PDA

View Full Version : Please read


IronManX
09-14-2001, 05:33 PM
I found this on another message board. Please read.

Toivo Kallas
Department of Biology & Microbiology

Date: Thu, 13 Sep 2001 10:14:27 -0700

Dear Friends,

Yesterday I heard a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio allowed that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage," and he asked, "What else can we do? What is your suggestion?" Minutes later I heard a TV pundit discussing whether we "have the belly to do what must be done."

And I thought about these issues especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years I've never
lost track of what's been going on over there. So I want to share a few thoughts with anyone who will listen.

I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I fervently wish to see those monsters punished.

But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who captured Afghanistan in 1997 and have been holding the country in bondage ever since. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a master plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan" think "the Jews in the concentration camps." It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would love for someone to eliminate the Taliban and clear out the rats nest of international thugs holed up in their country. I guarantee it.

Some say, if that's the case, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban themselves? The answer is, they're starved,
exhausted, damaged, and incapacitated. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. Millions of Afghans are widows of the approximately two million men killed during the war with the Soviets. And the Taliban has been executing these women for being women and have buried some of their opponents alive in mass graves. The soil of Afghanistan is littered with land mines and almost all the farms have been destroyed . The Afghan people have tried to overthrow the Taliban. They haven't been able to.

We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Trouble with that scheme is, it's already been done. The Soviets took care of it . Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering.
Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? There is no infrastructure. Cut them off from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already did all that.

New bombs would only land in the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the Taliban eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. (They have already, I hear.) Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it would be making common cause with the Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been raping all this time

So what else can be done, then? Let me now speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with ground troops. I think that when people speak of "having the belly to do what needs to be done" many of them are thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as needed. They are thinking about overcoming moral
qualms about killing innocent people. But it's the belly to die not kill that's actually on the table. Americans will die in a land war to get Bin Laden. And not just because some Americans would die fighting their way through Afghanistan to Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that, folks. To get any troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would they let us? Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be first. Will other Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I'm going. The invasion approach is a flirtation with global war between Islam and the West.

And that is Bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he wants and why he did this thing. Read his speeches and statements. It's all right there. AT the moment, of course, "Islam" as such does not exist. There are Muslims and there are Muslim countries, but no such political entity as Islam. Bin Laden believes that if he can get a war started, he can constitute this entity and he'd be running it. He really believes Islam
would beat the west. It might seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into Islam and the West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the West wreaks a holocaust in Muslim lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, even better from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong about winning, in the end the west would probably overcome--whatever that would mean in such a war; but the war would last for years and millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly for that? Bin Laden yes, but anyone else?

I don't have a solution. But I do believe that suffering and poverty are the soil in which terrorism grows. Bin Laden and his cohorts want to bait us into creating more such soil, so they and their kind can flourish. We can't let him do that. That's my humble opinion.

Tamim Ansary

candide
09-14-2001, 10:28 PM
My friend, I agree with your statements. I agree with your rationale. But, Americans, collectively speaking, have seen too many Die Hard movies. It is my conviction that we won't realize the dire consequences of impulsive action until the fighting is amongst us -- which it will be, however unconventional. Osama bin Laden is in a no lose situation.

There are several scenarios:

1) The US does nothing

In this case, he wins. The United States suffers a travesty, they come to know what the rest of the world is already too familiar with, and he achieves his purposes, at least somewhat. (However, this situation is merely to be thought of in theory, because it's fairly unarguable that the United States will retaliate some how)

2) The United States goes to war with Afghanistan, irrespective of the nation's populace.

In this situation, the image of the US as a brutal hegemon will simply be confirmed. Once other states begin to see the levels of death and destruction, the US will lose their support. Also, other Islamic nations (even the more moderate ones) will begin to oppose this war, and might perhaps take the side of Afghanistan. This will cause more war, and will polarize the globe. Bin Laden wins here as well.

3) The United States kills Bin Laden, eliminates his organization, and is seemingly successful in their efforts.

In this case, the people of the US have still tasted of terrorism. Implanted in their minds is the realization that they are not in fact immune to the toils of the world. They're very real, and eminently close. The people here fear. And, the problems of the Middle East will still not be solved, and other actors will come to take Bin Laden's place.

The United States, and the West cannot win wars against supposedly ethno-nationalist terrorists by conventional means. Britian has been fighting a war against the IRA, who is in its midst, since 1916, and has not yet won. The PLO and its predecessors have been waging war in Israel since before 1948. How does the United States, who however omnipotent, is in fact on the other side of the world, expect to effectively put an end to world terrorism with a few bombs? The solution to this problem comes not through killing those who just happen to be at present the leaders -- that is only scratching the surface. We always try to outwardly change things, but change must come from within. Instead of taking people out of the slums, we should take the slums out of their hearts and minds, and allow themselves to come away from the slums.

The way to stop Bin Laden is:

Destroy his base of support.

In essence, Bin Laden is simply an anarcho-terrorist. However, he appeals to those of Islam who are oppressed. The Palestinians, and others who feel they need him allow him to operate. People are willing to sacrifice their lives for him, because he offers hope, however much a facade his offer may be. If we can pacify the Palestinians, and give real help to those who rely on Bin Laden, they would no longer need his assistance. His base of support would be eliminated. Then, he and his group would be seen as what they are -- simply anarcho-terrorists, like the Red Brigade in Europe (1980s). Without a base of support, he could be disposed of quite easily. No one would care for his cause of they are placid. Do you really think there would be problems in the West Bank and Gaza if the US, as opposed to giving Israel $6 billion per year for weapons, would have invested it in the Palestinian's economic infrastructure? People are so short sighted sometimes.

I'm not expecting you all to necessary buy this theory, it's quite hard to digest, but I think there is merit to it. It actually came from a University Professor I know, so I really can't take much credit.

toker
09-15-2001, 12:33 AM
If you look at this from the perspective of fighting a drug cartel. You can make people see what drugs do show them the bodys in the local morgue that died from OD.

Will this stop thousands of addicts who feel content because they have a drug that makes them feel good?

This guy is like an addiction for these people and he uses the power of religon to serve his purpose.

How can you make these people change their belief about what has been drilled into their minds for years? Give them food?? Give them money?? Show them Love??

If you did try open their eyes they would think its a trick like they have been told. We already have many who have left and tried to make their people see the truth. So if they wont believe their own people they are not likely to believe anyone.

You can try all you want but even if you did suceed how long would it take?

How many americans would die while tring?

How many other nations would also suffer in the long process?

These people want to DIE is the point they believe death is a key to heaven. We cannot stop a man dangling a grenade by the pin in the middle of a crowded builing. But if we did stop him and not let him kill himself we would be called evil by these sick people.

You think they care about the blood of their own people being shed?

They dont care and have no value for their own lives let alone anyone elses. We know this is not the first nor the last they are still tracking down more terrorists and while you try and talk they will continue to try and kill. They dont care about right and wrong most prob were taught to hate the US since they were born.

Change could prob could be accomplished and you can bet the government has thought out many senerios. Change could also cost thousands more innocent lives right in our own back yard and thats what we want to prevent. Its you or them basically and i choose them.

Would you rather live in fear and watching people you care about die or try to end it now?

with life comes death and no man can change that. http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/frown.gif

richard123
09-15-2001, 02:17 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by candide:
The way to stop Bin Laden is:

Destroy his base of support....</font>

These scenarios neglect 1 very important thing... Mr. Bush wants to get re-elected. Changing US foreign policy to reduce the hatred against the USA would probably work, but it won't do shit for G.Bs. popularity.

The American people demand revenge. It doesn't really matter who as long as the targets are proven to be the perpetrators of this indescribable crime.

I have read stuff in the European press also (for example in Sweden - long time critics of US foreign policy) where they say exactly the same thing: Starve bin Laden of oxygen - make him irrelevant. But the ball is in America's court now, and Bush will do whatever people want him to.

The drug analogy mentioned by Toker is interesting too. All the decades of fighting drugs (including: Just say "NO") and people are still dying. Some people (like me) think that drugs should be legalised.

HeLiS
09-15-2001, 06:45 AM
normal bombs wont work but a good old US made nuke will soon clear em all out http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/smile.gif

Arthur
09-15-2001, 09:35 AM
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by HeLiS:
normal bombs wont work but a good old US made nuke will soon clear em all out http://bbs.adultwebmasterinfo.com/ubb/smile.gif</font>

I suggest you track down a copy of a book called Nagasaki Journey. Full of hilarious photos of charcoalled women and children.

It's a real fucking laugh, mate.

Arthur
09-15-2001, 10:24 AM
http://visual.arts.ewu.edu/ets/191more.html

http://visual.arts.ewu.edu/ets/191sum.html

http://www.exploratorium.edu/nagasaki/journey/journey2.html