Criminals

Well we currently have a federal government that cooperates with regimes, the US among them, that torture people. Further, they seem to have little concern that people they turn over to these regimes are subject to torture. That clearly makes them complicit in heinous crimes. It would appear we have criminals in government. Small wonder they seem intent on continuing to participate in an imperial experiment in the Middle East. Morality is of far less concern to them than a demonstration of violent power merely for the sake of showing just how resolved they are to deal out death, horror and destruction to others.

They're treating him like Ezra Levant!

There's more than a little irony at the Tyee posting this story, expressing concern over freedom of the press, and opining that when an individual can be sanctioned by the state for "insulting" a religion, this is "a shocking confirmation of intolerance and a lack of respect for free speech".

Of course, the same thing is currently happening in Canada with Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn, but that's a story the Tyee has assiduously avoided commenting on...

I don't follow, Percy

Are you suggesting that Canadians execute journalists now? Your parellels are confusing me...

Cont.

There is no democracy in Afghanistan.

‘The report’s claim that Afghanistan&8217;s US-imposed regime is `democratic&8217; is absurd. CIA `asset&8217; Hamid Karzai was installed by Washington and is kept in power by US troops and a stream of cash payoffs to drug-dealing tribal chiefs. His rigged `election&8217; was supervised by US troops and bought with $100 bills.

Afghanistan&8217;s so-called `national army&8217; is made up of US-paid mercenaries. The `army&8217; does not need more training, as Manley claims. It needs loyalty to a legitimate national government &8211; which does not exist.

Half of Afghanistan&8217;s population, the Pashtun tribes (the source of the Taliban religious movement), has been largely excluded from political power. Until included, there will be no stability, never mind democracy. But Washington and Ottawa, have painted themselves into a corner by so demonizing Taliban and making enemies of the Pashtun (half of Afghanistan&8217;s population), that overt negotiations with the movement or its growing number of allies is impossible.’

This is Canada’s Vietnam and we should pull out now. There is no victory, no glory to be won here, only a money pit and death to follow. Perhaps the ugliest truth of all is that we might be the bad guys in this one, supporting corrupt regimes that strongarm to steal oil reserves against nationalist interests and keep a heroin poppy trade more lucrative than ever.

Percy, You missed this I guess

Actually we ran this article http://thetyee.ca/Views/2007/12/13/MarkSteyn/ about the very issue you claim we ignored. May I suggest using the search tool on The Tyee before leveling such a blast?

Yes I did, David, but...

Mea culpa, David, there is a December story on Mark Steyn. The general tone is that this is not such a big deal. After all, we're not like the Americans with their free speech obsessions, right? Slightly concerning, but definitely not a big deal. Or rather, to quote the author "let's leave the caterwauling to other people, take a deep breath, stay calm."

I did use the Tyee search engine to find stories on Ezra Levant...no hits! I looked through the Tyee back to the start of the year...no coverage! No Tyee article has appeared on Ezra Levant's plight.

Again I ask, why is freedom of the press a big deal in Afghanistan, and not in Canada?

Tyee search feature

I noticed the Tyee uses the site specific Google search tool... which is a very finiky search tool... you essentially need to match the exact spelling of the your search-term to the document-text-word you desire to search for before you get a match, it's one of the quirks with the site specific Google search tool... Google's "own internal search engine" with match close spellings... Tyee web admin. also needs to make sure they have a proper and regularly updated site-map in order for google to index all the content on all the pages.

That's a trifle invidious, don't you think Percy?

Comparing Ezra Levant's 'plight' with the situation for journalists in Afghanistan.

Surely you're joking.

Levant has run afoul of a provincial 'HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL' hearing instigated by a complainant.

There is simply NO comparison - and Levant's publication of the political caricatures in question was, in my opinion, a purposeful act designed specifically to create:
1) Offence, and
2) Publicity for his failing (now, failed) magazine.

G West: I am no fan of the

G West:

I am no fan of the Conservatives, but the Human Rights Commission action by Muslims, is part of their campaign to live under Islamic sharia, which imposes the death penalty for blasphemy on both Muslims and those of other faiths. Freedom of conscience does not exist in any Muslim majority country. After the demographic transfers resulting from the Partitian of India, Pakistan remained 20% Hindu, while India was 8% Muslim. Currently the Hindu population of Pakistan is less than 1%, while Muslims now form 14% of India (and there are over 10,000,000 illegal immigrants from Bangladesh in India. Why? Islamic sharia enforcement is an inherently oppressive and violent form of social regimentation.

I strongly support the fight against surrogate enforcement of blasphemy, on behalf of our Muslim minority. I strongly support the absolute right to ridicule the claims of ANY religious or atheist group. I have direct source proof from Saudi published copies of the Bukhari' Sahih Hadith, and al-Tabaris' history, which includes explicit references to the "prophet" Muhammad's marriage to the 6 year old daughter of abu-Bakr, the future Caliph (successor) of Muhammad. Should we care if Muslims condemn expressions of displeasure for the "prophet's" sexual habits? Should we accept all "prophet" claims of any cult, including that of Jim Jones and David Koresh?

The brain: Go to the UN

The brain:

Go to the UN website. Eradication efforts are effective in everywhere in Afghanistan, except Helmand District, which is Taliban country. Pashtos - Karzai is one - didn't fully participate in the last elections for the simple reason that the Pashtun Code holds that democracy seizes sovereignty from Allah, the Muslim deity. Even Pashto' Shura assemblies prohibit voting by women, and they allow major issues to be settled ONLY by the Ulama (Islamic scholars). And most Ulama curriculums require 6 years of intense study.

Frankly, those of us who photographed Brooklyn, NYC from the World Trade Centre, prior to the Taliban/al-Qaeda gift to disbelievers, would want these elements treated as we dealt with German National Socialists after World War 2. Before you defend people only because they are non-white, you should think of how they treat their own kind.

Fogotwillijngate

So, what's your point?

The ALBERTA Human Rights commission exists. Its primary function is to find ways for people from diverse cultural and religious backgrounds to live together.

Since it exists and is capable of hearing complaints against actions like Levant's I see nothing wrong with the fact that an identifiable group would use it to advance their own status as a group within Canadian culture.

I'm no fan of Sharia Law either...but I see absolutely no indices that anyone is forcing it upon either you or me. If you really think you want to undertake a reform of every cultural practice that doesn’t accord with Christian and Western norms you better find yourself another Pope Urban and begin another crusade – don’t be surprised though when you find it’s only you and little Rickie Hillyer riding off against the infidel.

Have you read Levant's late and unlamented - and frequently hate-filled 'journal'?

No one is questioning his right to free speech - the Muslim groups are complaining about 'their' treatment by Levant's actions.

Human Rights commissions are better utilized for countering discrimination and prejudice in the workplace but, if you're familiar with the Alberta legislation you'll see they have other purposes too.

Perhaps you should read up on the legislation and on Canada's own Constitution and hate laws too.

The fact you don't happen to appreciate Muslim values matters very little to anyone else. I don't much like a lot of Catholic and Lutheran attitudes either and the Mormon practice of shunning is abhorrent - but you won't catch me lighting my hair on fire over it.

People have a right to believe what they like - as long as they keep out of each other's face. Our facile program of democratization in Afghanistan is a waste of time, money and lives. It engenders false hope in a people who will, in the end, have to solve their own problems.

In my view.

Fogotwillingate

I'm not exactly defending them, Fogotwillingate. I find Pashtos or Pushtin religious teachings to be dangerous and disfunctional with its rigid stance to equality and valuations of life in general. I don't view these beliefs as anything beyond violent, oppressive cult behavior. Whether the doctrine is corrupt, who's to say. Its certainly practiced that way, as most complex religions are highly prone to violence in highly illiterate populations.

For what its worth, its one of the main points as to why our mission is failing! When missionaries went around the world converting "pagans" and "non-believers" to Catholithism (another dangerous cult in my opinion), missionary success was rampant in peaceful nations and dismal failures in violent nations or tribes. We'll have as much luck talking Islamists away from Mohamed as we will trying to talk Christians away from Christ. Try it, and its considered a "test" that merely strenghens further resolve.

We are again, talking about 14 million people in Afghanistan who have such disfunctional beliefs with one ethnic group that is where else, but southern Afghanistan and a further 28 million or so in NW Pakistan and these population estimates could be conservative.

All told, there are 42 million people to "deprogram" as it were and what of the other 14 million Afghanistans that aren't Pahstos/taliban? Its not like they have good leaders, good government or good moral high ground to preach from... so who would I back? No one. The longer we stay, the stronger the north will be from drug money and the bloodier the civil war will become when NATO is finally gone and I highly doubt that it will be any time soon as NATO really is there to secure imperial interests. The big question is how long NATO will stay and that depends on whether or not the U.S. will continue to make a play for oil reserves in the middle east and with the reality of peak oil, I dont see a pullout by americans any time soon.

All those eradication efforts you say are effective are only temporary. The North is stable only so long as NATO and/or U.S. stays put and when they leave, it will be the same old same o. North and South will be involved in a civil war of sorts or until leadership has changed in the North, either or, but the south will win in the end, human rights will continue the way it was before we showed up and the few good things to come out of the future is we won't be there losing Canadian lives, spending Canadian money on a money pit, and the Taliban will stop the flow of Heroin from the North as power is regained.

Cont.

Our only real option is to pull out, try to establish diplomacy with leaders who aren't politically, morally or religiously corrupt (and that might mean there's no chance of it because we as of yet have corrupt western leaders here never mind in F'ghan, but we can still try) and let them decide it amongst themselves, regardless of whether or not human rights violations will continue on or not, of which they most certainly will and why am I being so callous about it? Because we will have to leave at some point, be it now or a decade from now, were never there for the right reasons since our UN role changed to a NATO role and inevidably, Afghan's will have to decide it for themselves.

In the past and present, Canadians and NATO haven't changed much of anything for Afghanistan. In reality, things have gotten worse. The Heroin trade has become a cancer to neighboring nations and human rights hasn't improved. Its a failed mission and there are major indicators and reasons as to why.

The point I'm trying to make is simple. We have no military solution to Afghanistan, our reasons for being there are imperial or to back U.S. imperial driven goals especially since our role changed from UN to NATO in 2005 in spite of what Harper and his yes men say, our goals are not humane, we entered there as a UN mission built on a lie to go after Bin Ladin... and even if they were humane, we would have little if any success as nation builders or influencers of the general public as a whole unless we want to wage a media driven religious war based on ideology and since their beliefs easily incite violence, I simply don't see how it can be done.

A UN mission might stand a chance if it was to commit 50,000 troops for... say... 10 years?

Otherwise, there is no military solution, there is no religious solution, and there is no humanitarian solution other than to pull out, let them decide it amongst themselves and try diplomacy if things go bad and they likely will, but things will go bad when Nato pulls out regardless. We are talking about beliefs and an uneducated people accustomed to war and all the ugliness it harbors.

Cont.

We can't change a people overnight? Try, we can't change people at all! Its just like the so called Christian missionaries of old. The only people they converted were already sheep. The foreign shepards, as they say, didn't bother with good christian missionary burials of those found trespassing.

And if we want to get ugly and dirty about it, (which I think is ludicrous to even begin to entertain the thought but here goes) just do what the U.S. has always done, which is supply one or both sides with weapons and exploit weakness. This is, by the way, the classic CIA playbook and we've seen it being played out and were playing an ugly, naive/ignorant role to boot. Question is, what could one possibly gain other than imperial quests for oil and pipelines with our presence there? And there it is... an ugly truth.

We should bring half of the troops home, leave the rest to finish whatever PRT's they've committed to in the North, change the mission from here on in to peace, and plan for a full withdrawl in Feb of 2009. To stay is to see a Heroin trade continue to flourish, lose more soldiers and resources, and watch our international reputation continue to slide as we are internationally being percieved as fighting along side U.S. troops for imperial reasons and nothing more because that is quite frankly the truth of it and the truth itself reveals why we will fail there. If it was a UN led mission, it might be another story, but... its time to end our Vietnam and bring our brave soldiers home.

A classic Whitehouse.org poster

The "Hereeeeeee's freedom" poster...

http://www.whitehouse.org/initiatives/posters/freedom.asp

ME2 - you're not alone!

I've always held the view that the Afghans who have been part of our little failed program of democratization deserve a free pass to Canada and presumptive Canadian citizenship - if they want it. They'll be mostly women and children I'd say and we should bring them here before little Ricky ships the last Canuck soldier out of country...your allusion to France/Algeria is indeed apt.

But we'll have to do a better job of trying to integrate these people into Canadian society than France has done..

It's the least we can do in partial payment for a huge dose of false hope and unfulfilled promises.

You can ask Frank.

On another matter:

[MODERATOR NOTE: The Tyee can't host a conversation about the lawsuit at this time. Let me encourage you all to return to the topic of this thread: Afghanistan. Thanks.]

MODERATOR NOTE

Just to let everyone know, I deleted a couple of posts and a section of GWest's post, above, because The Tyee can't host a conversation about the lawsuit at this time. Let me encourage you all to return to the topic of this thread: Afghanistan. Thanks.]

So much for free speech

see ya.

Naw Gordon

So much for libel chill.

Maybe journos in Afghanistan aren't all that different from journos here.

'tip of the hat Geoff!

Burrrrrr....

It would seem there is a sudden chill in the thread. I suspect that is exactly what certain unnamed parties had in mind.

Here's hoping other media can and will pick up a story that the Tyee cannot.

As for Afghanistan, and particularly the Afghans who have been helping NATO and the UN. Any withdrawal should coincide with the granting of refugee status to as many of those who helped as possible to enable them avoid the all too certain reprisals they will be subject to. But a full withdrawal I believe seems to be the only tenable solution.

And free speech is back!

And what does history teach us about occupation of foreign soils and staying put?

We westerners didn't allow women to vote until the last century. Give it time. This world is being united by media and it is through media that the words of Islam in all of its good, bad and uglies will be challenged over time including other human rights and equality for all and in all other religions.

Keep in mind that all highly complex religions have a high tendacy to be violent. Christianity heavily comes to mind... Top down leadership easily twists truths until truths are built from the bottom up! Tis' why there is wisdom in the saying "in order to lead, one must follow and in order to follow, one must lead." (its so often the opposite of the way we think it is, especially when put to a timeline and watching it evolve/devolve before our eyes)

Women in Afghanistan... who do they snuggle up to at night? And what they teach their children? We sow what we reap and we reap what we sow. The blueprint... that code of honor that stands the test of time.. those easy to pronounce words of love, of truth, of honesty, of forgiveness, of faith... real easy until we try them. Our battles are no easier here in Canada to achieve morality than it is over there. Welcome to the human condition.

And who is better? Us? Them? I see 32 million people that have cut half of our forests, polluted our waters and air and earth... who are we to think we can solve the worlds problems when we can barely grasp the tragedy's of our own?

It begins with the acknowlegement of our own ugly truths. The greatest leaders are humble ones. It begins with humility. Our sheer admitance that we as Canadians and humans are limited in all respects including a standard that we set for ourselves and a model exemplar for those to follow and so far, I don't see much in the way of a model to be proud of. I see a sick pride that begins with our leaders who are quick to worship themselves at the horrific expense of others, ugly examples to follow... and until we get our own house in order and restore to grace the powers that be, we'll do more harm than good in places like Afghanistan and for humanity and all life in the universe as a whole. We are not yet fit to lead in nations like Afghanistan.

The mind is the builder. The thought is the seed itself. Just as the thought is the sin/truth, we sow what we reap and reap what we sow. Its long overdue the self examination of what it is that Canadians put on their own plates, before we decide what to feed others.

Just an observation...

Much, this country and Amerika is populated by folks who had to flee their own countries out of fear of reprisal for having chosen to serve foreign imperialism, British, French or now the US, who had invaded their home country as part of basically, an Empire building cause dressed up as "Democracy" or what similar crapolla have you. In their own lands, they were/are still much thought of as traitors, in fact. Certainly this was true in Vietnam (the boat people), and is doubtless destined to be no less true in Iraq and Afghanistan-, or what Middle East countries yet remain to be brought into this, as part of the US Empire war of conquest.

Based on past practise, we should expect to see lots more Middle Eastern looking faces showing up on our streets going forward.

And yes, we have the luxury, unlike the places they will be coming from, to see them as victims rather than traitors. (When really, most will likely be some mixture of both, in the greatest likelihood-, or folks simply running away from the postwar realities their countries are destined to be in, as this War for Empire goes forward. And I think we should certainly taken them in, even if their plights spring not from the most noble motivations. We deserve to. It's part of the price "Democracy", so-called, will have to pay for its failure in the end.)

Count on it.

What gives, Canis?

Canis Latrans writes :

And yes, we have the luxury, unlike the places they will be coming from, to see them as victims rather than traitors. (When really, most will likely be some mixture of both, in the greatest likelihood-, or folks simply running away from the postwar realities their countries are destined to be in,

You display a somewhat cynical attitude, CL. Just when does a freedom fighter become a "traitor"? And are they cowards to run from the "postwar realities"?

As I recall, those are the same attitudes the French use/have used to justify their shabby treatment of their Algerian "collaborators".

The above has been reported

The above has been reported on the CBC and CTV networks as well as the Star in Toronto but I've seen nothing in the local Sun or Province. Correct me if I'm wrong.

The ever more diversified press in Britain has been following this story for quite some time, and a recent Independent article from today follows:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/asia/afghan-government-official-says-that-student-will-not-be-executed-778686.html

Jack Layton, whose command of "the facts" around Afghanistan were referred to as "hippy speak" in your recent Terry Glavin article from January 23, called on the Harper government to lobby the Karzai administration to push for a reprieve.

By referring to Layton's "hippie speak" as unrealistic and short on facts I would suggest Glavin reappraise his own outlook.

Democracy in Afghanistan means the freedom to legally condemn someone who merely downloads a document from the internet which questions the role of women in Afghan society. If there had been no outcry from Western countries the Islamic court death sentence, subsequently approved by a duly elected Senate, would have been enforced - completely legal and within the rule of law.

Many of the ruling, appointed and elected elite were monsters of the nineties, with thousands of executions on record when they were in power the last time, and murderers can always display good manners when they are subsidised to be nice. They're nicer now because they like the cash flow from us - money which by the way somehow "gets lost" into the pockets of those with their hand out. Bribery and "gifts" are a way of life in Afghanistan and no amount of pressuring for human rights is ever going to create fundamental change unless we increase the cash flow - my tax dollars - and even that is no determinant.

Paddy Ashdown, a former Royal Marine who helped to defeat an insurgency in Borneo during the sixties, was selected as Britain's administrative envoy to Afghanistan. He's a tough, decent, no bullshit and a very active former leader of the Liberal Democrats. This was turned down by the Karzai government for a multitude of reasons, a couple being that 1) he said "we are losing" and 2) because the Brits are training former Taliban fighters as a local milita, part of a plan to win the more moderate elements into the fold. Karzai is furious over the latter.

A couple of years back I said to people we were not going to get out by the 2009 deadline, that both the Conservatives and Liberals would find a way to extend our mandate. Harper, being the master of his political game used Manley as a way to get the Libs to fall on their own sword. We are in for the long haul so prepare to spend your tax dollars for a hopeless cause instead of using revenue to address the problem of child poverty in this country ...

That's one human right issue we can really do something about Terry.

me2 querie...1

I certainly do not advocate the mistreatment of anyone, no less once they are taken in as our own, from whatever part of the world they come.

But there is a simple reality out there, that foreign imperialism, when it invades a country, that nation is typically left broken, even for a long time after the foreign invader is driven out. And one of the manifestations of that is, it frequently turns the victim peoples against each other, creating a strata of those who "collaborate" in one way or another with the imperialist power and its puppet regime, counterpoised to those who resist the invader, or at least do not co-operate with it, and/or join the national resistance.

The net result is, once the invading power is sooner or later driven from the land, and they invariably are, if one knows their history of imperialism, that "collaborating" strata of the population is forced to flee for its very life. (Revenge seeking after a bitter counter-imperialist struggle is not uncommon and to be expected.)

Enter my comments above. It is simple living and historical reality.

But fundamentally where you and I differ, it would seem, is that unlike yourself, I do not see those population strata who "collaborate", in one way or another, with Western Imperialism in the Middle East as "Freedom Fighters"-, nor will those who eventually drive them out. Again enter the "post any war reality" of which I speak above. (And this has nothing to do with what I think of the religious or political viewpoints of these victorious "anti-imperialism" forces-, in Afghanistan or anywhere. They are at least a native development of Afghanistan and/or the Middle East region (which we helped create against the Russians). The MAIN foreigner forces there are those of the US Empire, and such "servant" powers as assist them; a prime example of which is Canada.

Continued next post...

me2 querie...2

From previous post.

Following this latter invading power's defeat, it is up to the Afghanis, and indeed the entire peoples of the Middle East, to sort themselves out religiously and politically over time, and deal with those whom "they" view as "traitors" from their midst. (The US certainly does not tolerate those amongst them it views as traitors, and what is fair for the goose, is fair for the gander.)

We should, on a simple humanitarian basis, be at least some responsible for the social devastation we will inevitably leave behind, by at least taking in those as "served" us, even if it was to the betrayal of their own nation-, sprang it from cowardice, treachery, or pecuniary interest. (And yes, there will be simple "victim" souls amongst them.)

This is the simple outcome of what we do when we set about serving an Empire building power like the US, for whatever self-delusional reasons we justify it to ourselves. An illusory "Democracy" being the typical scam cause.

(This country, in my view, though I hope it can be changed in time, has a really rather pathetic "servant" history, helping to fight the foreign wars of Britain, and now the US Empire.(While the latter yet covets our resources, and particularly our norther lands.)

For Canis

My reference to "freedom fighters" was meant to be allusive rather than literal. I couldn't put it in quotes, because you hadn't used the term, so I tried italics - Clumsy? Yes, I admit to it.

But you made your points clearly enough the first time, Canis. Obviously, any collaboration with us decadent Westerners has to be traitorous.

And since the justice of the Taliban, being home-grown, is thus perfectly legitimate, there cannot be any "freedom fighters" in Afghanistan.

For ME2

We are then basically agreed after all. :-)

Certainly not serving in the US Empire cause we are serving there. Or in its puppet Karzai regime-, which would last about a minute and a half (like Israel) without the Empire's financial and military largess.

Indeed, this is the element from which will come our next wave of immigration, presumably; the Afghan boat people of this generation. :-D lol.

Regards.

Am I overlooking something here?

I can't believe such a position coming from you, Canis.

Are you really saying that women who resist the the return of the harshest interpretations of the Sharia Laws in Islam, as wielded by the Taliban, are "traitors"?

And concerning all those Afghanis who would welcome at least a beginning of Democratic process, are they too "traitors" who are only trying to suck up to the Anerican invader?

Do you really think these people are too stupid to recognise the risk they are running, not knowing it would be far safer to be outwardly anti-American?

Perhaps I should make it clear that I'm not referring to the likes of Karzai et al here, since these opportunists always land on their feet.

If that is your position, may I respectfully suggest that you wait a couple
of years, at which time you can be well-paid by the neocons for helping them propagandise their way out of fulfilling their obligations to these people.

Yes, you are overlooking somethin 1.

First, if this conflict was about concern about Sharia Law and the suffering women of Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, with its own Saudi Royal Family enforced version of Sharia would long ago have been the central object of this US Empire invasion. So let's stop the bullshite in full flight here, like about NATO concerns for "democrtacy" etc as well.

See, just for starters:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_rights_in_Saudi_Arabia

But, of course, even the Liberal Party, who got this country into this latest "Serving Amerika" pandering mess, know that this is, like Iraq, really all about oil.)

Read, for starters:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/oil.html

In particular, it was/is about the backing up the desire of the US corporation UNOCAL, to build an oil pipeline from the northern "'stan" countries, down the length of Afghanistan and across Pakistan to US tanker bottoms in the Arabian Sea, bound for the insatiable industrial maw of Amerika. Real concern for the women of Afghanistan, rather than manipulative propaganda concerns to put a noble face on this latest US imperialist adventure, has never been a serious part of this dirty, oily hands business-, which uses everyone and especially plays all elements of Afghani society one off against the other, including men against women. (Same as occurs in this country in many regards.)

And yes, as I said at the beginning of this, there will now be innocent victims of this invasion as well as serious traitors of various sorts, from an Afghan perspective-, who regrettably, as in the case of many Afghani women, fell for the bullshit US Empire line, will now be a part of its deadly end consequence. (And it doesn't matter what I think in the end, it is what those think who will be meting out their version of justice post the defeat of the Empire and its bootlicks. Then we will see the real "good" we have done for Afghani women, likely for many years now. And yes, many of those will be forced to flee, doing great harm now to their long term prospects for progress.And yes, we will and need be prepared to take them in. No question.)

Continued next post...

Yes, you are overlooking something 2

From previous post...

Better here though, the smokescreen of bullshite be dispelled, including that of both the Liberal Party and Conservatives, both who seek to serve the US Empire cause, and that Afghanistan like Iraq be left to resolve its own future and past histories. Women languish in incredible poverty and abuse on our Native Reserves, on our urban streets, and are murdered in not small numbers in this country too. It was not even that long ago when the West had its own version of Sharia Law under the Holy Roman Catholic church in Europe, its heretical pogroms and burning of "witches" etc.

Better the men and women of the Middle East be left in peace, with the opportunities for development that alone will provide them to resolve the issues of their societies.

Were we perfect ourselves, then we might pontificate more convincingly.

Time to end the hyperbole around these Middle East empire building conflicts, and end them now-, withdrawing all foreign occupiers back to their own homeland parts of the world. And better for example, that we prepare for and deal with our own real problems with the US Empire, securing equality, respect and equilibrium here.

For Canis

You're beating up on your own straw men Canis. If I'm expected to comprehend what you write, you should do the same for me. Neither I nor anyone else on these threads holds any brief for the Americans. Stop grandstanding.

I wrote

"And so I am in total agreement with the obvious consensus so well expressed above, that we should cut our losses and get the hell out of there".

Show some humanity and give those people the benefit of the doubt - unless you yourself feel qualified to personally select the genuine "patriots" from the fakers - and God forgive you if you do.