ComradeMan
14th January 2010, 13:32
Right, I was restricted for my stance on Afghanistan, so here goes.
To me Afghanistan is a leftist nightmare. It's a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.:(
I maintain that the occupation of one country by the forces of another is in principal wrong and only on rare occasions where perhaps a friendly power has been invited by the legal and principled government of a country to help could it perhaps be justified. I have never supported the occupation.
My whole problem, and this is from a leftist point of view is quite simply, What do we do now? Does Afghanistan get abandoned? What role should the international community have in helping the Afghani people? And what is the position on reactionary groups like the Taliban despite their resistance to the coalition?. What would happen if the coalition were to go home tomorrow and the Taliban take over? What would then be the position here? For many people here, it is our countries with governments we may have even voted for that sent the troops there in the first place, that are part of the occupation and so surely we also have a moral responsibility to try to put right what has been done wrong? Many people in our countries were against the war, I admit but at the same time it is our governments at home that make these decisions so I feel we have some collective responsibility here too.
I am sure many people can understand my dilemma.
I repeat I have never supported the occupation- but we have to work out a de-occupation strategy that is realistic. Slogans are great and all that... but what needs to be done in terms of facts.
What is the problem with the UN (in terms of humanitarian agencies)? I have always been led to believe that despite its problems the UN is at least some kind of brake on total capitalist domination. I have also been led to believe that the humanitarian work is fundamentally a force for good in the world.
If I have a stance, I admit I am no expert on this matter, that in some ways is "reactionary" then please say where and why. Let's educate here and not just attack. I apologise to all members of the forum who may have been taken aback by my stance.
I assure you that any position I take has its basis on the humanitarian needs of the ordinary grassroots people! That is where I try to work from and increasingly in this world you just don't know who to believe or who to trust anymore.
Please accept my apologies for the my unintentionally and dare I say, well-meaning stance and tell me where I went wrong.
I am also man enough to admit my mistakes and the more I read of the occupation the more I begin to see that the presence of the US military is doing more harm than good and should come to an end. Nevertheless I will support genuine people's movements in the country but NOT the Taliban.
Quote
The Taliban remain as ultra-reactionary as ever. The forces which socialists can positively support in Afghanistan, such as the fragile women's movement in Kabul, are weak. We would solidarise with the people of the cities against conquest by the Taliban. But the US and NATO military forces should withdraw
http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2009/09/08/afghanistan-bad-worse
EDIT 15/01/10
I think it's telling that some who were so vociferously anti- my positions and launched the hue and cry so to speak are conspicuously absent here- what's the matter? Few constructive answers beyond sloganeering?
To me Afghanistan is a leftist nightmare. It's a case of damned if you do and damned if you don't.:(
I maintain that the occupation of one country by the forces of another is in principal wrong and only on rare occasions where perhaps a friendly power has been invited by the legal and principled government of a country to help could it perhaps be justified. I have never supported the occupation.
My whole problem, and this is from a leftist point of view is quite simply, What do we do now? Does Afghanistan get abandoned? What role should the international community have in helping the Afghani people? And what is the position on reactionary groups like the Taliban despite their resistance to the coalition?. What would happen if the coalition were to go home tomorrow and the Taliban take over? What would then be the position here? For many people here, it is our countries with governments we may have even voted for that sent the troops there in the first place, that are part of the occupation and so surely we also have a moral responsibility to try to put right what has been done wrong? Many people in our countries were against the war, I admit but at the same time it is our governments at home that make these decisions so I feel we have some collective responsibility here too.
I am sure many people can understand my dilemma.
I repeat I have never supported the occupation- but we have to work out a de-occupation strategy that is realistic. Slogans are great and all that... but what needs to be done in terms of facts.
What is the problem with the UN (in terms of humanitarian agencies)? I have always been led to believe that despite its problems the UN is at least some kind of brake on total capitalist domination. I have also been led to believe that the humanitarian work is fundamentally a force for good in the world.
If I have a stance, I admit I am no expert on this matter, that in some ways is "reactionary" then please say where and why. Let's educate here and not just attack. I apologise to all members of the forum who may have been taken aback by my stance.
I assure you that any position I take has its basis on the humanitarian needs of the ordinary grassroots people! That is where I try to work from and increasingly in this world you just don't know who to believe or who to trust anymore.
Please accept my apologies for the my unintentionally and dare I say, well-meaning stance and tell me where I went wrong.
I am also man enough to admit my mistakes and the more I read of the occupation the more I begin to see that the presence of the US military is doing more harm than good and should come to an end. Nevertheless I will support genuine people's movements in the country but NOT the Taliban.
Quote
The Taliban remain as ultra-reactionary as ever. The forces which socialists can positively support in Afghanistan, such as the fragile women's movement in Kabul, are weak. We would solidarise with the people of the cities against conquest by the Taliban. But the US and NATO military forces should withdraw
http://www.workersliberty.org/story/2009/09/08/afghanistan-bad-worse
EDIT 15/01/10
I think it's telling that some who were so vociferously anti- my positions and launched the hue and cry so to speak are conspicuously absent here- what's the matter? Few constructive answers beyond sloganeering?