It is a pummeling of a little stone age country, because some bad men took control of it.
X, I don't think this is the case. I think we're pummeling that little stone age country to allow those assassins you favor to do their business more safely and effectively. That doesn't make the country any less pummeled, I'll grant you...
We talked a lot about Afghanistan on this thread long before September 11 and about how horrible the Taliban was for the people, particularly the women. I'm sure you recall the discussion. Brees kept telling us about how the treatment of women was meant to protect them and how much the women appreciated it. Yes, I thought you'd remember that.
I recall saying at the time that, sadly, we had no business going in there and doing something about it. Well, we have an excuse now. How convenient it would be if we could take out Osama and company and do a little nation building in the process.
We have no way of knowing what the Afghani people want. They're too weak and disorganized and probably ignorant of most of what's going on to tell us. After all they've been through, though, I'd bet they would be willing to risk a few civilian casualties in the bombing to be able to send their girls to school, for their women to get medical treatment, to have more freedom, and to save their children from starving. I think it would be pretty arrogant of us to intrude on their country out of the blue to accomplish those things. But if they're a byproduct of reducing international terrorism, I would consider that a big net gain.
Karen |
