Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: maceng2 who wrote (11227)	11/23/2001 1:36:12 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Since the Taleban, which was the toughest military crowd on the ground in Afghanistan, didn't have a lot of trouble subduing nearly all of Afghanistan, and that force was reduced to tatters in fairly short order, I don't think that any force in Afghanistan which is not supported by outside countries would be in a position to create trouble for a multinational occupation force with a shoot-the-bastards policy, [not a sissy UN peacekeeping force which gets tied up to stakes], if any unauthorized people start wielding arms around the place. The Northern Alliance wouldn't want to be too greedy. They might find that they are next on the list after the Taleban if they aren't co-operative in creating civilisation. We don't want a half-done job. It will also be instructive for other war lords around the planet to see the outcome in Afghanistan of a determined international effort. For example, sorting out Palestine would be a good thing too. Japan seemed to do okay under USA [and New Zealand and other allies] occupation after WWII. The USA occupation forces are still there today. That's in a country of 120 million, which is an order of magnitude bigger than Afghanistan. A heavy-handed international cop is exactly what is needed. Write up a constitution and the Afghan population would love it. There would be US$ flooding in for an oil pipeline construction. Business would come back to life. CDMA networks would bloom. Poverty isn't a popular way of life. A spot of international Colinisation is just what Afghanistan needs. Colin Powell and Condominium Rice have an opportunity to really set the world to rights. Condoleezza knows a bit about Russia. I'm sure it is better than calling it a day and returning to the USA and hoping things don't go bad again. If nothing is different, why should something different happen? There are no internal affairs in Afghanistan now because there is no nation to meddle in. It is a lawless place where people are fighting to be Alpha Male Top Monkey. It's open slather. Sure, the Northern Alliance kleptocracy will be keen to take over a lot of it [and maybe get their greedy paws on the oil from the north]. Already it sounds like a Saddam Hussein in the offing. In fact, that murderous Uzbek general has more than a passing resemblance to a young Saddam Hussein. Oil tolls would fund an international force and development of democratic self-government in Afghanistan. There would not be a need for a major external presence once things are running hunky-dory. I suspect George W wouldn't be in favour of cheaper oil because his oil buddies won't want oil prices going too low [very terrible for high-priced North American and British production]. It would create instability in Saudi Arabia too [perhaps]. I think that's a reason why Iraq is likely to get it in the neck, though Gwynne Dyer [whose opinions I usually admire] thinks higher prices are exactly why George W will NOT attack Iraq - the worry about a major USA recession being greater than worry about cheap oil prices, which are desirable to forestall said recession. A pipeline through Afghanistan would be another desirable supply point outside the Persian Gulf which would improve supply security. Then, Palestine! Mqurice