A continuation of [url=http://www.rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/afghan-puppe... thread.[/url]
Afghan puppets, theTaliban & their masters are going down 3
Sun, 2010-12-19 09:21
#1
Afghan puppets, theTaliban & their masters are going down 3
Sun, 2010-12-19 09:33
#2
I don't wanna say I told you so but I told you all Canadian soldiers wouldn't be pulled of of Afghanistan.
Don't be fooled by the "non-combat moniker".
Sun, 2010-12-19 09:44
#3
Ummm..., please don't be tricked by this crank thread.
Anti-imperialist discussion and news about Afghanistan is continued [url=http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/afghan-puppets-a... this thread[/url].
Thanks.
Sun, 2010-12-19 09:47
#4
Oops, sorry. it'd be easier if we had one afghanistan mega-thread, yes no?
Sun, 2010-12-19 09:52
#5
Ummm..., please don't be tricked by this crank thread.
And don't be fooled by directionally challenged leftists. Because at least some of us anti-war leftists don't support former US proxies and right wing extremists like the Taliban.
[url=http://www.rawa.org/rawa/2010/06/01/peace-with-criminals-war-with-people...
Note the similarity between these US-backed right wing fundamentalists and the US-backed ones in 1970s-80s Chile who enjoyed rounding up leftists in football stadiums and shooting them to death.
Sun, 2010-12-19 09:56
#6
This thread is pro-imperialist and contrary to babble policy. I have alerted the mods and demanded that it be shut down. We see enough of this bullshit hijacking in the regular threads, let alone the pro-imperialist garbage surrounding us in the MSM. Babble must not tolerate viewpoints serving to whitewash and justify Canadian military interference in Afghanistan.
Please do not engage in this dirty diversion by posting in this thread before it's closed. Thanks.
Sun, 2010-12-19 10:03
#7
This thread is pro-imperialist and contrary to babble policy.
What happened to your photo of the Olson twins?
No it's not imperialist to reject ALL of the US-led military occupation and the right wing fundamentalists they've propped up over the years.
Real leftists support the Afghan people and the other 80percent of the legitimate resistance consisting of mainly localized tribes and ordinary Afghans who do not support right wing ideologues and Afghan Arabs running the Taliban or even the very psychopathic Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and Jalaluddin Haqqani who Malalai Joya recently compared to Pinochet and Hitler.
We don't support ANY of the enemies of the Afghan people in this thread. And I personally didn't appreciate your pro warmongering rhetoric in the last thread.
Sun, 2010-12-19 10:47
#8
[url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2003/sep/20/afghanistan.weekend7][color=... good friends left behind[/color][/url] 2003
For 17 years, Washington poured $4bn into the pockets of some of the most brutal men on earth - with the overall aim of exhausting and ultimately destroying the Soviet Union in a futile war. One of them, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, a warlord particularly favoured by the CIA, received tens of millions of dollars. His speciality was trafficking opium and throwing acid in the faces of women who refused to wear the veil. In 1994, he agreed to stop attacking Kabul on condition that he was made primeminister - which he was.Eight years earlier, CIA director William Casey had given his backing to a plan put forward by Pakistan's intelligence agency, the ISI, to recruit people from around the world to join the Afghan jihad. More than 100,000 Islamic militants were trained in Pakistan between 1986 and 1992, in camps overseen by the CIA and MI6, with the SAS training future al-Qaida and Taliban fighters in bomb-making and other black arts. Their leaders were trained at a CIA camp in Virginia. This was called Operation Cyclone and continued long after the Soviets had withdrawn in 1989.
Sun, 2010-12-19 11:26
#9
Babble must not tolerate viewpoints serving to whitewash and justify Canadian military interference in Afghanistan.
Please do not engage in this dirty diversion by posting in this thread before it's closed. Thanks.
Fidel, is this censorship of other individuals' POV not against babble policy? I am under the impression that one alerts the mods to posts that may contravene babble policy, not intimidate and shadow moderate posters who displease the self-appointed dictator-for-life-and-beyond.
I do not consider it appropriate that certain posters on babble spend the majority of their efforts on either preaching to the choir or attempting to shut down discussion with intimidating language that suggests anyone who doesn't agree with them is not anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, anti-racist, etc.
This chap appears to be pushing an agenda that one should only post in threads where the message is 'properly' controlled - by him or her.
Sun, 2010-12-19 11:51
#10
I certainly agree with that. Falling into the trap of generalisation seems easier the more extreme an individual's opinion becomes.
Sun, 2010-12-19 11:56
#11
I am not going to comment on what Unionist's entire range of political views might be. I just can't be sure. But I think that it is also generally against babble policy to suggest that an entire nation of people are supporters of right wing religious fundamentalists, like the Taliban, when they clearly are not. We don't refer to all Germans as Nazis, or all Croats as Ustashi, or all Canadians as empire loyalists, all British people as medieval roundheads etc. Nor do I consider all Afghan men and women to be supportive of the very misogynist and medieval Taliban.
Sun, 2010-12-19 12:33
#12
attempting to shut down discussion with intimidating language that suggests anyone who doesn't agree with them is not anti-colonialist, anti-imperialist, anti-racist, etc.
While I don't think this is true specifically of Mr Unionist I think you hit the wooden stake on the head in terms of a common tactic employed here. Sometimes I am reminded of two people in Salam arguing over the price of eggs and one turns to the crowd shouting "Yea well only someone who is a WITCH would say that! Am I right people! Who's with me?!"
Sun, 2010-12-19 12:49
#13
I would request that you nice folks find something else to talk about other than me. It's contrary to babble policy to discuss individual babblers, let alone to attack them.
As for this thread, I have also advised the mods that it's contrary to babble's anti-imperialist policy. This will be a nice test to see whether that policy means anything or not.
Sun, 2010-12-19 13:21
#14
Catchfire
Hi everyone. babble has an anti-imperialist policy which means discussion here starts from the position that foreign wars of aggression are destructive, cynical and have absolutely nothing to do with justice or peace.
Please continue in oldgoat's new thread. Closing.