Re: Afghanistan thoughts
Suggested response: Finding, arresting and putting Bin Ladin on trial (using ground forces if necessary). What not to do: Carpet bomb Afghanistan. Aside: When the IRA next bomb someone should the USA carpet bomb Ireland in retaliation? - Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 11:09 AM Subject: Re: Afghanistan thoughts Somehow I think that the our leaders right now do see beyond it. I've understood what bin Laden has been after for some time. (There is a lot of information on the Internet just do a search on his name). What would you suggest as a response to the murder of well the current count is 5000+ of innocent people for a political purpose. At 08:15 AM 9/15/2001 +0800, you wrote: Excellent Chris. I hope people read this and I hope they can see past their anger enough to understand it... Regards Nenad - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 7:35 AM Subject: Afghanistan thoughts I'm passing this along just as I received it... -- Forwarded message -- Folks, This came across on another mailing list I am on. Very interesting, plausible response to What did they hope to gain by this massive terrorist attack and a and bleak picture of Afghanistan today. *** Subject: A view from Afghanistan Dear Friends, The following was sent to me by my friend Tamim Ansary. Tamim is an Afghani-American writer. He is also one of the most brilliant people I know in this life. When he writes, I read. When he talks, I listen. Here is his take on Afghanistan and the whole mess we are in. -Gary T. Dear Gary and whoever else is on this email thread: I've been hearing a lot of talk about bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but we're at war, we have to accept colateral damage. What else can we do? Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we have the belly to do what must be done. And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here (the US) for 35 years I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters. But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think the people of Afghanistan think the Jews in the concentration camps. It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats nest of international thugs holed up in their country. Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban. We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already did all that. New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the Taliban eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
Actually my first reponse was too simplistic. What should be done is to invade Afghanistan, overthrow the Taliban, catch Bin Ladin, restore order, set up a new constitution (like the US did in Japan after WW2) and rebuilt the country to show them that the West is not their enemy and to sow the seeds of peace. Next the US should talk the Israelis into giving the Palestinians a homeland, overthrow Saddam Hussein and rebuild Iraq. It won't be easy - but there is no other way to ensure that the WTC bombing is the last of its kind. Rednecks would say: 'nuke the lot of them' - I have to agree that this would work - but is it a practical way or the way a civilised society deals with a problem? - Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 11:09 AM Subject: Re: Afghanistan thoughts Somehow I think that the our leaders right now do see beyond it. I've understood what bin Laden has been after for some time. (There is a lot of information on the Internet just do a search on his name). What would you suggest as a response to the murder of well the current count is 5000+ of innocent people for a political purpose. At 08:15 AM 9/15/2001 +0800, you wrote: Excellent Chris. I hope people read this and I hope they can see past their anger enough to understand it... Regards Nenad - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 7:35 AM Subject: Afghanistan thoughts I'm passing this along just as I received it... -- Forwarded message -- Folks, This came across on another mailing list I am on. Very interesting, plausible response to What did they hope to gain by this massive terrorist attack and a and bleak picture of Afghanistan today. *** Subject: A view from Afghanistan Dear Friends, The following was sent to me by my friend Tamim Ansary. Tamim is an Afghani-American writer. He is also one of the most brilliant people I know in this life. When he writes, I read. When he talks, I listen. Here is his take on Afghanistan and the whole mess we are in. -Gary T. Dear Gary and whoever else is on this email thread: I've been hearing a lot of talk about bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but we're at war, we have to accept colateral damage. What else can we do? Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we have the belly to do what must be done. And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here (the US) for 35 years I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters. But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think the people of Afghanistan think the Jews in the concentration camps. It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats nest of international thugs holed up in their country. Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban. We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
Nenad, You certainly have a way of putting something that is complex in a simple package that accomplishes little and is somewhat irrelevant. With current international laws, putting Bin Ladin on trial may not happen and if it did, removing only him will not put much of a dent into terrorism. Taking out the network is necessary. Carpet bombing is a knee-jerk reaction that I don't think will occur. It certainly accomplishes very little. IRA bombings would be handled as terrorist networks are slowly rooted out. The blindly carpet bombing anything is highly unlikely. It seems many of us are violently agreeing. Waging war on innocent bystanders is not going to get anything done. Surgical removal of the problem is what needs to occur. Harboring/hiding of terrorists is in fact, part of the problem and needs the same surgical techniques (Taliban leaders and followers only - not Afghanistan citizens, as an example). Bruce Dayton Sacramento, CA - Original Message - From: Nenad Djurdjevic [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, September 16, 2001 11:50 PM Subject: Re: Afghanistan thoughts Suggested response: Finding, arresting and putting Bin Ladin on trial (using ground forces if necessary). What not to do: Carpet bomb Afghanistan. Aside: When the IRA next bomb someone should the USA carpet bomb Ireland in retaliation? - Original Message - From: Peter Alling [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, September 17, 2001 11:09 AM Subject: Re: Afghanistan thoughts Somehow I think that the our leaders right now do see beyond it. I've understood what bin Laden has been after for some time. (There is a lot of information on the Internet just do a search on his name). What would you suggest as a response to the murder of well the current count is 5000+ of innocent people for a political purpose. At 08:15 AM 9/15/2001 +0800, you wrote: Excellent Chris. I hope people read this and I hope they can see past their anger enough to understand it... Regards Nenad - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 7:35 AM Subject: Afghanistan thoughts I'm passing this along just as I received it... -- Forwarded message -- Folks, This came across on another mailing list I am on. Very interesting, plausible response to What did they hope to gain by this massive terrorist attack and a and bleak picture of Afghanistan today. *** Subject: A view from Afghanistan Dear Friends, The following was sent to me by my friend Tamim Ansary. Tamim is an Afghani-American writer. He is also one of the most brilliant people I know in this life. When he writes, I read. When he talks, I listen. Here is his take on Afghanistan and the whole mess we are in. -Gary T. Dear Gary and whoever else is on this email thread: I've been hearing a lot of talk about bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but we're at war, we have to accept colateral damage. What else can we do? Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we have the belly to do what must be done. And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here (the US) for 35 years I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters. But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think the people of Afghanistan think the Jews in the concentration camps. It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats nest of international thugs holed up in their country. Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
Nenad Djurdjevic wrote: Suggested response: Finding, arresting and putting Bin Ladin on trial (using ground forces if necessary). What not to do: Carpet bomb Afghanistan. Aside: When the IRA next bomb someone should the USA carpet bomb Ireland in retaliation? Huh? I must have missed the news that Ireland was on the official list of States sponsoring terrorism. The analogy is absurd. Ernest _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
Somehow I think that the our leaders right now do see beyond it. I've understood what bin Laden has been after for some time. (There is a lot of information on the Internet just do a search on his name). What would you suggest as a response to the murder of well the current count is 5000+ of innocent people for a political purpose. At 08:15 AM 9/15/2001 +0800, you wrote: Excellent Chris. I hope people read this and I hope they can see past their anger enough to understand it... Regards Nenad - Original Message - From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Saturday, September 15, 2001 7:35 AM Subject: Afghanistan thoughts I'm passing this along just as I received it... -- Forwarded message -- Folks, This came across on another mailing list I am on. Very interesting, plausible response to What did they hope to gain by this massive terrorist attack and a and bleak picture of Afghanistan today. *** Subject: A view from Afghanistan Dear Friends, The following was sent to me by my friend Tamim Ansary. Tamim is an Afghani-American writer. He is also one of the most brilliant people I know in this life. When he writes, I read. When he talks, I listen. Here is his take on Afghanistan and the whole mess we are in. -Gary T. Dear Gary and whoever else is on this email thread: I've been hearing a lot of talk about bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this would mean killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this atrocity, but we're at war, we have to accept colateral damage. What else can we do? Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we have the belly to do what must be done. And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard because I am from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here (the US) for 35 years I've never lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone who will listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is no doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity in New York. I agree that something must be done about those monsters. But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even the government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant psychotics who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler. And when you think the people of Afghanistan think the Jews in the concentration camps. It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats nest of international thugs holed up in their country. Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the Taliban? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, suffering. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. There are millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these widows alive in mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms were all destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why the Afghan people have not overthrown the Taliban. We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age. Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it already. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their houses? Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already did all that. New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they at least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the Taliban eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and hide. Maybe the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common cause with the Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been raping all this time. So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak with true fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with ground troops. When people speak of having the belly to do what needs to be done they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as many as
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
On Fri, 14 Sep 2001, Bob Blakely wrote: I am sick and tired of folks claiming that we are considering bombing anyone back to the stone age. I frankly don't care who your smart expert is. I never asked you, personally, to care. It was a post of someone's opinion, and you're free to agree or disagree with it as you see fit. To clear up what might be a popular misconception, he's not *my* expert. I don't even know the author. He may be smart, but he's ignorant concerning the goals of war, of the US and of NATO. It appears you may be too. Possibly, but I've never claimed otherwise. Putting words in my mouth and insulting me for not being something I've never claimed to me is juvenile and below you, Bob. I have explained the mission of the US (military) in a previous post. Others have also. You were apparently listening only to those posts or sentiments that fit your naive impression of what war is. C'mon, Bob, don't make me lose respect for you. What the hell makes you think that I was listening to certain posts but not others? I'm not arguing for any side here. I posted a bloody article that I got from another discussion group because it was an interesting perspective on the situation. You mistakenly assume not only that I know the author, but also that I agree with everything he said. Can you show me where I said any of that? I don't mean to be insulting by using the word naive, but anyone who thinks the goal is to bomb anyone back to the stone age is naive and thinking as a child. Come on, Chris, your brighter than that! For the record, please learn to separate messages that I forward from other groups (This came across on another mailing list I am on) as something to think about from messages that I actually write and say I believe that It is possible that some people can post messages with which they don't necessarily agree. That being said, the author does say some very interesting things. If you don't agree, that's fine, but don't jump to conclusions about what I believe or do not believe. This is a sensitive time and I'm staying out of as many opinion pissing contests as I can, as they'll accomplish nothing right now on the PDML. chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Bob Blakely wrote: Your complaint is fair, and I'm the one who should read more closely. I was wrong, and caustic in the process and I'm sorry. S'ok. My reply could have nicer, too. Seems that a lot of us have been on edge lately, which is understandable. chris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
In a message dated 9/15/2001 8:52:18 AM US Eastern Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Sat, 15 Sep 2001, Bob Blakely wrote: Your complaint is fair, and I'm the one who should read more closely. I was wrong, and caustic in the process and I'm sorry. S'ok. My reply could have nicer, too. Seems that a lot of us have been on edge lately, which is understandable. chris Good to see this exchange. To add my Perspective(?) -- Too many of us have chosen to answer the situation by isolating acts of the past to prove a point, thus leading to purposeless bitter argument. Isolating historic events in an attempt to advance a theory accomplishes less than nothing. Perhaps we should look at our common interests and give respect to the differences. Personally I have been appalled at the naive judgement of those who seem to believe that only the USA received this attack. Disregarding whatever else the terrorist attack was, it was a attack on the world. To believe anything else is (in the opinion of this long-time student and teacher of history) naive to the point of incredulous. To search for the cause in a single dark closet is to remain in the dark forever. As for me, I am anguished, angry, and yes, fearful -- my location dictates that I personally am relatively safe on a personal basis. I fear those who would serve their own prejudices by excusing the attack because it was prompted by (__). Choose your incident, event, or policy. Regards and be well, Ed M. - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
I am sick and tired of folks claiming that we are considering bombing anyone back to the stone age. I frankly don't care who your smart expert is. He may be smart, but he's ignorant concerning the goals of war, of the US and of NATO. It appears you may be too. I have explained the mission of the US (military) in a previous post. Others have also. You were apparently listening only to those posts or sentiments that fit your naive impression of what war is. I don't mean to be insulting by using the word naive, but anyone who thinks the goal is to bomb anyone back to the stone age is naive and thinking as a child. Come on, Chris, your brighter than that! Regards, Bob.. From: Chris Brogden [EMAIL PROTECTED] I'm passing this along just as I received it... -- Forwarded message -- [Skipped - naive understanding of war] - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
Bob Blakely wrote: I am sick and tired of folks claiming that we are considering bombing anyone back to the stone age. I frankly don't care who your smart expert is. He may be smart, but he's ignorant concerning the goals of war, of the US and of NATO. It appears you may be too. I have explained the mission of the US (military) in a previous post. Others have also. You were apparently listening only to those posts or sentiments that fit your naive impression of what war is. I don't mean to be insulting by using the word naive, but anyone who thinks the goal is to bomb anyone back to the stone age is naive and thinking as a child. I think you should go back and carefully read what the writer said. You are taking violent exception to things he never suggested. He was not discussing the goals of war. He was responding to very specific comments made on radio, among other places -- comments similar to some I also have seen, both here and in other forums, suggestions that we go in and bomb or destroy Afghanistan and not worry about collateral casualties. He has given a thoughtful answer to why that is not sensible. What is your problem with that? Bob Harris - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
Re: Afghanistan thoughts
No problem with your take on it at all. Error one: The conquest of Pakistan is unnecessary as they have decided to side with us. Error 2: As to will Muslim nations just stand by, Saudi Arabia ( They hate Bin Laden and have no love for the Taliban) has sided with us. Turkey and Egypt also. Error 3: As to large armies, NATO consists of Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom and the United States. Russia has also sided with us, offered troops and they know the territory. All totaled, these countries comprise more than 1/5th of the world's population - primarily the industrialized 1/5th. Don't think for one minute that Bin Laden and his cells can't be found, the Taliban destroyed and Afghanistan feed and rebuilt. Hell, maybe they'll eventually become the Japan or Germany of the Middle East - if they want. It'll be up to them. Did you ever see an old movie called The Mouse that Roared? As a bonus, the economies if the West will also eventually roar. They always have. On the other hand, if you decide you are defeated before you even start, your decision is correct. Regards, Bob... From: Robert Harris [EMAIL PROTECTED] Bob Blakely wrote: I am sick and tired of folks claiming that we are considering bombing anyone back to the stone age. I frankly don't care who your smart expert is. He may be smart, but he's ignorant concerning the goals of war, of the US and of NATO. It appears you may be too. I have explained the mission of the US (military) in a previous post. Others have also. You were apparently listening only to those posts or sentiments that fit your naive impression of what war is. I don't mean to be insulting by using the word naive, but anyone who thinks the goal is to bomb anyone back to the stone age is naive and thinking as a child. I think you should go back and carefully read what the writer said. You are taking violent exception to things he never suggested. He was not discussing the goals of war. He was responding to very specific comments made on radio, among other places -- comments similar to some I also have seen, both here and in other forums, suggestions that we go in and bomb or destroy Afghanistan and not worry about collateral casualties. He has given a thoughtful answer to why that is not sensible. What is your problem with that? - This message is from the Pentax-Discuss Mail List. To unsubscribe, go to http://www.pdml.net and follow the directions. Don't forget to visit the Pentax Users' Gallery at http://pug.komkon.org .
