the war in afghanistan

[danyboy27]

on many communist party websites i have seen that they completly oppose the war in afghanistan and we should pull out like right now.

when i am thinking about that, i dont get it. how great we will improve the life of those people by pulling out and letting the muslim extremist take the power back?

how moral it would be to lets the talibans rape afghanistan again?

i seriously dont get it, there must be another way than just leaving.

why no communist party or communist organizations advocated a better handling of that conflict instead?

why nobody ever suggested a different military doctrine to face the threat instead of leaving like cowards and condemning all those eople to a certain death?

from what i understand, most of the civilian casualities in afghanistan have been caused by the over-utilization of drones and fighter bomber, and the overconfidence in technology alone to faces the talebans.

the training of the afghan army should be handled by russian instructor instead of the us instructors in order to get them ready faster and facilitate training, russia did trained the afghan long time ago and the initials result where succesfull.

its just make me sick that nobody actually give a shit about those verry importants details.

[GPDP]

Because the idea of the US playing a positive, non-imperialist role in Afghanistan is laughable.

[danyboy27]

Because the idea of the US playing a positive, non-imperialist role in Afghanistan is laughable.

so there is no alternatives?

no third solutions?

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

when i am thinking about that, i dont get it. how great we will improve the life of those people by pulling out and letting the muslim extremist take the power back?

They won't. The idea is to cease imperialist interference, not try to "fix" countries that don't want to be "fixed".


how moral it would be to lets the talibans rape afghanistan again? In case you haven't noticed, the US quislings in Kabul aren't any better, just more obedient.


i seriously dont get it, there must be another way than just leaving.Yeah, they could carpet bomb the entire country, but that's generally considered beyond the pale.


why no communist party or communist organizations advocated a better handling of that conflict instead?Because, quite frankly, the US started it. They invaded Afghanistan on the flimsiest possible pretext, and have only themselves to blame for it. The quickest way the US could finish is an immediate pullout. Don't listen to right-wing bullcrap that says the EBIL TERRISTS will continue to attack the US - there's a reason for Islamic terrorism against the US and it's allies, it's not just comic book villainy.


why nobody ever suggested a different military doctrine to face the threat instead of leaving like cowards and condemning all those eople to a certain death?Certain death? Don't be absurd. Those whose lives were threatened to any significant degree under the Taliban (homosexuals, women, etc) are in just as much danger now. Except now, they've got the occasional firefight or airstrike to add to the risk.


from what i understand, most of the civilian casualities in afghanistan have been caused by the over-utilization of drones and fighter bomber, and the overconfidence in technology alone to faces the talebans.Which wouldn't be happening if the US wasn't occupying the damn place.

Also, between 600,000 and 2 million civilians died during the Soviet invasion. They didn't use drones.


the training of the afghan army should be handled by russian instructor instead of the us instructors in order to get them ready faster and facilitate training, russia did trained the afghan long time ago and the initials result where succesfull.If a remember correctly, the USSR left with it's tail between it's legs.


its just make me sick that nobody actually give a shit about those verry importants details.And it makes me sick that you should act as an apologist for US imperialism.

[danyboy27]

i am not an apoligist to american imperialism, i just try to look at the things has they are right now.

no i am not believing in the evil terrorist tehory, if the taleban come back, they wont attack the us, just kill their own people again.

i think noxxion, its a verry bizarre speech from someone who declare himself a communist who see the world has a band of people that should be united together to stop thing such has world hunger.

you can denies it, but actually, people can PLAY music in afghanistan and watch tv, use a freaking cellphone for god sake, and women are actually integrating the society, learning how to drive is now possible for them, they are going to school, school have been banned back then.

we have all right to criticize the us, and we should, and we should critizize the techniques employed, but quitting is just lame.

Iraq is different, and the iraqi invasion should have never happened, it was a terrible mistake.

so what your great plan to help the afghan people.
hoo i completly forgot, that not our problem right? imperialism bad, all that stuff.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

i am not an apoligist to american imperialism, i just try to look at the things has they are right now.

The "way things are now" are shit and your bleating that the US should not pull out would only ensure that things remain shit.


no i am not believing in the evil terrorist tehory, if the taleban come back, they wont attack the us, just kill their own people again.As tyrannical theocracies go, the Taleban are minor-league assholes. I'm pretty sure those goat-fucking medievalists- sorry, our esteemed trading partners in "Saudi" Arabia would jostle for the title of World's Biggest Bunch of Oppressive Assholes, although they'd have some stiff competition.


i think noxxion, its a verry bizarre speech from someone who declare himself a communist who see the world has a band of people that should be united together to stop thing such has world hunger.Here on Planet Earth, the world's population is divided up into many different nationalities and cultures. Expecting that to change with a single invasion of one little country, is fucking cuckoo batshit territory.


you can denies it, but actually, people can PLAY music in afghanistan and watch tv, use a freaking cellphone for god sake, and women are actually integrating the society, learning how to drive is now possible for them, they are going to school, school have been banned back then.I think you have Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia confused.


we have all right to criticize the us, and we should, and we should critizize the techniques employed, but quitting is just lame.The United States invaded Afghanistan and installed a quisling government! You goddamn idiot, would you have recommended the Wehrmacht not to "pull out" of France? Both France and Afghanistan were aggressively invaded, and both of them had/have resistance fighters.


Iraq is different, and the iraqi invasion should have never happened, it was a terrible mistake.It was not a "mistake" it was a calculated act on the part of the imperialist US administration.


so what your great plan to help the afghan people.
hoo i completly forgot, that not our problem right? imperialism bad, all that stuff.It isn't our problem. The Afghani people are not congenitally stupid and are fully capable of working things out for themselves, without a bunch of foreign assholes telling them what to do.

The simple fact of the matter is that you cannot drag entire countries and cultures kicking and screaming into the 21st century - they have to find their own way.

[danyboy27]

i dont think we can change the whole world by invading afghanistan, but i hope you where aware of the horribles conditions the taleban imposed on their own peoples.

i am well aware that saudi arabia is a shithole, and i am has well frustrated that we still doing buisness with them, and i am aware of the inegality those folks do to their peoples, but music is actually allowed in saudi arabia, just so you know.

i seriously think Iraq was a mistake, for god sake, even the us military thinker back then where thinking it was a mistake, but they where forced to obey to what cheney and bush asked. they seen Iraq with a twisted view of reality, and it ended like that.

then again it seem weird, that you just want to lets it go, lets it happen, really.

what your opinion on sudan btw.
should we lets them kill their own people forever? 300 000 innocent civilians killed so far by omar al bashir and its nice milita.

maybe you can accept that, but i will never ever accept such horribles things, no matter if the responsable is a communist, capitalist, or muslim fundamentalist.

i dont say the us should invade everyone and fuck up the whole world, but i think in certain times, military operations should happen, b y the us or someone else.

the rwandan genocide proved what happen when we sit down and watch, and if you think it acceptable, i dont.

[benhur]

I agree with Spetnaz on this. It's quite contradictory for us leftists to say socialism must be a global agenda, and yet do nothing about the world. Also, the idea that afghans or others will find their way into 21st century is bull. Until then, are we going to allow taliban to slaughter innocent people? Communism doesn't just happen, it has to be propagated amongst the people, especially in the third-world, where people are oppressed by theocratic governments.

[butterfly]

I'm with NoXion, the key word here is blowback.

[Dean]

on many communist party websites i have seen that they completly oppose the war in afghanistan and we should pull out like right now.

when i am thinking about that, i dont get it. how great we will improve the life of those people by pulling out and letting the muslim extremist take the power back?

how moral it would be to lets the talibans rape afghanistan again?

i seriously dont get it, there must be another way than just leaving.

why no communist party or communist organizations advocated a better handling of that conflict instead?

why nobody ever suggested a different military doctrine to face the threat instead of leaving like cowards and condemning all those eople to a certain death?

from what i understand, most of the civilian casualities in afghanistan have been caused by the over-utilization of drones and fighter bomber, and the overconfidence in technology alone to faces the talebans.

the training of the afghan army should be handled by russian instructor instead of the us instructors in order to get them ready faster and facilitate training, russia did trained the afghan long time ago and the initials result where succesfull.

its just make me sick that nobody actually give a shit about those verry importants details.

Before the recent conflict, there were less human rights abuses, less opium output (:(), and a more vibrant economy. Yes, the Taliban are a scummy, dangerous force whose only positive role has been against U.S. and Soviet imperialism. But U.S. imperialism drives their membership up, heightens their suppressive behavior and immobilizes all the positive organizations and state apparatuses which act to conflict the Taliban influence.

Furthermore, the violence against women almost always occurs in places where imperial control is heightened. Just like Al-Aqsa targets Israeli citizens who exist within a militant, oppressive military occupation. The violence is against the perceived systems and moral failings which characterize the cultural differences between the Afghan/Palestinian people and their respective oppressors.

This kind of violence must always be understood in regards to its conditions. Take away the U.S. exterminators, and you won't see the brutal repression the Taliban is known for - there wont be a significant conflict to justify that response.

[danyboy27]

Before the recent conflict, there were less human rights abuses, less opium output (:(), and a more vibrant economy. Yes, the Taliban are a scummy, dangerous force whose only positive role has been against U.S. and Soviet imperialism. But U.S. imperialism drives their membership up, heightens their suppressive behavior and immobilizes all the positive organizations and state apparatuses which act to conflict the Taliban influence.

humm..are you serious? cutting off people hand when they steal, and shooting women in footbal stadium does count for human right abuse right? Personally i realy dont have the exact number and stastistics on it, but i seen video of how was afhanistan before and after, and from what i saw, that was pretty ugly before.

you really think the talebans just gonna dissapear like that? they didnt even allow their own people to READ, reading man.

again, i am fucking amazed how you guy think the world gonna fix itself up.

maybe i am not enough rational, that possible, but i am thinking about all those people killed and raped in darfur, and i still hope something happen in order to stop it.

that fucker gonna get away with it, and nobody care.

[benhur]

This kind of violence must always be understood in regards to its conditions. Take away the U.S. exterminators, and you won't see the brutal repression the Taliban is known for - there wont be a significant conflict to justify that response.

Of course. Taliban society was paradise, prior to US intervention.:rolleyes:

Seriously, stoning and other barbaric practices were going on, EVEN BEFORE US invasion. So it's not like the taliban needs an excuse to be violent. They just are, and the people of Afghanistan deserve better.

[butterfly]

If memory serves correctly, it was daddy Bushes imperialist policies that generated the conditions required for Taliban society to thrive in the first place.

[TheCultofAbeLincoln]

If memory serves correctly, it was daddy Bushes imperialist policies that generated the conditions required for Taliban society to thrive in the first place.

I'd say it's more Reagan, but that's just me.

We funded (though not the more arab groups) them against the invading Soviets, so maybe we were doing Afghanistan a good thing by allowing them to resist?

NoXion, were we doing Afghanistan a favor by funding extremely reactionary military groups? And are the people of Afghanistan solely responsible for getting rid of that monster we helped create?

Personally, I think the whole strategy is flawed. Unfortunately, and completely due to Iraq, we are unable to launch the campaigns going up into the mountains in force to take care of the issue once and for all. I fear we may resort to simply airstrikes, and the areas may continue to fester and pose a threat to a more progressive world that doesn't want them, including most civilians of their country(the taliban, not al-Qaeda).

It'd be as though we sealed off the alps at the end of World War II and never went after whatever SS whackjobs were still fighting, save for often incorrect airstrikes based on often false intelligence. Whatever. You can always get the WWII analogies to work :lol:

[redSHARP]

a few facts:
1. taliban is in negotiations to disarm and to take part in a democratic society
2. taliban mderates have split with al queda
3. pakistan border region is unstable and is used as a terrorist base
4. the people have been taking an active role in dealing with taliban extremists, almost like the CNT/FAI during the spanish civil, and just like the civil war, they are not getting major support
5. afghanistan is an artificial country made by imperialism

just a few facts to keep in mind

[Wanted Man]

Well, it's not like the imperialists would "let" the Taliban do anything by leaving. In fact, they are already negotiating with the Taliban, because that may be the only way out for them. If you thought Iraq was bad, Afghanistan is really a bottomless well. The puppet government is a joke, Karzai is really more like the mayor of Kabul, not the president of his country.

I don't know about the rest of the country, but the Dutch occupation of Uruzgan, which was supposed to be a "build-up" mission, has turned into a bloody war that has killed thousands of Afghans, as well as 17 Dutch soldiers (those bourgeois parties that also favour a pull-out only mention the latter fact, because the victims of Dutch imperialism are apparently irrelevant... :rolleyes:).


I agree with Spetnaz on this. It's quite contradictory for us leftists to say socialism must be a global agenda, and yet do nothing about the world. Also, the idea that afghans or others will find their way into 21st century is bull. Until then, are we going to allow taliban to slaughter innocent people? Communism doesn't just happen, it has to be propagated amongst the people, especially in the third-world, where people are oppressed by theocratic governments.
LOL, because brutal imperialist oppression is really a favourable condition for revolution, right? :rolleyes:

[Dean]

Of course. Taliban society was paradise, prior to US intervention.:rolleyes:

Seriously, stoning and other barbaric practices were going on, EVEN BEFORE US invasion. So it's not like the taliban needs an excuse to be violent. They just are, and the people of Afghanistan deserve better.

As I pointed out, the Taliban are not innocent. But the wde-scale, brutal violence seen in the last 2 decades wont exist without a reason to. It is disgusting to say that a foreign occupation which systematically exterminates the local population is somehow better than the suppression seen by the Taliban alone.

[danyboy27]

a foreign occupation which systematically exterminates the local population is somehow better than the suppression seen by the Taliban alone.

i dont realy call the flawled airstrikes a systematic extermination, there is no wagon coming to the camp for gods sake.

the currents civilian death in afghanistan is the dirrect result of the use of bad tactics and overconfidence in technology.

i talked to several of my comrades who served in afghanistan and the last thing they want is to kill civilians, but frankly its not their fault, its all about the high command and his unability to take action in order to avoid such mistakes.

Seriously, i dont trust the so called moderate taleban, they did this kind of thing in the past with pakistan:hoo lets do a peace treaty! hoo we changed our mind, lets jihad! they doing it all the time! if they decide to disarm this is fine, but they just wont.

the talebans got a split with alquaeida beccause they owe them money! the taleban paid long time ago for logistical help from them and now they are trying to get away without paying their million worth intel and material to them.

[redguard2009]

If the US-led NATO forces were capable and willing to transform Afghanistan in a direction amicable to its people, then I'd be all for it. However, they are not; their efforts have gone no further than to replace the Taliban with a pro-west puppet government, dust off their hands, and then nosedive into Iraq. There is no hunt for Al Qaeda, no honest effort to rebuild Afghanistan, and nothing moderately progressive in their agenda. Unfortunately, continued occupation of Afghanistan will be just as disastrous in the long term (and probably short term) as a complete withdrawl.

[danyboy27]

If the US-led NATO forces were capable and willing to transform Afghanistan in a direction amicable to its people, then I'd be all for it. However, they are not; their efforts have gone no further than to replace the Taliban with a pro-west puppet government, dust off their hands, and then nosedive into Iraq. There is no hunt for Al Qaeda, no honest effort to rebuild Afghanistan, and nothing moderately progressive in their agenda. Unfortunately, continued occupation of Afghanistan will be just as disastrous in the long term (and probably short term) as a complete withdrawl.


i know all that, that why i said the way of things done should change.

btw, hamid carzai was democraticly elected...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghan_presidential_election,_2004

and there is plenty of other candidates that participated to the election.
is he a crony? probably, but for the afghan people he was the most known politician, they voted for him, he got elected.

you can call him an american puppet, but he often speak out about the civilian casualities and he his verry critical toward the united state on how they handle the crisis, but he also aware that his country gonna fall into anarchy if they leave while everything is unstable.

[Bud Struggle]

you can call him an american puppet, but he often speak out about the civilian casualities and he his verry critical toward the united state on how they handle the crisis, but he also aware that his country gonna fall into anarchy if they leave while everything is unstable.

That's pretty much the case. It's is indeed a mess and things shouldn't have been done and things that were done could have been done better--but we can't go back in the past--so all we can do is go for the best sityuation possible for the people of Afganistan.

And Carzai seems to be the best the Afgani's can hope for at this time. As Soet says he is making his point about American "Cowboy" military tactics that kill civilians and he seems to care about his country.

The best thing that could be done is to get the US out and not let the Taliban (because there would be oppression and blood baths, etc.) in. The thing is we should all work for the least amount of deaths as possible.

The country will ALWAYS be in the US sphere of influence (I know you Commies may not like that, but the US isn't going to give up the place up to the Taliban--and that's the only other option,)--but Afganistan should have a signifigant amount of freedom to persue it's own goals.

[hajduk]

does anyone read the book by Rupert Morgan "Rule No.1"?

[danyboy27]

does anyone read the book by Rupert Morgan "Rule No.1"?

i watch southpark verry often.
for what i seen from the review of the book, its a long southpark script.


you learn stuff from southpark too.

[Patchd]

I was talking to a member of the British Army after attending a public debate, and even he admits that Afghanistan is a mere stepping stone for Iran. We now see (although we've been seeing for a while now) hostility being turned towards Syria, as well as the Iranian theocracy. Although word from a soldier doesn't make things "correct", one can interpret the hostility and the current world situation with regards to Iran as a future decision to extend Imperialism there.

I don't know what could be done to help the residents if the troops are pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq, however what I believe that it isn't up to some foreign standing army to conduct some form of "peace mission", when we all know that the armies of bourgeois nations are the enemies to the very idea of peace. Perhaps a workers' volunteer group, or perhaps help the Afghan people to realise that they should counter the Taliban in some way, however the latter is very unlikely as I believe they know full well that they need to do so anyway.

Also you have to remember that, yes, women are supposedly allowed to go to school now, but they do so under threat of death, just this time instead of it being the Taliban executing some punishment, it will be because they were caught up in a firefight or a bombing, whether it was an US Army bullet, or a Taliban roadside bomb doesn't matter. There would be no roadside bombs if there was no war.

The war has changed nothing apart from the fact that the USA, Britain and any other interested power has another foothold in the Middle East, one shitty power being replaced by another shitty power.

[danyboy27]

I was talking to a member of the British Army after attending a public debate, and even he admits that Afghanistan is a mere stepping stone for Iran. We now see (although we've been seeing for a while now) hostility being turned towards Syria, as well as the Iranian theocracy. Although word from a soldier doesn't make things "correct", one can interpret the hostility and the current world situation with regards to Iran as a future decision to extend Imperialism there.

i dont seriously things gonna be exactly like that after january.
and beside, iraq is a way more good place to attack Iran, and they are leaving it.





I don't know what could be done to help the residents if the troops are pulled out of Afghanistan and Iraq, however what I believe that it isn't up to some foreign standing army to conduct some form of "peace mission", when we all know that the armies of bourgeois nations are the enemies to the very idea of peace.

what left from the survivor of the armenian genocide, the rwandan genocide and the holocaust might disagree with that.




Also you have to remember that, yes, women are supposedly allowed to go to school now, but they do so under threat of death, just this time instead of it being the Taliban executing some punishment, it will be because they were caught up in a firefight or a bombing, whether it was an US Army bullet, or a Taliban roadside bomb doesn't matter. There would be no roadside bombs if there was no war.

but now they have the choice, back then just mentionning it would have resulted in something like that
http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/pics/CameraBurqa/Execution.jpg




The war has changed nothing apart from the fact that the USA, Britain and any other interested power has another foothold in the Middle East, one shitty power being replaced by another shitty power.
and that people can play soccer again, that people are now allowed to go to universities, that cellphone and music are allowed, that political affiliation is now allowed, that the right of protest is allowed, that summary executions are now banished, that women can now drive, that the people have the right to vote, and so on and so on.

[Hiero]

The best thing that could be done is to get the US out and not let the Taliban (because there would be oppression and blood baths, etc.) in. The thing is we should all work for the least amount of deaths as possible.

Well as stated by another poster, there has been talks about negotiating with "moderate" elements of the Taliban. Basically they can't win against the Taliban so they need to split the Taliban into two. Then probally move against the border region in Pakistan.

It is a huge embarrassment to the imperialist. Even these so called moderates are going to want to implelement a religious rule. Which is already the case in large parts of Aghanistan. What Spestnaz21 is talking about is a fantasy, it only exist in Kabul. The social structures still exist throughout Afghanistan, the Taliban only enacted laws to enforce that social structure. There have been numerous reports about atrocities against women, homosexuals, whatever with or without the Taliban.

Basically western intervention into Afghanistan has been a disaster for the people of Aghnaistan. If we start with the first Afghan and US sponsered counter revolutionary war, the US first support various groups to overthrow a secular and gender balanced state. It then attempted to remove this groups and install a puppert government, promoting the idea of secularism and women's rights. Now it will negiotate and legitimise the more "moderate" elements of that same group is first funded and then tried to oust.

The idea that the US is a solution is fantasy, they are the root of the problem. It is a problem they can not fix, they either negiotate with the Taliban or they keep fighting an unwinable war, which will eventually turn against them as people will be less likely to cooperate and rat out the Taliban if civilians keep dying at the rate they are.

[Patchd]

i dont seriously things gonna be exactly like that after january.
and beside, iraq is a way more good place to attack Iran, and they are leaving it.
Who said? They have no intention in leaving Iraq, Obama isn't leaving Iraq btw. In addition to that, I very much doubt that the hostility shown towards Iran by Bush will totally disappear, although we can only predict at this point in time couldn't we?

But I'd like to point out this map, which shows that both Iraq and Afghanistan are strategic points for invasion.

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3037/2327740463_4b690cb3e8.jpg

Syria, although not connected territorially to Iran, would still be a key strategic point.


what left from the survivor of the armenian genocide, the rwandan genocide and the holocaust might disagree with that.
I think victims of the holocaust would also know that while the British and American generals knew that there were certainly concentration camps in existence, there was no attempt to destroy these camps or liberate them, until they "mysteriously" found these camps when invading occupied Europe.

In addition, on the Rwandan genocide, an article by the BBC; http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/714025.stm

I have even less knowledge in the Armenian genocide, however, correct me if I'm wrong, but no foreign power intervened.


but now they have the choice, back then just mentionning it would have resulted in something like that
http://www.geocities.com/martinkramerorg/pics/CameraBurqa/Execution.jpg
No, in many cases, and this is from talking to that soldier, as well as reading a few liberal bourgeois news sources, women are still socially restricted from having an education. These schools for girls that the media like to portray are still few, and only an extreme minority have access to these.

I could also bring out a picture to "back up" my point, pictures do nothing apart from add dramatic effect and in some cases mislead the reader.

I'm sure these children are thanking the Coalition for their war against terror;
http://www.rawa.org/s-child.jpg


and that people can play soccer again, that people are now allowed to go to universities, that cellphone and music are allowed, that political affiliation is now allowed, that the right of protest is allowed, that summary executions are now banished, that women can now drive, that the people have the right to vote, and so on and so on.
You have to realise that without actual liberation, that being the social, political and economic liberation of the people by themselves, despite people being "able" to do things, it doesn't make them acceptable.

For example, by law, I'm allowed to be gay, however, through past experiences, I've noticed that there is still a large part of modern Western society that would forbid me to be openly gay.

And do you know what the right to vote in Afghanistan means? You have the option of electing one puppet government over another. Bourgeois democracy is not true democracy.

[danyboy27]

it may only happening in khandaar or kabul, but its a start.
basicly the fact that attrocities continue is beccause their police are underpaid, the army is not ready yet and the coalition didnt put enough troops in the rural area to avoid the taleban to go to a town, impose their own rules, blow up women schools and play the mobster with the local authorities.

the us or the coalition actually have a great deal of responsability in what happening in afghanistan and what happened, its their responsability to do something so the shit wont hit the fan anymore.

what i initialy said was that i was amazed that no leftist group made pressure on their governement to change the way that war was done rather than asking to pull out.

people say here that it was better before, but how could you say that, since jornalists or other westerner where not allowed in afghanistan before the us came in, i reslly dont know where your stats come from.
My sister was in college 2 year ago and she had the pleasure to meet an afghan girl that had the opportunity to be sent in canada to study, all expense to the canadian governement. there was a women colonel in the afghan army until recently, but man that show how things changed.

the afghans are good peoples, i am not saying they are thrilled to see us here, but if we can bring them little help before we leave it would be perfect. I dont want us to stay here forever, but i dont want to see our guy leave while everything down here have to be done. There is some canadian engineer in afghhanistan building sewers networks and other governemental facilities, and they are not alone in that.

you guy see all the western countries has extremely evil, like if all they are doing is plotting some stuff in order to inflict more pain to humanity every fucking living day so they can be more powerful. Of course they have Agenda, but dont you think that having some calm down here would be a good thing for everybody?


we are priviliegied to leave here beccause we can influence our governements, we can change the way they are doing things with more efforts, for the good of the afghan people and for our goods.

how much soldier have you talked to? how much of them are pissed off of the civilian casualities, how much of them have actually a good idea on how resolve the problem but cant do shit beccause they are only grunt?

hoo of course, the soldiers are part of the bourgeois, they are worthless, we should not talk to them, they are scum and really dont know jack shit about the current situation in Afghanistan, they just passed 3 month in that country, so how could they really know what going on and what we could do to make this stuff better after all!

many soldier there surely know what could be done to change all that, but if we dont ask them, they will never tell us, and on that sense the left failed to understand that, and i am really sad about that.

ii am asking them Question, i talk to them , trying to understand what wrong down here, what could we do in order to be able to get out without causing more thrauma to the afghan population.
I seriously would like to have the opinion of several afghani on that, and i seriously think the afghan should vote about it, if they dont want us fine, but at the end that will be there decisions.

[danyboy27]

EDIT:
armenian genocide where stopped by the russian army, the tsar army. Bourgeois can save life sometimes, even without that has a goal.

i still condemn civilian casualities even if it come from the us, has i said a million time before, those death could have been avoided with the proper tactics and the proper hardware. its has i pointed out a million time, the overconfidence in airpower and technology that make thosr thing happen, not mentionning the deabatable tactics of the taleban of hidding in every house they could find when they hear a drone coming.

yea those death are wrong, we should do something to avoid them.

[Wanted Man]

If the US-led NATO forces were capable and willing to transform Afghanistan in a direction amicable to its people, then I'd be all for it. However, they are not; their efforts have gone no further than to replace the Taliban with a pro-west puppet government, dust off their hands, and then nosedive into Iraq. There is no hunt for Al Qaeda, no honest effort to rebuild Afghanistan, and nothing moderately progressive in their agenda. Unfortunately, continued occupation of Afghanistan will be just as disastrous in the long term (and probably short term) as a complete withdrawl.
This is basically a liberal position. It ignores the reality of imperialism, and it just deplores the occupation, while pretending that "things could be better" if only the imperialists had good intentions. What you propose is basically exactly what Barack Obama wants. Obama wants to slowly pull out of Iraq because it was a "mistake", and then send more troops to Afghanistan to "rebuild it", to "hunt Al Qaeda", etc.

[Patchd]

it may only happening in khandaar or kabul, but its a start.
basicly the fact that attrocities continue is beccause their police are underpaid, the army is not ready yet and the coalition didnt put enough troops in the rural area to avoid the taleban to go to a town, impose their own rules, blow up women schools and play the mobster with the local authorities.
Right, so we agree on one thing already, the Coalition are doing fuck all in Afghanistan right? Except for as you said, in Khandahar or Kabul, which is still doubtful to an extent. People still live in fear there, roadside bombings still occur, and social attitudes haven't completely changed.

Yet the coalition believe they have the authority to occupy some key towns and/or cities, and claim that they have authority over all of Afghanistan...and even have the cheek to declare an end to the war, when it is clearly still going on, and people are still being killed.


the us or the coalition actually have a great deal of responsability in what happening in afghanistan and what happened, its their responsability to do something so the shit wont hit the fan anymore.Why should it be the American bourgeoisie's responsibility, what connection had they to Afghanistan before, apart from supplying their current enemies with arms during the cold war? The ruling class hasn't changed, and as it is the ruling class that determines a government in power, the intentions of the US in Afghanistan isn't to help their people against the evil Taliban who they funded in the first place!


what i initialy said was that i was amazed that no leftist group made pressure on their governement to change the way that war was done rather than asking to pull out.Because thats the job of the liberals. We have more sense to realise that fuck all will be done if we ask the gov't nicely if they could please shoot less people.

Two million people came onto the streets of London in 2005 to march against the war in Iraq, British troops are still in Iraq.


people say here that it was better before, but how could you say that, since jornalists or other westerner where not allowed in afghanistan before the us came in, i reslly dont know where your stats come from.
My sister was in college 2 year ago and she had the pleasure to meet an afghan girl that had the opportunity to be sent in canada to study, all expense to the canadian governement. there was a women colonel in the afghan army until recently, but man that show how things changed.Well, I don't know who is saying that it was better before, it certainly wasn't, but it also certainly wasn't any worse either. They were both shit in my opinion, there has to be a different change, we shouldn't rely on the bourgeoisie to conduct "peace" missions, when they are the epitomy of destruction and war, nor should we sit back and ignore the then Afghan theocracy.

And brilliant, your sister met an Afghan ambassador who was lucky enough to be one of the very few, if not the only, Afghan girl to be sent into Canada to study...of course she's going to be all lubby dubby about the Coalition being there.


the afghans are good peoples, i am not saying they are thrilled to see us here, but if we can bring them little help before we leave it would be perfect. I dont want us to stay here forever, but i dont want to see our guy leave while everything down here have to be done. There is some canadian engineer in afghhanistan building sewers networks and other governemental facilities, and they are not alone in that.By "we", do you mean the working class or the state rulers that have currently placed occupational troops there?

Because in my opinion, "we" haven't done anything of the sort. The bourgeois government does not represent me.

Also, remember the need for propaganda, not only that but I'm sure most capitalists these days realise you can't merely occupy a territory and leave it to go to shits, otherwise the people will rebel against their "liberators". They have to create a mask which they can claim is a force for good, when in fact, its hiding their true intentions.


you guy see all the western countries has extremely evil, like if all they are doing is plotting some stuff in order to inflict more pain to humanity every fucking living day so they can be more powerful. Of course they have Agenda, but dont you think that having some calm down here would be a good thing for everybody? Well that is why we're Marxists or Anarchists, our very basis for analysis is that the capitalist class rarely ever does anything out of sympathy or kindness.

Why else is there such a great wealth disparity? Why else are the large amount of people in the world deprived of social care, health care, medicines, food, even water?


we are priviliegied to leave here beccause we can influence our governements, we can change the way they are doing things with more efforts, for the good of the afghan people and for our goods.Give me an example.


how much soldier have you talked to? how much of them are pissed off of the civilian casualities, how much of them have actually a good idea on how resolve the problem but cant do shit beccause they are only grunt?Exactly, so you agree with me that their stay in Afghanistan and Iraq are long overdue, as they, even if they want to do something about the current situation, can't do jack shit.


ii am asking them Question, i talk to them , trying to understand what wrong down here, what could we do in order to be able to get out without causing more thrauma to the afghan population.
I seriously would like to have the opinion of several afghani on that, and i seriously think the afghan should vote about it, if they dont want us fine, but at the end that will be there decisions.Thats not the point.

The point as Marxists, which I suppose you are, is to oppose our state oppressors, the tools of class oppression must have nothing to do with what we want.

Which is, also the security and wellbeing of the Afghan people, which the Coalition states are not securing.

EDIT: About your later point on the Armenian genocide...what did the Tsar, and Russia later, gain from that then? Armenian submission.

This was the case for a lot of Russia's history, in the 19th century mainly, especially with its conflicts against Turkey...supposedly "protecting the Christian peoples of Eastern Europe", when in fact it was to establish satellite states and territory which could house warm water ports.

[Hiero]

You keep forgoting the main point. The US has lost the war, they want to negotiate with elements of the Taliban.

Once more imperialism fails again.

[danyboy27]

i am not a marxist, but i see the governement has a a structure representing us, the people. I am not down for full blown communism yet, but i think that us the people derve more than we currently have right now.

when i talk the governement and i say we, i implies the troops, the canadian soldier who are dieng down here.

of course i want us to leave, but not before the afghan had a minimum of infrastructures.

the coalition the us continued to supply the mujadeen even after the russian pulled out, destroying in 3 year all what the russian have been building during that war. it may sound silly but the russian actually build modern afghanistan with its infrastructures, army hospital all that.

beccause of that, the us have a moral debt, or at least from my perspective its a debt, and they should stay here until they rebuilt what they helped to destroy.

you want exemple when the people actually win over the governement?
free healthcare in canada was achieved by legislator and an overwhelming support from the people, and beccause of that we have free healthcare.
Black people and women where allowed to vote in america and canada beccause they put pressure on their respectives governements, the vietam war was interrupted beccause of the overwhelming pressure the people put on the back pf the us governement.

Time changed, and the way we should put pressure on the governement changed, we should look foward alternatives to make our voices heards. wich one? fuck me, i dont know, but i do know there is an urgent need of looking foward new methods.

[Patchd]

i am not a marxist, but i see the governement has a a structure representing us, the people. I am not down for full blown communism yet, but i think that us the people derve more than we currently have right now.

when i talk the governement and i say we, i implies the troops, the canadian soldier who are dieng down here.
Yeh, we do deserve more than we have right now. Although I don't associate myself as a collective with any soldier of a volunteer army, the army has always been used as an oppressive tool, it always has been and always will be, and in turn, it is my class enemy.


the coalition the us continued to supply the mujadeen even after the russian pulled out, destroying in 3 year all what the russian have been building during that war. it may sound silly but the russian actually build modern afghanistan with its infrastructures, army hospital all that.

beccause of that, the us have a moral debt, or at least from my perspective its a debt, and they should stay here until they rebuilt what they helped to destroy.
But thats the thing, you can never rely on any Capitalist to depend on his/her "morality". They have none. The hypocrisy shown throughout history merely highlights this point.

In addition, they are clearly not in Afghanistan "for the sake of its people". They could have done so earlier, they could have ensured that the Taliban never got their weapons, in addition, I don't see the US or Britain in many other countries fighting a "war for peace", take Sudan for example, or other oppressive states such as some Central Asian ones, or perhaps even the Saudi state! Surely the US has a "moral debt" to pay to the victims of Saudi oppression too, seeing as they support and fund Saudi Arabia.


you want exemple when the people actually win over the governement?
free healthcare in canada was achieved by legislator and an overwhelming support from the people, and beccause of that we have free healthcare.
Black people and women where allowed to vote in america and canada beccause they put pressure on their respectives governements, the vietam war was interrupted beccause of the overwhelming pressure the people put on the back pf the us governement.
1) No, the bourgeoisie finally realises that shit's gonna hit the fan if they don't offer some sort of social security. The same goes for the NHS is Britain, we see it now being constantly eroded away with the "threat" of Communism apparently diminished.
They didn't do it, for our own good, they did it for theirs.

2) Yet what does the vote in Canada or any other Capitalist nation for that matter, actually imply? How important is it? How much difference is actually made?

3) Exactly, Vietnam, just shows us again eh. The government didn't end the war because the American people were sad about it, they ended it because the people got pissed off as fuck about it. The last thing a politician wants is a revolt on his/her doorstep.

In addition, what I don't think is being mentioned as much either, was the beginning of the hitting off of certain officers in Vietnam, whereby troops would remove, through force, officers who, say, were too keen on sending themselves into battle. They had pretty much the beginning of a revolt in their own armed forces, now thats a dangerous prospect to the ruling class, the idea that there are a bunch of pissed off people with guns, who are willing to do shit about it.


Time changed, and the way we should put pressure on the governement changed, we should look foward alternatives to make our voices heards. wich one? fuck me, i dont know, but i do know there is an urgent need of looking foward new methods.
Why is there an urgent need? But yes, times change, people don't usually though.

[hajduk]

i watch southpark verry often.
for what i seen from the review of the book, its a long southpark script.


you learn stuff from southpark too.so?

[danyboy27]

that exactly why i cant agree with the hardcore leftist, they always bring up the capitalist/bourgeois boggeyman all the time.

of course the rulling class is doing that for their own safety, and has long that we, the people can make them fear us, we have power over them, we can force them to do stuff they would usually hate to do.

no matter if a governement is communist or capitalist, i firmly believe that the people have to in a certain kind of way scare the shit out of it, otherwise one day or another he gonna become sloppy.

i am aware that there is differents layers of class in the society, but i dont really believe that everything the bourgeois or the rulling class are doing are only decided by money. Often they are just taking decision beccause they are lazy or narrow minded, disconnected of the people, you need to shake them really hard now and then to make them realize they fucked up.

[RGacky3]

Spetnaz, it does'nt matter if there is a third way, or a good solution to the war in Afganistan, you forget who's making the desicions out there, the government, and the governments motives are not a democracy, they want a safe subservient state.

The government will pull out once it has that secured, then and only then. If they pull out now I doubt the Taliban would make a comeback, a real power play, but thats not the point, you remember who armed the Taliban? The government would have no problem with the Taliban if they were obedient.

The government is NOT staying there because they have a moral debt, they've never done that, they had a moral obligation to intervene in liberia, did they do that? No, thats not their motivation.

The fact of the matter is, if your trying to justify an action of the government by some of the possitive side effects, then you can justify many things, the Roman empire made roads and utilities and such for its conquered nations, but it still violated them.

Its not up to the US to decide if a country is ready or not, or whatever, who annointed the US God of the world, I'll tell you who, the Dollar and the Gun :), same as every empire in history.

You have to understand the way government works and how they make desicions before you can talk about solutions.

[danyboy27]

Spetnaz, it does'nt matter if there is a third way, or a good solution to the war in Afganistan, you forget who's making the desicions out there, the government, and the governments motives are not a democracy, they want a safe subservient state.

The government will pull out once it has that secured, then and only then. If they pull out now I doubt the Taliban would make a comeback, a real power play, but thats not the point, you remember who armed the Taliban? The government would have no problem with the Taliban if they were obedient.

The government is NOT staying there because they have a moral debt, they've never done that, they had a moral obligation to intervene in liberia, did they do that? No, thats not their motivation.

The fact of the matter is, if your trying to justify an action of the government by some of the possitive side effects, then you can justify many things, the Roman empire made roads and utilities and such for its conquered nations, but it still violated them.

Its not up to the US to decide if a country is ready or not, or whatever, who annointed the US God of the world, I'll tell you who, the Dollar and the Gun :), same as every empire in history.

You have to understand the way government works and how they make desicions before you can talk about solutions.

i am aware of that, but i am also aware that in almost all countries lobby and pressure groups are pushing the state of all side to make stuff changed and approved.

why do you think the healthcare is still a private thing in the us? some guy pay and put pressure on the back of politicians, its up to us to do the same.
and Quite frankly we could change thing by ourselves, we just dont do it.

i mean gosh, even the military decisions in Iraq have been heavily influenced by pressures groups, people who got contacts and relatons.

Sindicates here in Quebec have enormous sum of money in their hands, milions of dollars, all coming from the workers, and those guy PAY peoples to make decisions changes in the local politics.

if a few thousand of peoples can have that much power, i dont see how millions of workers could not influence the governements decisions.

[RGacky3]

i am aware of that, but i am also aware that in almost all countries lobby and pressure groups are pushing the state of all side to make stuff changed and approved.


Thats true, and that does have an impact, but that impact is minimal compared to the investment motive, I think its fair to say that if there were NO lobby groups, the government would still work for big business.


why do you think the healthcare is still a private thing in the us? some guy pay and put pressure on the back of politicians, its up to us to do the same.
and Quite frankly we could change thing by ourselves, we just dont do it.

Thats one reasone, the other one is, theres a lot of money being made by pharmasutical companies, and a lot of money in circulation because of it.


i mean gosh, even the military decisions in Iraq have been heavily influenced by pressures groups, people who got contacts and relatons.

Yeah, but more so by business interests, the only reason the government listens to those groups is not because they'll help their campain, its because they control a large amount of cash, and can make a big differencein the well being of the country.


if a few thousand of peoples can have that much power, i dont see how millions of workers could not influence the governements decisions.

They can. Because the workers as a whole have the man power, only its a lot harder to organize thousands of workers than it is to organize a couple fat cats and bank accounts.

[danyboy27]

They can. Because the workers as a whole have the man power, only its a lot harder to organize thousands of workers than it is to organize a couple fat cats and bank accounts.

i was refering to union labor and syndicates.

those worker pay small wages per pay that goes in the syndicates, who accumulate this money so they can be used to do strikes AND pay individual to make things moving in their favors in the senate or the parlement.

i was pointing out that if we the people where doing the same thing the unions and syndicates, ammassing large sum of money in order to have social stuff moving in our favor in the governement, we would be more powerful than those fat cat, and i really mean it.

it would be laborious but possible to organize such things, if insurances company can charges peoples all over the world for a service, i dont see how those principles could not be applied to some sort of social movement pressure group working in a country.

in exchange of those little payments, workers would have a voice on how this money should be spent in order to make social causes advances, and they would also benefit of a wide array of services such has lawers, job finder, housing finder, and other services dirrectly benefiting to workers.
surplus will be used for lobbying and pressures groups.

Personally, i would be glad to pay for that, if the contributions are reasonables, i would do it.

[RGacky3]

those worker pay small wages per pay that goes in the syndicates, who accumulate this money so they can be used to do strikes AND pay individual to make things moving in their favors in the senate or the parlement.

They do that, one problem, unions generally have a lot less money than corporations, and also like I said, payments to things like election funds are not the main motivation of government.


i was pointing out that if we the people where doing the same thing the unions and syndicates, ammassing large sum of money in order to have social stuff moving in our favor in the governement, we would be more powerful than those fat cat, and i really mean it.

No we won't, the only way that would be the case, would be if we raised enough money to buy the industries and resources and have control, and if we could do that we would probably already be the fat cats.


i dont see how those principles could not be applied to some sort of social movement pressure group working in a country.


The problem is these principles, are simply them flexing their money, and control, which be definition we don't have :P.


in exchange of those little payments, workers would have a voice on how this money should be spent in order to make social causes advances, and they would also benefit of a wide array of services such has lawers, job finder, housing finder, and other services dirrectly benefiting to workers.
surplus will be used for lobbying and pressures groups.


Like I said, lobbying and pressure groups are NOT the main tool the Capitalist uses to wield control over the government, the main tool, is simply, their investments.