Is the war in Afghanistan necessary?

[Poppytry]

Think about it, without NATO the weak government will quickly collapse and be the Taliban will be back in power. A Taliban in power can also support the militant extremists in neighboring Pakistan. With NATO you will have (if all goes to plan) a US puppet government filled with moderates.

Now let me just state one thing, I am traditionally 100% opposed to US imperialism for example in Vietnam, a united communist Vietnam would not have been a bad thing for the Vietnamese and the US should never have intervened. However I cant find my self supporting the withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan as the thought of a strict Islamic government advocating sharia law sickens me. The fact that once they consolidate power they will begin to influence neighbors could also have disastrous consequences to the region. It will be a huge step back for the Afghan people in the long run. Maybe I hold this view because I'm a passionate atheist.

And before anyone suggests it.. NO I do not support carpet bombing random villages and the tragic loss of life of Afghan civilians.

[Pirate turtle the 11th]

Yeah better look out for the taliban they might legalize rape or something, oh wait the puppet goverment has just done that.

[Poppytry]

Obviously I don't support the puppet government working for US interests. But in the grim situation Afghanistan is in, it's the better of two evils

[Bankotsu]

Embedded With the Taliban
http://www.counterpunch.org/jacobs09032009.html

[Caulfield]

I used to share your opinion. And let me say this first at the commencement of my post, that I am NOT a supporter of the Taliban regime.
Though the people we see, fighting and opposing the NATO intervention of Afghanistan, are not the same Taliban as the ones who got in power in 1996. Men are joining the Taliban because their wives were murdered on their wedding days, because their mothers were raped, because they themselves were sexually abused and humiliated by putting all kind of stuff into their anus for no particular reason, because their children are being born as if they were heavily mutilated, etc.

What we're seeing is the power of the media to influence the masses. Do some of us remember the Russian-Afghan war? The whole western world was raging against the Soviet-Union for not respecting human rights, being inhuman, being evil communists, blablabla. If you talk to Afghans though, and ask them to make a comparison between the Russians and the NATO forces this is how they'll answer you:

'The dogs of the Russians had more dignity than these NATO forces have.'

But what do we do here? We continue to see them as protectors of the Afghan people. It's a shame that the only resistance is by the Taliban. I wish there was a intellectual uprising.

Once again, although I do not support the modern Taliban in Afghanistan, I really do understand their anger, and their fight against NATO. Both of them should disappear, but at this moment, I'd rather see NATO out of Afghanistan than the current Taliban.

[Spirit of Spartacus]

@ Comrade poppytry...

I don't understand why you think the imperialist war in Afghanistan is "necessary". You seem to have fallen for the same propaganda which imperialism uses to legitimize its wars of conquest and robbery all over the world.

If they leave Iraq, the Iraqis will kill each other, there will be a civil war, so they have to stay in Iraq.

If they leave Afghanistan, the Taliban will come back.

If they leave Somalia, the Shabaab will come to power.

If they let go of Pakistan, the Taliban will take over the country.

Our response to all this propaganda nonsense should be simple: GET THE **** OUT, imperialist pigs. The biggest cause for the extension and worsening of these conflicts is the imperialist occupation. Without calling for an immediate end to the occupation, any position that we take on these countries ultimately plays into the hands of the imperialist occupation.


Think about it, without NATO the weak government will quickly collapse and be the Taliban will be back in power.

And what is it about the "weak government" which you want to defend, comrade? Why do you see pro-imperialist puppets as being something better than the Afghan national resistance, whatever its composition might be?


A Taliban in power can also support the militant extremists in neighboring Pakistan.

First, the Taliban cannot return to their dominant position in Afghanistan any more, even if the US pulled out this very day.

Second, the biggest impetus for militant Islamists in neighbouring Pakistan is the imperialist occupation of Afghanistan and the continuing NATO aggression against the Pashtun tribes on the Pakistani-Afghan border. The reason we in Pakistan are currently embroiled in a civil war between the pro-imperialist military and the brutal Taliban, is because of the NATO occupation next door.

The longer the NATO occupation remains, the worse things will be for both Afghanistan and Pakistan.


With NATO you will have (if all goes to plan) a US puppet government filled with moderates.

You're totally falling into the imperialist discourse of "extremists vs moderates". For US imperialism, any force which is prepared to work with it is "moderate", while any force which resists it is "extremist", whatever the ideological affiliation of those forces may be.

By the way, you should really take a better look at the puppet government installed by NATO in Afghanistan. All its members are former mujahideen (who are Islamists, and fought against the socialist regime in the 80s and really have very few ideological differences with the Taliban).

Do you really think that Karzai and the warlords and fundamentalists sitting in the puppet Afghan government are rooting for feminism and LGBT rights? They are actually passing laws using the Afghan parliament, which are as discriminatory to women and minorities as anything the Taliban could come up with.

The US policy in Afghanistan is simply to support "their Islamists" against the "unreasonable Islamists" (like the Taliban) who fail to go along with imperialist dictates. That's what this dirty war is all about.


Now let me just state one thing, I am traditionally 100% opposed to US imperialism for example in Vietnam, a united communist Vietnam would not have been a bad thing for the Vietnamese and the US should never have intervened. However I cant find my self supporting the withdrawal of NATO troops from Afghanistan as the thought of a strict Islamic government advocating sharia law sickens me.

Like I said, the only reason you hold this view is because you are totally unable to see beyond the simplistic binaries presented by the Western imperialist media.

If sharia law sickens you, let me assure you that this puppet Afghan government is also introducing the same Shariah law as the Taliban, ratifying it through a parliament filled with temporarily pro-US warlords and fundamentalists, and in general is hated by the Afghan populace, as opposed to the national resistance (which unfortunately does consist of a lot of people calling themselves "Taliban").


The fact that once they consolidate power they will begin to influence neighbors could also have disastrous consequences to the region.

These forces were created by US imperialism, and their main source of propaganda is still the US imperialist aggression in this region.

Strike at the root of the problem, comrade.


It will be a huge step back for the Afghan people in the long run. Maybe I hold this view because I'm a passionate atheist.

In your passion for atheism, you lose sight of things like class struggle, imperialism, finance capital, exploitation, structural injustice and plain political realities in Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Nobody in Afghanistan or Pakistan cares if you're an atheist or not. What matters to the masses is what line you take in their struggle against imperialist aggression. If your line is pro-imperialist (as it unfortunately is), then your atheism will only count against you further.


And before anyone suggests it.. NO I do not support carpet bombing random villages and the tragic loss of life of Afghan civilians.


How very kind and considerate of you. :sleep:

So what advice do you have for the Pentagon in its counter-insurgency operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan?

I'm sure the Afghan people will be much more comfortable with imperialist aggression if they know that it is now being conducted on the advice of a passionate atheist, who also happens to be a leftist and actually cares deeply about them, and would like to save them from the clutches of the evil bearded misogynstic Taliban at all costs!

[Bankotsu]

Our response to all this propaganda nonsense should be simple: GET THE **** OUT, imperialist pigs. The biggest cause for the extension and worsening of these conflicts is the imperialist occupation. Without calling for an immediate end to the occupation, any position that we take on these countries ultimately plays into the hands of the imperialist occupation.


We must resist the western propaganda and their lies that seeks excuses to intervene and invade countries.

We must not fall for their false propaganda.

[Poppytry]

So what advice do you have for the Pentagon in its counter-insurgency operations in Afghanistan and Pakistan?

I'm sure the Afghan people will be much more comfortable with imperialist aggression if they know that it is now being conducted on the advice of a passionate atheist, who also happens to be a leftist and actually cares deeply about them, and would like to save them from the clutches of the evil bearded misogynstic Taliban at all costs!

Unfortunately I don't have an answer.. ideally of course I would like the Afghan people to have sovereignty of their own nation. I don't no what to say as whatever I say against a strict Islamic future for Afghanistan seems to imply that I'm supporting US occupation. I cannot see how a strong democratic government can be elected within the current climate, occupation or no occupation.

I'm not naive enough to think that the US are in Afghanistan to save the people and pursue democracy as if they really did give a damn about fighting for democracy they would be in a lot more countries.

[scarletghoul]

There are no (significant) good guys here. Both major forces (Taliben and puppet government/NATO) are quite bad, however one is an occupying imperialist force, and the other is a mass movement of people. For this reason my view is the same as Caulfied's above.

Ideally of course I support the Communist (Maoist) Party of Afghanistan (
http://www.sholajawid.org/update/index_english.html ), but they are small and largely irrelevent, as is every progressive force in the country.

Afghanistan's fucked up, but this is precisely due to the American interference. Unless theyre gonna install a progressive socialist regime, the Americans need to gtfo and leave the afghans alone.

[anti-N.I.C.E.]

No, not really. Brave British soldiers are being lost for the sake of democratic idoltary.

[KarlMarx1989]

What we're seeing is the power of the media to influence the masses.
You seem to have fallen for the same propaganda which imperialism uses to legitimize its wars of conquest and robbery all over the world.
Yes, it is all the media. The media has been using propaganda in this country since the early 1980's. An important thing that the christian-American doesn't report on is the hundreds of thousands of deaths of innocent Afghan citizens, people who are not fighting anyone; just trying to live their lives.

There are many things the media won't tell you because of their propaganda. The US trained Osama Bin Laden, and other people in that group, to kill Soviet soldiers. The CIA gave that group over $3,000,000 to aide them against the Soviets. Not to mention the billions in aide the US gave to Saddam Hussein for weapons used to kill Iranian soldiers in 1982. Whereas, in 1983, the US gave weapons to the Iranian government used to kill Iraqi soldiers. In 1990, Iraq was able to invade Kuwait with the help of the US. Then the US invaded Iraq in 1991 and then the President of the US reinstated the dictator to Kuwait. Since then, the US has been bombing Iraq on, pretty much, a daily basis. To top all this off, the US gave Taliban-ruled Afghanistan about $245,000,000 in aid spead out between 200 and 2001. So, what do you think Osama Bin Laden, and the people he worked with, used their training and the money they recieved for? That's right, they attacked America on US soil that September. christian-America deserved it for they aided the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden.

I don't even think the amount of American deaths that accumulated on September 11, 2001 is even 5% of the amount of Afghan civilian deaths alone--or "casualties" as our government likes to call them. Give me a break. Not to mention the fact that christian-American forces have killed hundreds of thousands in South America, Central America, and the Caribbean.

Do some of us remember the Russian-Afghan war? The whole western world was raging against the Soviet-Union for not respecting human rights, being inhuman, being evil communists
I know why the war first started. It started, rather officially, because in 1979 the USSR deployed troops into Afghanistan to help the the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan; which was a self-declared Socialist State. The United States saw this as "an evil act" and assisted the Afghan government. The US's military assistance in Afghanistan, along with the help of several other countries, caused the USSR to fully withdraw by 1988 because of high military costs that were directly affecting the country's economy. Three years later, the USSR collapsed. Even after this, the US did all of the things I outlined earlier. I think this whole thing is deeper than just worrying that "terrorists" are going to take over the government if they leave...

The thing is, christian-America has done so much more than just this. Let's not forget the activity the US had in Iran in 1953, where they overthrew the PM, Mossadeq, and installed Shah as dictator.

Surely the propaganda that the US media pedals has a grip on the christian-American public, gullible as they are. I also see propaganda in other NATO countries. I am against all forms of terrorism. When I see christian-America supporting the KKK/NRA, and then hear them say they are "fighting terrorism" abroad; it infuriates me because they are basically saying that christian-extremism = good and muslim extremism = bad. That is, at least, what the media says. In reality, the US has aided terrorists in West Asia; like the Taliban. As it seems to me, christian-America supports terrorism so that they can flourish and make more profit. I don't actually know what their objective is in aiding terrorist groups, but I know that there is something going on and it is nothing to overlook.

[Revy]

Normally I'd expect Newsbot to post something like this, but I'll say quite clearly, it's not necessary. It's a brutal occupation. Overthrowing the Taliban is something only the people of Afghanistan can do. The war has done nothing to weaken the Taliban, its only purpose was hegemony over Afghanistan's resources and strategic position.

[Revy]

Do you really think that Karzai and the warlords and fundamentalists sitting in the puppet Afghan government are rooting for feminism and LGBT rights? They are actually passing laws using the Afghan parliament, which are as discriminatory to women and minorities as anything the Taliban could come up with.

The US policy in Afghanistan is simply to support "their Islamists" against the "unreasonable Islamists" (like the Taliban) who fail to go along with imperialist dictates. That's what this dirty war is all about.


agreed 100%. The US doesn't care. It's allied with Saudi Arabia, for crying out loud. It's naive to believe it's about human rights, it's just about imperialism.

[KarlMarx1989]

Agreed, I may not know what christian-America's objective is, but I speculate it is for imperialist purposes.

[JohannGE]

No, not really. Brave British soldiers are being lost for the sake of democratic idoltary.

It always amazes me how it's always the "brave" ones that get killed!

[anti-N.I.C.E.]

It always amazes me how it's always the "brave" ones that get killed!
They are all brave.

[Revy]

They are all brave.

lol:rolleyes:

[JohannGE]

They are all brave.

and all, aparently, doing the job that they love.

[The Idler]

The lesser of two evils is still evil.

[red cat]

No, not really. Brave British soldiers are being lost for the sake of democratic idoltary.

BOO HOO ... Poor patriotic kids...snifff.:lol:

[red cat]

But what do we do here? We continue to see them as protectors of the Afghan people. It's a shame that the only resistance is by the Taliban. I wish there was a intellectual uprising.

Once again, although I do not support the modern Taliban in Afghanistan, I really do understand their anger, and their fight against NATO. Both of them should disappear, but at this moment, I'd rather see NATO out of Afghanistan than the current Taliban.

Chill..a new revolutionary communist party has come up in Afghanistan. As far as I know they have started some kind of armed struggle too. Probably thats why the US is not very keen to quit Afghanistan in near future.

[KarlMarx1989]

Like I said earlier:

[The 'war' in Afghanistan] started, rather officially, because in 1979 the USSR deployed troops into Afghanistan to help the the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan; which was a self-declared Socialist State. The United States saw this as "an evil act" and assisted the Afghan government. The US's military assistance in Afghanistan, along with the help of several other countries, caused the USSR to fully withdraw by 1988 because of high military costs that were directly affecting the country's economy. Three years later, the USSR collapsed. Even after this, the US did all of the things I outlined earlier. I think this whole thing is deeper than just worrying that "terrorists" are going to take over the government if they leave...
The US trained Osama Bin Laden, and other people in that group, to kill Soviet soldiers. The CIA gave that group over $3,000,000 to aide them against the Soviets. Not to mention the billions in aide the US gave to Saddam Hussein for weapons used to kill Iranian soldiers in 1982. Whereas, in 1983, the US gave weapons to the Iranian government used to kill Iraqi soldiers. In 1990, Iraq was able to invade Kuwait with the help of the US. Then the US invaded Iraq in 1991 and then the President of the US reinstated the dictator to Kuwait. Since then, the US has been bombing Iraq on, pretty much, a daily basis. To top all this off, the US gave Taliban-ruled Afghanistan about $245,000,000 in aid spead out between 2000 and 2001. So, what do you think Osama Bin Laden, and the people he worked with, used their training and the money they recieved for? That's right, they attacked America on US soil that September. christian-America deserved it for they aided the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden.

[PRC-UTE]

No, not really. Brave British soldiers are being lost for the sake of democratic idoltary.

Not that many, though. The IRA killed over 100 soldiers in 1972 alone. Not even twice that many have died in combat in Afghanistan since 2001.

[RebelFag]

People talk about this war like it was deliberated over by Geopolitical think tanks, and well, NOT, it was a rootin' tootin' decision to invade that there Taliban cuz they done let Osama go, and Saddam tried to kill muh Daddy,

the Chaos Factor. Shit happens, and it's unplanned , stupid shit, and things get all fucked up fast and you gotta just wince and start to try to put all the piece back together and , oh god....

[Bankotsu]

People talk about this war like it was deliberated over by Geopolitical think tanks

According to some sources USA made the decision to invade Afghanistan in summer of 2001, before Sep 11 attacks:



India and Iran will “facilitate” the planned US-Russia hostilities against the Taliban.

June 2001

Indian officials say that India and Iran will only play the role of “facilitator” while the US and Russia will combat the Taliban from the front with the help of two Central Asian countries, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan, to push Taliban lines back to the 1998 position 50 km away from Mazar-e-Sharief city in northern Afghanistan...

http://daredevil92103.wordpress.com/2007/07/30/we-already-had-plans-to-invade-afghanistan-before-911/

A former Pakistani diplomat has told the BBC that the US was planning military action against Osama Bin Laden and the Taleban even before last week's attacks.
Niaz Naik, a former Pakistani Foreign Secretary, was told by senior American officials in mid-July that military action against Afghanistan would go ahead by the middle of October.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/1550366.stm


Threat of US strikes passed to Taliban weeks before NY attack

Osama bin Laden and the Taliban received threats of possible American military strikes against them two months before the terrorist assaults on New York and Washington, which were allegedly masterminded by the Saudi-born fundamentalist, a Guardian investigation has established. The threats of war unless the Taliban surrendered Osama bin Laden were passed to the regime in Afghanistan by the Pakistani government, senior diplomatic sources revealed yesterday...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/sep/22/afghanistan.september113

15 March 2001

India is believed to have joined Russia, the USA and Iran in a concerted front against Afghanistan's Taliban regime...

http://www.janes.com/security/international_security/news/jir/jir010315_1_n.shtml

[Hiero]

I have said this in the OI thread about the Taliban and Afghanistan. Just because the occupying army is from a bourgeoisie democracy does not mean that the occupation will be a form of bourgeoisie democracy.

[red cat]

I have said this in the OI thread about the Taliban and Afghanistan. Just because the occupying army is from a bourgeoisie democracy does not mean that the occupation will be a form of bourgeoisie democracy.

To be precise, since the occupied country was semi-feudal semi-colonial before occupation, the occupation by bourgeois democratic forces will be colonial in nature.