin during WWI to René Lévesque during WWII, they have always had the star journalists working for them.

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:33

#19

Webgear

Frmrsldr

I think your message is very confusing. I still do not understand what you mean by support the troops?

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:37

#20

Webgear

Martin

Very true, however in my view after the 1960s, public relations changed a lot and the CF was left behind in many regards until the late 1990s.

This is due to the change in Canadian society.

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:42

#21

Webgear

I understand very well. It is the same for what the NDP press release. It is all about damage control.

Tue, 2009-04-14 23:46

#22

Unionist

Webgear wrote:

Sorry Unionist, my French is not all that great. Are portions of family divided on the subject?

Is there a conflict between the mother and father?

Neither the mother nor the father has been interviewed. It is only the CF liars that have spoken in their names, saying that the "family" is not giving interviews right now. Only the godfather/uncle has spoken, and that's what triggered the panic - sort of like an IED going off in their midst, get the picture?

Wed, 2009-04-15 00:22

#23

martin dufresne

I hope you are getting good money for all that evasive maneuvering, Officer.

Wed, 2009-04-15 00:28

#24

Webgear

Lol, you give me too much credit. Do I even remotely sound educated?

Wed, 2009-04-15 00:44

#25

Fidel

Dont play dumb with us. Because we're pretty good at it ourselves.

Wed, 2009-04-15 00:59

#26

Webgear

Lol, welcome back Fidel.

Wed, 2009-04-15 06:35

#27

Slumberjack

Webgear wrote:
The CF is new to the PR front...

Actually they are relatively new to the modern PR business. Sure there were imbedded war correspondents and official press releases going back to the distant past, but the CF learned quickly after the 'media response line' fiasco during the Somalia affair. Before that, the public was blissfully unaware of much of the goings on within DND, for example, the media and public didn't pay much attention if any to who the CDS or MND was. They've done a brilliant job of it since then, managing the support of the MSM and all political parties, quite a feat if you ask me. There's nothing like a 100 and counting dead, and countless maimed, to soften the backbone of the political and media establishment. Who among them could now speak publicly of vain sacrifices, wasted lives and the utter folly of the 'mission.' The support the troops mantra is entwined with support for the mission, the two cannot be separated. If the mission is condemned, the troops died for nothing. What parent could come to terms with that reality. Which of them could readily admit that they did not do all they could to prevent their sons and daughters from participating in this ongoing disaster. Understandably they will fall in line with the official script as the only means available to protect the memory of their loved ones. This is the true genius of modern PR and propaganda.

Wed, 2009-04-15 06:42

#28

Slumberjack

Unionist wrote:
Anyway, what do people think will happen to Trooper Blais's uncle Mario?

Hmmm...good question. What do you think will happen to him?

Wed, 2009-04-15 07:00

#29

Unionist

Slumberjack wrote:

Unionist wrote:
Anyway, what do people think will happen to Trooper Blais's uncle Mario?

Hmmm...good question. What do you think will happen to him?

It has already happened, SJ. He has been publicly admonished and excluded from "the Blais family" by the publication of the horrid "communiqué" by the CF. His grief has been mocked. His outrage at the useless deaths of 117 Canadians (as he himself put it) has been "contextualized". His call on Harper to withdraw from Afghanistan has been situated outside the wishes and aspirations of "the Blais family". He has been delegitimized, to the extent that the CBC National last night carried a typical fawning report by Nancy Wood which didn't even stoop to mentioning his existence.

Wed, 2009-04-15 07:06

#30

Catchfire

Unionist, while I appreciate your skepticism and agree that the murder of Sitara Achakzai is being abused by our government and our armed forces to legitimize our war of agression on the backs of abused women, I think you're off base when it comes to Achakzai's bona fides as a women's rights activist. Asking why there are no online articles referencing Achakzai's work before she was so conveniently martyred for Canada's imperialist desire is a bit like condemning the Taliban for their position on Gay marriage. There are no media outlets in Afghanistan, save ours, and why would Canada care about a grassroots feminist movement in Afghanistan? We certainly wouldn't support it, fund it or offer it protection. And if there are references to Achakzai floating around out there, I wonder, how's your Arabic?

While this article from the Huffington Post smacks of the jingoism you decry, it does allege that Achakzai led a 'nationwide sit-in of 11,000 Afghan women in seven provinces who gathered to pray for peace on International Womens Day'. I, too, question if she truly was 'Afghanistan's leading activist for women's rights' but it seems quite clear that she was an activist. I would also question the colonialist implications of importing a Western ideal like 'International' womens day to Afghanistan, but it is not for the would-be conquerors to dictate the way feminism develops in the land we are occupying.

You are right to point out that the West hasn't heard anything about this woman before she was murdered, but that simply underlines the barbaric fact that she is worth more to Canada dead than alive. I think the evidence demonstrates that she was a brave and courageous woman, and that she fought for what she believed. It's just a tragedy that such bravery is only valuable to the occupying army posthumously and retroactively.

Wed, 2009-04-15 07:40

#31

Ghislaine

Well said Catchfire.

unionist, thank you for those links re: Blais' uncle and godfather. I really cannot understand how anyone could say that these 117 did not lose their lives in vain! Harper himself admitted it. Obama admitted it. I am beginning to doubt we will even be able to leave in 2011, let alone now. Obama is asking for 83 Billiion more to fund the wars that are now his.

Good for Blais' uncle - he is a courageous man. I am sure Ms. Blais' intentions were good and she believed she was making a difference. I think we all know what they say about good intentions.

You will be happy to know unionist, that Blais' uncle's comments are one of the front-page headlines on my local paper, the

[url=http://www.journalpioneer.com/index.cfm?pid=2382] Journal Pioneer [/url].

Wed, 2009-04-15 07:50

#32

Unionist

Catchfire wrote:
I think you're off base when it comes to Achakzai's bona fides as a women's rights activist.

I asked who called her a "women's rights activist", and never got a reply. Surely all information has a source, an origin. What is the source of this information? Seems like a legitimate exercise of skepticism on my part.[/quote]

Quote:
I wonder, how's your Arabic?

Nonexistent, but even if I could decipher Arabic script, I'd likely need to understand the underlying non-Arabic Indo-European language, if it's one spoken in Afghanistan.

Quote:
While this article from the Huffington Post smacks of the jingoism you decry, it does allege that Achakzai led a 'nationwide sit-in of 11,000 Afghan women in seven provinces who gathered to pray for peace on International Womens Day'.

Really? [url=http://www.msmagazine.com/news/uswirestory.asp?ID=11633][color=red]Ms. Magazine[/color][/url] says it was a "prayer for peace" demonstration attended by about 1,500 women. Oh well, what's a few zeroes? Nothing!

Curiously, neither item cites any source, although I do note that the Huffington author is a "Hollywood screenwriter". Also, I would be interested in knowing who sponsored and protected these so-called actions, and how the western media managed to miss them.

She may have been a brave and committed woman. I'll tell you what, though. My bigger question would be this: Where did she stand on the the invasion and occupation of her country and its installation and maintenance of a puppet regime? Perhaps one of the numerous "anonymous" sources now popping up will provide an answer.

Wed, 2009-04-15 07:59

#33

Catchfire

Actually, I'm not sure that a feminist activist needs to have a stand on invasion, occupation and puppet regimes. I think all she needs to have a stand on is women's rights and the reality of the situation. I laughed too that the Huffington article was basically an advertisement for the journalist's novel. In fact, I pointed out the author's bias and exaggeration. But if you want a source, it's in the original AP article:

Quote:
Achakzai, a dual German-Afghan citizen, spent the years of Taliban rule in Germany and returned to her native country to fight for women's rights, said Shahida Bibi, a member of the Kandahar women's association who worked with Achakzai.

A member of Kandahar's provincial council, Achakzai was vocal in encouraging women to take jobs and encouraging them to fight for equal rights, Bibi said.

I agree that we should denounce the way our media outlets are perverting Achakzai's death in the name of their invasion, but I think we shouldn't undermine the work that Afghan feminists are doing to right the wrongs they perceive. It's a bit rich to ask such feminists to adopt an anti-colonialist stance before we support or acknowledge their activism.

Wed, 2009-04-15 08:06

#34

Unionist

Catchfire wrote:

I agree that we should denounce the way our media outlets are perverting Achakzai's death in the name of their invasion, but I think we shouldn't undermine the work that Afghan feminists are doing to right the wrongs they perceive.

I agree fully - see my link below.

Quote:
It's a bit rich to ask such feminists to adopt an anti-colonialist stance before we support or acknowledge their activism.

I have never asked feminists to adopt such stands. Achakzai, however, was a provincial council official in Kandahar. It would be lovely if an official of Kandahar province, who returned to Afghanistan in 2004 after many years' absence, could remain neutral on the foreign military occupation.

Now, in today's news:

[url=http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2009/04/15/afghan-women-protest015.html][c... women pelted by stones during rape law protest[/b][/color][/url]

Wed, 2009-04-15 12:31

#35

Unionist

[url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/16/world/asia/16afghan.html][color=red]NY Times[/color][/url]

Wed, 2009-04-15 16:50

#36

Slumberjack

Catchfire wrote:
It's a bit rich to ask such feminists to adopt an anti-colonialist stance before we support or acknowledge their activism.

They're damned from all sides it seems. Trying to eek out the smallest of concessions from a fundamentalist puppet government draws the ire the fundamentalist insurgency, while siding with the insurgency accomplishes absolutely nothing in the way of rights, but only increases the odds of having ones home and children destroyed from the air. Even in death they are manipulated as propaganda tools by western hegemony, and apparently, readily seen as such from some vantage points. If there are more desperate circumstances to face for anyone involved in women's rights, I can't imagine it. While we're searching for fact based and properly sourced information as is normally the case, we might consider that it's difficult enough for women to achieve recognition of deeds and accomplishments within our society, let alone for a female activist operating in far more difficult circumstances to achieve the sort of international recognition that would satisfy our need for sources.

Wed, 2009-04-15 18:29

#37

Unionist

And when they become government officials, in the face of an insurgency?

Wed, 2009-04-15 18:51

#38

Webgear

martin dufresne wrote:

I hope you are getting good money for all that evasive maneuvering, Officer.

You should know how I am getting paid, you are my boss. It was nice seeing you today at CSIS headquarters, it has been a while.

Thu, 2009-04-16 21:56

#39

Frmrsldr

Webgear,

I'm sorry my message earlier was confusing.

Try this page http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/04/15/an-apology-for-an-occupation-...

Perhaps the message expressed there will be more understandable.

Thu, 2009-04-16 23:56

#40

Unionist

Great answer, Frmrsldr.

Fri, 2009-04-17 14:40

#41

martin dufresne

The Canadian Forces screws up bad - even Blais' comrades are bristling at a lack of respect for the fallen soldier. Trying to avoid bad press by imposing a low profile?

Soldiers upset at missing Blais ceremony
TheStar.com
FRANK GUNN/THE CANADIAN PRESS
April 16, 2009
Joanna Smith
Ottawa Bureau

OTTAWA- The top military brass apologized to Canadian soldiers today after some expressed disappointment they were not able to attend the repatriation ceremony for their 21-year-old comrade killed in Afghanistan this week.

Some of the soldiers who returned to Canada on the military aircraft carrying the remains of 21-year-old Trooper Karine Blais, who died in a bomb blast Monday, told CTV News they were offended when the military aircraft carrying her remains did not land at CFB Trenton as it usually would.

The military aircraft landed instead at CFB Uplands, the military side of the Ottawa International Airport, and soldiers told reporters the flags were not even lowered there.

They were also disappointed they would not be able to attend the final repatriation ceremony at CFB Trenton.

A spokesperson from the Department of National Defence who could only speak on background said the aircraft landed at CFB Uplands to let off soldiers who would be returning to CFB Petawawa before continuing to Trenton.

"Some of us talked about it on the flight last night and none of us would have minded stopping in Trenton first," one soldier told CTV News.

"I think they had their flight plans in and that was what they wanted to do ... Unfortunately, as nice as it would have been to be at the ramp ceremony in Trenton, we got dropped off here first and it's going to be a little tough coming all the way with her and not being with her when she comes off the plane."

The military would not comment any further beyond a statement issued by Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Walter Natynczk apologizing to anyone who took offence at the change of plans. (...)

The LCN network quotes Ret Colonel Michel Drapeau who speaks of "an act of imbecillity". As forr Karine Blais' family...

La famille de la défunte outrée

Pour la famille de Karine Blais, c'est un autre coup dur à encaisser. Déjà, à la suite de l'annonce de sa mort, son parrain Mario Blais avait exprimé sur la place publique son franc désaccord pour la mission des Forces en Afghanistan. Il réclamait notamment la fin de l'engagement militaire là-bas et le rapatriement des soldats.

«La famille est très choquée de tout ça», a-t-il dit. Mario Blais rappelle que les soldats qui se trouvaient dans l'avion militaire étaient prêts à accompagner leur camarade tombée jusqu'à Trenton.

Sat, 2009-04-18 12:58

#42

Michelle

Judy Rebick was asked yesterday by the Globe and Mail whether it is "possible to be a feminist and be anti-war" with respect to the Afghanistan war.

This is her answer.

Quote:

My answer was to ask "how has the war helped women?" which I see today is the banner headline on page 11.

...

I have met with Iraqi feminists and heard directly of their suffering under the US Occupation and the extreme attacks on the rights of women from fundamentalist Muslims. And I know that war never helps women. As militarism increases, patriarchy is reinforced. Men become bolder in their assaults against women whether fundamentalists attacking women's rights, soldiers using rape as a weapon of war or husbands assaulting their wives.

It is easy to fall into the trap that a Western military presence will somehow protect the women of Afghanistan. Beyond wishing that it were true, it is a rescue narrative that resonates deep in our souls. The reality is that life has not improved for women as RAWA points out.

If women's equality were really the goal, why didn't Western government support the forces on the ground who were already fighting for women's equality including conducting underground schools for girls.

The outrage over the women's rights in Afghanistan in the media is little more than a propaganda effort to convince Americans and Canadians to support this war without end in Afghanistan under the illusion that we are helping the people there. Don't fall for it.

Sat, 2009-04-18 13:08

#43

Unionist

Judy Rebick wrote:
The outrage over the women's rights in Afghanistan in the media is little more than a propaganda effort to convince Americans and Canadians to support this war without end in Afghanistan under the illusion that we are helping the people there. Don't fall for it.

Bears repeating - everywhere.

Sat, 2009-04-18 23:40

#44

Frmrsldr

Unionist,

Remember The Maine!

You probably know that the American press milked for all it was worth a story about an American female journalist who was held prisoner by the evil Spanish imperialists when the revolution broke out in Cuba in 1898 as one of the reasons to justify America going to war with Spain.

Sun, 2009-04-19 00:29

#45

Unionist

I even recall 1,000 ships being launched to rescue a woman allegedly abducted by some ancient kingdom.

Rescuing women and children is not a new theme.

Sun, 2009-04-19 00:36

#46

Frmrsldr

Well, it's finally happened. The Globe and Mail has written an article (probably an OpEd) with an argument that is heavily slanted toward our troops 'needing' to stay in Afghanistan to both protect women and advance women's rights in Afghanistan:

http://www.rawa.org/temp/runews/2009/04/17/plight-of-afghan-women-prompt...

Very sorry to be the bringer of such bad news.

Sun, 2009-04-19 01:53

#47

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Judy Rebick wrote:
The outrage over the women's rights in Afghanistan in the media is little more than a propaganda effort to convince Americans and Canadians to support this war without end in Afghanistan under the illusion that we are helping the people there. Don't fall for it.

Bears repeating - everywhere.

But at the same time, we dont have to support the Taliban either. If the former Anglo-American proxies want to takeover Afghanistan and start capping women in the back of the head in the middle of a football stadium Pinochet style, then I think we should have no part of that either.

Sun, 2009-04-19 07:27

#48

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

But at the same time, we dont have to support the Taliban either. If the former Anglo-American proxies want to takeover Afghanistan and start capping women in the back of the head in the middle of a football stadium Pinochet style, then I think we should have no part of that either.

Better hurry and write to Judy. She may be softening on the Taliban. (Uh, that was sarcasm, irony, etc.)

Someone says "Troops out!", you reply, "But what about the women!!". It's a variation on the theme that Judy is warning about.

Sun, 2009-04-19 08:02

#49

Slumberjack

How fortunate it is then to finally have available to us the 'flag as offensive' button, so we can scroll back through the numerous Afghanistan threads and give all the pro-Taliban comments their proper due. Never mind that the act of doing so apparently sends it into the oblivion where no one will see it, like many individual acts of civic duty, it's the sentiment that counts.

Sun, 2009-04-19 12:58

#50

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Fidel wrote:

But at the same time, we dont have to support the Taliban either. If the former Anglo-American proxies want to takeover Afghanistan and start capping women in the back of the head in the middle of a football stadium Pinochet style, then I think we should have no part of that either.

Better hurry and write to Judy. She may be softening on the Taliban. (Uh, that was sarcasm, irony, etc.)

Someone says "Troops out!", you reply, "But what about the women!!". It's a variation on the theme that Judy is warning about.

Except that Judy is talking about people who support the US-led military occupation of Afghanistan. I, however, do not.

Is it possible for someone to support neither the US-led military occupation of Afghanistan nor the US and Britain's former proxies, the Taliban? Yes, it is. And we're talking about some percentage of men and women in Afghanistan, RAWA and some number of the millions whove fled Afghanistan since the 1980s and 90s, 2000's.

As an example, I never supported the Khmer Rouge in the former Democratic Kampuchea either. And similar to but not exactly in the same way, the KR were a highly politicized armed force indigenous to Cambodia up to relatively recently. And western leaders were all prepared to recognize that group as legitimate rulers complete with representation in the UN.

Sun, 2009-04-19 13:58

#51

Unionist

As Slumberjack hinted, Fidel, your innuendo that babble is rife with Taliban supporters is a bit humorous. If that's not what you're saying, then it's hard to understand why, any time says withdraw the troops, you feel obliged to say, "But that doesn't mean we support the Taliban either!!!"

The key thing is this. We Canadians can withdraw our troops. We Canadians can't do anything about the Taliban. Only the Afghan people can (if they are so inclined). To mix up the two issues only confuses and delays the inevitable - our withdrawal, or (with increasing and accelerating certainty) our humiliating and richly-deserved military defeat.

The Afghan people will win - part 4

Pages