Bush Agrees With DU Hawks:'Brutal Tyranny' if Militants Retake Afghanistan

[tekisui]

Source: Taiwan News
Former President George W. Bush warned yesterday that "the world would face serious threats" if the resurgent Taliban and al-Qaeda are allowed to retake control of Afghanistan.

Bush spoke in the Indian capital as President Barack Obama tries to decide whether to commit tens of thousands more troops to Afghanistan. This has been the deadliest year for international and U.S. forces there since the 2001 invasion to oust the Taliban, and President Hamid Karzai is embroiled in an election dispute that has badly tarnished the Afghan government's credibility. "The mission in Afghanistan has been long and difficult and costly, but I believe it is necessary for stability and peace," Bush told a leadership conference in New Delhi. "If the Taliban and al-Qaeda and their extremist allies were allowed to take over Afghanistan again, they would have a safe haven and the Afghan people, particularly the Afghan women, would face a return to a brutal tyranny."

more: &cate_rss=news_Society

[unhappycamper]

1. Why this fuck isn't * in the Hague leaves me speechless. n/t

[Odin2005]

2. Guilt by association is a fallacy.

[tekisui]

6. Agreement with fallacy is idiocy.

[cliffordu]

3. I just wonder what you want to do with all the people who have been

associated with the US since we've been there.

Don't worry, no one here will call you a racist if it's fine with you if they all die in the sports stadium in Kabul. They aren't White America, so fuck them, eh??

And the women who have escaped the Burka, I suppose it's alright if they're doused with acid or set on fire or chopped into little pieces, too...

But that's alright with you as long as your hysterical meanderings are adhered to.....


Bush broke the fucking thing, and Obama has to fix it, whether you like it or not. That might mean being there for a little while.

We left Vietnam in a real hurry, and to this day I wonder what happened to the Vietnamese people I came in contact with every day - I wonder how many were marched out of Danang into slave labor camps and how many were simply killed where they stood...and what happened to their children and wives, husbands......

You really have an easy morality about this, your tactics that of a hysterical preteen stomping their little feet without regard for the consequences of the action you espouse.

And it is tedious. You are tedious in your fake purity and the backhanded insults like this OP.

You should be ashamed of yourself, but that will never happen, you cannot stop looking into the mirror long enough for that.

[tekisui]

5. Wow. It seems like I hit a nerve.

I don't have to resort to back-handed insults. The position of war as policy is insulting in itself. Afghanistan is not ours to fix, nor are we capable of fixing it. We should be discussing how to leave, not how to fix the country. Why aren't we obligated to stay in Iraq indefinitely? Don't tell me it is fixed, you know better.

It is the double standard and absurd mind-fuck that one war is good while the other is bad. That one is worth 'getting right', while the other is worth 'getting out'.

Women are worse off now. They want us out of Afghanistan. Don't use them as a crutch for defending Obama's War. Every excuse you give can be said about Iraq, too. It is disappointing and disgusting that so many Democrats can go from anti-war to anti-some-war and even to pro-this-war.

[cliffordu]

9. This is all anyone needs to know:

"....Women are worse off now. They want us out of Afghanistan. Don't use them as a crutch for defending Obama's War. Every excuse you give can be said about Iraq, too. It is disappointing and disgusting that so many Democrats can go from anti-war to anti-some-war and even to pro-this-war......"

Your thought processes have been corrupted.

[tekisui]

11. I am not surprised you resort to an ad hominum attack to avoid

defending your position and agreement with dubya. You have the hard position to defend. Mine is easy, it values humanity over politics.

[cliffordu]

12. Naivete over real world horrors, maybe.

Kinda pathetic, actually.

An ad hominum attack would be grouping anyone who disagrees with you as agreeing with W.

But in your magical pony driven universe, that's acceptable.

And why don't you let us all know how you came to understand what the Afghan women want?

[tekisui]

15. RAWA report here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=6896662&mesg_id=6896662

[grantcart]

13. No you are playing politics with humanistic phrases and ignoring humanity.

This is the reality of the most extreme part of the Taliban and like all revolutionary movements the most radical and ruthless part of the Taliban will, if victorious, exert its power over the other elements if they regain the power.



Taliban restoration would result in hundreds of thousands of executions and millions of refugees, and this time the US will not take them like they did in 1982 when I resettled Afghan refugees into the US.

In 1975 King Norodom Sihanouk extended his prestige to the Khmer Rouge, they made him a titular figurehead and he made a well publicized speech to the Cambodian diaspora to return to Cambodia and help rebuild the country with the friendly agrarian reformers known as the Khmer Rouge. Thousands, including several dozen of his own family did. They were all incarcerated and slaughtered.

You have the hard position to defend. Nato is engaged in defending a country with an emerging government, that with all of its faults still has the overwhelming support of 75% of the non Pashtun part of the country.

And then there is this: If the taliban were to be restored to power they would not only return to the slavery of women and capricious capital punishment for anyone who disagrees with them but they would turn into a narco state and the revenues would provide a secure funding source for more suicide missions of Al Queda.

The future of Afghan is simple only if you are a simpleton.

[cliffordu]

14. what grantcart said.

[tekisui]

16. I never claimed it was simple.

It is far from it. It is a tangled, bloody mess. But, I do not accept that we are improving things with 150,000 foreign troops. We are creating another point of contention and hate by our very presence. The Taliban is a blanket term that lacks nuance. Many Taliban are dealt with by Karzai and even the US is dealing with them. Why would we give them any legitimacy if the radical aspects were a true threat to returning to power?

And, this report from the guardian counters the claim that AQ will return if the Taliban are present:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/oct/26/afghanistan-al-qaida

I am not suggesting throwing our hands up and handing the country to the radical elements of the Taliban or even to the Taliban. But, we are looking at a war with no end in sight. No discussions of how to get out are being had in public by the Administration. That is the problem. If any plan is not presented as "the best way to get out", it will be a loss for Obama, the Democrats and peace. And, I do not accept that the best way to get out includes more troops going in.

[grantcart]

19. I believe the Guardian also believed Sihanouk that the agrarian farmers

called the Khmer Rouge were good guys.

The fact is that most insurgencies are defeated. Malaysia, Thailand and Indonesia all successfully defeated their insurgents - and all used completely different methods.


The Taliban are increasing morphing into foriegn invasion force with increasing numbers of foriegn fighters joining them. We need to act as a bridge so that the decent people in Afghanistan have a decent chance of building their own government.

[G_j]

4. smart man!

:puke:

[tabasco]

7. Why did he invade Iraq?

Oil profits, of course.

We had just cause to invade Afghanistan but Bush abandoned that mission.

Now, Obama has to finish up what Bush neglected.

[tekisui]

8. Finish up what?

[devilgrrl]

10. fininshing building a oil pipeline - that's what war is usually about - stealing resources

:popcorn:

[tabasco]

17. Along with our NATO allies, this:

http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/topics_8189.htm#missions

[Orsino]

18. Better yet: why didn't he invade China?

Bush is still trying to protect the fiction that his were wars for peace.

[TexasObserver]

20. Recommend