Is Afghanistan a "just" war?

[ProSense]

The 9/11 attack was terrorism, and in response, only one person voted against the original AUMF that launched the war in Afghanistan.

Barbara Lee

http://clerk.house.gov/evs/2001/roll342.xml

Ron Paul voted yes. Dennis Kucinich voted yes.

Opposition to the War in Afghanistan (2001–present)

Opposition to the decade-long Afghanistan war stems from numerous factors – these include the view that the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan was illegal under international law and constituted an unjustified aggression, the view that the continued military presence constitutes a foreign military occupation, the view that the war does little to prevent terrorism but increases its likelihood, and views on the involvement of geo-political and corporate interests. Also giving rise to opposition to the war are civilian casualties, the cost to taxpayers, the length of the war to date, and the estimates by many that it could last for many more decades.

- more -

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opposition_to_the_War_in_Afghanistan_(2001%E2%80%93present)

The Iraq war is mentioned a lot because of Bush's lies that got us into war, but is the Afghanistan war better because Congress approved it?

[kentuck]

1. Was Colonel Kurtz a good officer?

He started out good - at the top of his class. But somewhere along the line, he lost his way. And they had to go up the Nang River and take him out.

[HardTimes99]

10. Yours may be the most nuanced answer in this thread. I've recently begun quoting an excerpt

from Conrad's Heart of Darkness (the novel that served as source for Apocalypse Now) to show at least the narrator's (and presumably Conrad's also) absolute disdain for and bewilderment at what the French and Belgians were up to in the Congo.

Kudos for the reference. Quite a propos.

[FarCenter]

11. Also "Apocalypse Now".

Colonel Kurtz is based on the character of a nineteenth-century ivory trader, also called Kurtz, from the novella Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad. However, the movie's Kurtz is widely believed to have been modeled after Tony Poe, a highly decorated and highly unorthodox Vietnam War-era paramilitary officer from the CIA's Special Activities Division. Poe was known to drop severed heads into enemy-controlled villages as a form of psychological warfare and to use human ears to record the number of enemies his indigenous troops had killed. He would send these ears back to his superiors as proof of his efforts deep inside Laos.

Coppola denies that Poe was a primary influence and instead says the character was loosely based on Special Forces Colonel Robert B. Rheault, whose 1969 arrest over the murder of a suspected double agent generated substantial news coverage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colonel_Kurtz

[NuclearDem]

2. No.

It's a war we ended up fighting because we were shortsighted.

But that seems to be official US foreign policy.

[Harmony Blue]

3. It did not achieve the primary objective of capturing/killing Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan

And the secondary objective was to dismantle the Taliban safe haven for AQ, which has yet to be fully achieved. So, as a result it was not a just war since the objectives where not met.

[NoOneMan]

4. I've never thought so

But almost everyone was pretty unanimous back then. Thats why I have no used to politicians. And by having no use for politicians, you telling me who voted how no it means nothing now or then.

[hrmjustin]

5. Afghanistan was a mistake for us.

[Live and Learn]

6. No. nt

[Rex]

7. I'm glad you asked that question!

Let us go back to the reason er reasoning by the Bush regime.

http://archive.democrats.com/view.cfm?id=5166.
PARIS, Nov 15 (IPS) - Under the influence of U.S. oil companies, the government of George W. Bush initially blocked U.S. secret service investigations on terrorism, while it bargained with the Taliban the delivery of Osama bin Laden in exchange for political recognition and economic aid, two French intelligence analysts claim.

In the book ''Bin Laden, la verité interdite'' (''Bin Laden, the forbidden truth''), that appeared in Paris on Wednesday, the authors, Jean-Charles Brisard and Guillaume Dasquie, reveal that the Federal Bureau of Investigation's deputy director John O'Neill resigned in July in protest over the obstruction.

Brisard claim O'Neill told them that ''the main obstacles to investigate Islamic terrorism were U.S. oil corporate interests and the role played by Saudi Arabia in it''.

[cvoogt]

8. Close.

It isn't a just war; it is just a war.

[JI7]

9. i don't think we should have done it as Bush did , it should have specific and targeted

while letting the UN or some other international force start to get in there to try to get some humanitarian help and change , especially for women.

[Romulox]

12. 15 of 19 911 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia. When do we bomb?

[cali]

13. No.

A just war is an oxymoron. There may be wars that are justified, but there is no such animal as a "just war".

[ProSense]

15. "There may be wars that are justified, but there is no such animal as a 'just war'."

So you believe it was "justified"?

[cali]

16. didn't say that. just pointing something out

I think I'll start emulating YOU and just weasel my response to you.

It's what you richly deserve.

[ProSense]

18. So it wasn't "justified"? n/t

[cali]

19. didn't say that either, pro.

hey emulating you with your weasel answers is fun.

Loving it.

[ProSense]

21. I realize why you can't state whether or not it was "justified." n/t

[FarCenter]

14. It was in the beginning, when we helped the Northern Alliance take back territory from the Taliban

The corruption then started when we installed the Pashtun Karzai.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

17. No. And, we lost that one too.

[PowerToThePeople]

20. No.

It was sold to us as a focused operation of eliminating the terrorist training camps. The camps where the Saudi terrorists were supposedly being trained and where OBL was supposedly located as well. Nothing more. Nothing that should still be going on currently.

[Bluenorthwest]

22. Your use of the term is the most salient part of your OP, much like your recent 'who invited 9-11'

post. The words 'invited' and 'just war' should be knitted into a sweater for you to wear this fall. That's how good they look on you.

[ProSense]

24. It's called a question. Do you think the war was "just" or "justified"? n/t

[Bluenorthwest]

25. I'm not surprised that you don't recognize an answer when you see one because you never answer

questions asked of you, but you got your answer. The lexicon is the message, the choices of verbiage are the definition of your view, there is nothing more to speak of than the word choices as there is no content possible when using such language as 'just war' or when asking who 'invited' a mass murder. The entire message is in the words. So that's what I talked about. Sickening language defines the message.
Instead of a sweater it could be a 'Just War' and 'We Invited 9-11' sandwich board for you to wear, I bet John Kerry could get the Saudis to pay for it. It is their sort of newspeak.

[ProSense]

26. You didn't answer, but that's OK. n/t

[rug]

27. No. Not before it started. Not during it. And certainly not now.

It has become the Andromeda Strain for terrorism.

[hobbit709]

28. Not only no but FUCKING HELL NO!!!

[ZombieHorde]

29. Not even close.

I am glad people are asking this question, regardless of their answer.

[deurbano]

30. I always considered that war unjustified. I protested against it. ("Barbara Lee speaks for me.")

I thought we should try to bring those who were actually guilty of planning, funding and assisting in the crime to justice.