Is bush's war in Afghanistan more JUST than his war in Iraq?

[Philosoraptor]

Many seem to think so to this day. I've heard many try to justify it's justness by saying we went over there to destroy al qaeda, who supposedly attacked us.

The logic escapes me entirely, but I don't try to think of things in a logical way any more.

To me, they are both unnecessary and both illegal and both useless.

[tritsofme]

1. Probably misguided, and definitely mishandled

At the very least there was explicit authorization from the UNSC to conduct the war.

Something had to happen in Afghanistan, and a responsible president would have handled it much better.

[acmejack]

2. Worked wonders for the World's supply of Opiates.

Supply up, purity up, prices down. A very bad recipe, good for law and order crowd though isn't it? These people play a nice big picture game.

[sweetheart]

3. The petrol reality

The wars are not useless if you are an oil imperialist who demands at gunpoint the oil anywhere on earth.
It is no suprise that most countries and the vast majority of the world's oil is held in national(ist)
companies, ones in places where wars might be necessary to democratize the oil supplies. Democracy is
necessary all over the world to free up the oil, bush said it, and until every drop is free, its a
mission...

[OneBlueSky]

4. originally it was oil-driven . . . (as most Middle East strife is) . . .

massive deposits near the Caspian, secure pipelines to the sea through Afghanistan, etc. . .

whether any of this still makes sense (even the pretend kind) is certainly open to question . . .

[drduffy]

5. 'Just' assumes the invasion was for the reasons given...

It was not. It was for the pipeline. OBL has naught to do with it. If you still believe that government-concocted meme then you are probably among the 50-odd percent of Americans who still believe WMD were in Iraq. It is time to stop asking the silly questions.

[Hosnon]

27. That second to last sentence is a great way to insult independents. nt

[Solly Mack]

6. If terrorism is a criminal act - and I've always said it was

prior to either invasion - as I didn't support either invasion - nor was I {fill in the blank with descriptive term of choice} enough to get fooled by a Bush.....then "war" is not the solution to a criminal act.

Neither are just...the U.S. was wrong and remains wrong.

[FlavaKreemSnak]

7. You know, I used to think so but I don't any more

And now I know that the only reason I ever did think so is because I believed things that aren't really true, and I mostly believed them because I was too lazy to read about it or think about it and it was just easier to listen to like CNN or something and say oh, well, if the government and CNN are saying it then it must be true and that was it.

And then I started coming here and reading things, and also other places, and reading more things and I was like that fat guy who used to be on SNL who would hit his head and go "STUPID!" But it is not really funny because when I think about it, it is people doing the same thing that I was doing, and just not thinking about it because you always want to support your country and believe that what it does is to help you, but millions and millions of people including me doing that same exact thing of not thinking and reading up on stuff has gotten all these people killed. I am glad to be able to talk about this, but at the same time it is really hard for me to.

[Warren Stupidity]

8. No.

I initially supported what I thought was an attempt to capture the people responsible for the attacks on 9-11. Obviously the conquest and occupation of Afghanistan had little to do with capturing al qaeda and instead was the first in a series of conquests of muslim nations by our neo-imperialist idiots in the white house.

[bullimiami]

9. of course not. afghanistan was just an appetizer.

small potatos to be chewed and digested and used for whatever it had.

all that talk about removing the taliban, womens rights, opium, it was all just lip service, more lies to disguise the reality.

there was never any justice intended there, they just wanted to push out the uncooperative overseers and install their own. karzai, pipeline, 'friendly regime' available for exploitation.

[chelsea0011]

10. At this point, no. This "war' was never to install a government.

The Taliban were given a choice to give up bin Laden or face an invasion. They chose to not surrender up bin Laden and fight. Bush gave up before bin Laden was caught and somewhere this became a nation building war. That's the short answer. The long answer is that these neo-cons had long range plans for the Middle East all along and getting bin Laden wasn't a priority.

[NNN0LHI]

11. I never supported invading Afghanistan

My posts here before the invasion will back that up.

I felt like the Lone Ranger around here at the time.

It was like we just had to kill someone after 9/11.

So we did.

Don

[HongKonger]

12. Bush's Afghanistan?

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&pubid=968163964505&cid=1154339411209&col=968705899037&call_page=TS_News&call_pageid=968332188492&call_pagepath=News/News">NATO takes command in Afghanistan

The US has pretty much pulled out of Afghanistan and left the mess to it's euro-puppet NATO.

By the way, it's time for the EU to dump NATO and form their own military under command of Europeans with no American interference.

[enigma000]

20. Yeah, but the Europeans would have to pay for it

And military power costs money. Most Continental governments prefer social programs.

[HongKonger]

32. We have the technology

It would create jobs and add to the economy.

In the bigger picture.

Simple economics.

[aikoaiko]

13. I support the war in Afganistan.

The Taliban could have given up Osama, but they didn't. When given this chance to occupy, all the other "benefits" (= oil pipeline, install US friendly regime) weighed in too.

[NNN0LHI]

14. You think we are going to find this pretty soon?

[aikoaiko]

16. I'm not sure what your point is?

If you're asking do I think such a place exists, then my answer is no.

[HongKonger]

18. Ridiculous

So Where is OSAMA? If it was all worth it?



Oh Pakistan... the 'ally' of the US and where 90 percent of the population worship the guy. The real 'terrorist hellhole'. Karzai is calling it quits and Musharraf is hated - not to mention half his intelligence (ISI) community are also pro-Osama.

[aikoaiko]

19. How am I compared to Osama? Probably living a better life.

True, we have not caught Osama and several other key people. Better to try and fail than not try.

Again, I am not naive about our occupation of Afghanistan or Iraq. When given the chance, the Bushistas jumped at the chance to invade and install pro-US regimes (which is the majority of our mission now, I believe). But still, I want Osama captured or dead.

Is it really ridiculous to attempt to capture Osama?

[HongKonger]

30. Fail is correct.

Fail is correct. Your country is looking in the wrong place. The rest of the world knows that. Why don't you?

It's ridiculous to invade Iraq to capture Osama. The disconnect is so fucking clear.

End of story.

And you apparently support both invasions so I have nothing really more to say except... you are simply another American koolaid drinker who, despite posting thousands of times here, are awash in your own media's propaganda. You ought to travel sometime... get out there... meet some brown people in another land. They aren't all evil.

They just want what you want... peace, the right to live, give their kids a better world hopefully than they had...

The fact is, you gloat at grabbing resources from other countries' resources which is pathetic... somehow bundling it in with stomping on other nations like a scalp.

[aikoaiko]

38. Not even rabid republicans think we invaded iraq to get Osama

Im not sure where you get that.

You presume too much about me -- meet some brown people, travel. geeeesh. Sounds like you don't know many Americans -- at least not many Democrats. You should meet some. ;)

It sounds like you have a little anger at all Americans. This is fine. We've (our country, our government, and some of our people) has done some bad things and deserve it. The case for war in Iraq was trumped up and yes many of us bought into it (even most democrat senators and representatives). While it was clear that there was no connection between Iraq and the attacks on 9/11/06, many people thought that Iraq had WMD in some form. Personally, I had hoped that the war would be over quickly and the long-term, strangle-hold seige of Iraq would end and both countries could move on. But alas, this is not to be.

No gloating here.

[DemonFighterLives]

15. Here are the answers:

Not just, but I have to admit, I think I got caught up in the 90% that wanted to go after someone. Our* govt. pointed the finger at Afghanistan and nobody questioned them.
The alleged terrorist 16 of the 19 came from Saudi Arabia and not a thought was given to sniffing around there and the Bin Ladens were flown out of the US while no one else could fly.

Osama Bin Laden was flown out of Afghanistan under another military stand down to Pakistan.

Georgie gets the dope (poppies) and the pipeline and a supple leader.
I have since heard that their pipe (line) dream may not be needed. The oil that cheney and the boys were creaming over is not so abundant there as thought.

:dem:

[enigma000]

21. but what pipeline?

Is it in operation? Under construction? Is it even planned anymore?

[DemonFighterLives]

44. Maybe it was tin hat

but it was supposedly planned to cross Afghanistan to the Caspian Sea. I then heard that maybe they weren't going to build it and haven't heard any more.

[tomp]

28. we attacked Afghanistan BEFORE we investigated 9/11.

that should answer your question.

and we still haven't investigated 9/11.

[DemonFighterLives]

45. yeah, I know

:cry:

[Captain Hilts]

17. I also support the war in Afghanistan. Too bad it's screwed up. nt

[LSdemocrat]

22. If they had wiped out the Taliban, then it would have been a good war

The Taliban deserved to be taken out for their horrid human rights record alone. They were quite possibly one of the most oppresive regimes in history. But of course we didn't finish the job and now our little failed foray into Afghanistan will prolong the cycle of violence the country has been suffering through during the past 25 years.

[NNN0LHI]

25. Committing genocide would have been real good, huh?

Don't Taliban people have women and children like everyone else?

Wouldn't we have had to kill them all to accomplish what you say would have been a good war?

Or would just putting them all onto reservations have satisfied you?

Don

[LSdemocrat]

33. The Taliban is a military force, not an ethnic or religious group

[NNN0LHI]

35. And you think by killing every last one of them their kids will love us?

Maybe throw rose petals at our soldiers and dance a jig in the street because they are all so happy?

Don

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

23. A lot of Afghanis think it's not.

“When you're left wounded on Afganistan's plains
and the women come out to cut up what remains,
Just roll to your rifle and blow out your brains,
And go to your God like a soldier”

Rudyard Kipling

[jerry611]

24. The Taliban brought it on themselves

Their disrespect for Human Rights even had the entire United Nations against them. The UN refused to give them a seat in the General Assembly. Amnesty International called Afghanistan a "human rights catastrophe."

They had almost a month to turn over Bin Laden and shut his organization down. That is what the world was demanding. They refused. And even the arab world turned against them. Their closest ally, Pakistan, decided to become a US ally.

The Taliban was Osama Bin Laden's dream. He wants the entire world to be run by a one-world Islamic government that strictly enforces Sharia law. In this world, jews would be eliminated. And anyone who refused to convert to Islam would be killed. And Bin Laden is 100% convinced that Allah has put him on the planet to destroy the west, kill the infadels, and create this Islamic world.
The man has more than a few screws loose. And fortunately for us, his intelligence level is not much higher than Bush's. But he is insane, he has money, and he has followers. And that makes him dangerous.

[NNN0LHI]

26. Their human rights record was immaterial when they were terrorizing...

...the Soviet Union for the USA.

Funny how that works isn't it?

Don

[jerry611]

29. Taliban was not created until 1994

People that fought the Soviets for us eventually founded the Taliban. But the actual Taliban government did not exist during the cold war.

[NNN0LHI]

31. Same exact people with a different name you mean. Right?

http://www.csmonitor.com/2001/1010/p1s4-wosc.html

The reclusive ruler who runs the Taliban

<snip>Those who have met Omar, say he's tall (6 foot, 6 inches) bearded, reclusive, and a lover of war stories. A fierce commander, he was wounded four times in the jihad against the Soviets, leaving him with one eye.

[Sinti]

37. Technically this is wrong - the Taliban dudes were in school most - 98%

never fired a single shot against the Soviets, they were too busy studying Islam in Pakistan. It's al Qaeda that was formed out of the Mujahedeen. Mullah Omar may have, but the rest were students. In fact, "Taliban" the word basically means students.

[NNN0LHI]

39. Yea, they were in school all right as I remember

http://www.cbc.ca/news/background/afghanistan/schools.html

<snip>Math teachers use bullets as props to teach lessons in subtraction. This isn't their idea. During decades of war, the classroom has been the best place to indoctrinate young people with their duty to fight. Government-sponsored textbooks in Afghanistan are filled with violence. For years, war was the only lesson that counted.

The Mujahideen, Afghanistan's freedom fighters, used the classroom to prepare children to fight the Soviet empire. The Russians are long gone but the textbooks are not. The Mujahideen had wanted to prepare the next generation of Afghans to fight the enemy, so pupils learned the proper clips for a Kalashnikov rifle, the weight of bombs needed to flatten a house, and how to calculate the speed of bullets. Even the girls learn it.

But the Mujahideen had a lot of help to create this warrior culture in the school system from the United States, which paid for the Mujahideen propaganda in the textbooks. It was all part of American Cold War policy in the 1980s, helping the Mujahideen defeat the Soviet army on Afghan soil. snip

The University of Nebraska was front and center in that effort. The university did the publishing and had an Afghan study center and a director who was ready to help defeat the "Red Menace." snip

The Soviet Union occupied Afghanistan in 1979. Its fighting forces were well armed and ruthless. The Mujahideen fought the Soviets throughout the 1980s with a lot of covert aid from the U.S.

In 1986, under President Ronald Reagan, the U.S. put a rush order on its proxy war in Afghanistan. The CIA gave Mujahideen an overwhelming arsenal of guns and missiles. But a lesser-known fact is that the U.S. also gave the Mujahideen hundreds of millions of dollars in non-lethal aid; $43 million just for the school textbooks. The U.S. Agency for International Development, AID, coordinated its work with the CIA, which ran the weapons program.

"We were providing education behind the enemy lines," says Goutier. "We were providing military support against the enemy lines. So this was a kind of coordinated effort indeed.

[Sinti]

40. The psycho-religious Taliban were reciting the Koran in Pakistan

They learned their extremism in the madrases there. Those madrases are still in operation. This article talks about our support of the schools in Afghanistan - we paid the hate-filled textbooks the Taliban later gave to boys, too. At least they weren't communist :eyes:

[NNN0LHI]

41. All the Taliban were only schooled in Pakistan?

And then they ran back to Afghanistan with all those smarts they got?

I don't know about that?

Don

[Sinti]

42. They were schooled in Pakistan - not like college, this is a seminary.

They all went to the madrases there. The madrases basically teach hate, jihad, and a twisted version of Islam, Shia, Sunni, and Sufi will agree that it's twisted. Those "students" were exported, if you will, from Pakistan to Afghanistan. The Pakis financed them, gave them weapons and so on. They are not the "freedom fighters" we were so enthralled with when Reagan was in office. Those folks later became al Qaeda. This is the truth.

:shrug:

[NNN0LHI]

46. That is not the truth

I don't know of any madrassa in Pakistan that bin Laden the purported leader of al Qaeda or Mullah Omar the Taliban leader ever went to.

And this is exactly the same bin Laden and same Mullah Omar that Reagan was enthralled with when they were terrorizing the Soviet union for us. Same guys. I promise.

I don't think you dispute that?

I am not saying that some Taliban never attended some Pakistani madrassa. I am just saying doing so was never a prerequisite for joining the Taliban or al Qaeda.

I just think you are making too much of this. The Pakistani secret service was also the same conduit our CIA used to finance the same people and give them weapons to fight the Soviets.

Now that is the truth.

Don

[Sinti]

47. I think you misunderstand me.

Not bin Laden or al Qaeda- the Taliban. They are two very different things. Mullah Omar may have been a mujahedeen, and later the leader of the Taliban, I don't dispute that. But nearly all of the Talibani officials, regional leaders and such, came from Pakistani madrasses. They were not freedom fighters, they came after. The Pakistani government also financed and armed them, enabling them to take over in the power vacuum that ensued after the Soviets left. They wanted an ally on their border, rather than dozens of diverse warlords, and opium growing chieftains.


Edited to add:

I think this is important, because Pakistan is one of our premier allies in this GWOT. IMO, that policy turns reason on its head.

[Philosoraptor]

36. we gave the taliban 47 million right before nine eleven too

i wonder why?

[jerry611]

43. Clinton wanted to make a deal with the Taliban in 1996

He wanted an oil pipeline through there too. But because of the human rights problems and concerns voiced by women's rights groups, Clinton pulled out of the deal in the final stages. Oil companies were pissed off though...

[One_Life_To_Give]

34. If you believe that Al Qua eda attacked

the World Trade Center and the Pentagon on 9/11/2001
bombed the USS Cole
bombed the US Embassies in Tanzania and Kenya

then taking out their training camps in Afghanistan was far more just than Iraq 2. As evidenced by the disparity in the global support for attacks on Afganistan vs. attacks on Iraq.

[CJCRANE]

48. It seemed to make sense

but B*sh and Rumsfeld actually wanted to go straight for Saddam. They didn't have their echo chamber set up then so couldn't link Iraq to 9/11 straightaway. AFAIK it was cooler heads like Richard Clarke, Colin Powell and Tony Blair who persuaded * to after al-Qaeda first.

Even then they did it on the cheap using the Northen Alliance to sweep in from the north leaving al-Qaeda's southeastern strong-hold til last allowing its leaders to make a quick getaway.

[CJCRANE]

49. I supported

the invasion of Afghanistan at the time and cheered the destruction of the Taliban.

I now feel it was wrong. The Taliban were a primitive and oppressive but simply exterminating them as a solution doesn't make us much better than the Nazis.