Afghan resistance attacks UK political compound.

I've heard of them, but don't know much about them. If they are as peaceful as Sufis I don't have a problem with them. Where are they originally from? Pakistan?

 

No I won't do anything, except watch as random people out of no where appear to strike and then fade away like insurgents.

 

I think that democracy is strictly a Western concept meant for Western societies and their protectorates like Japan. There is only one way to deal with Islamic societies militarily. That would be the Mongol method.

 

The Mongol method?

 

The Siege of Baghdad, which occurred in 1258, was an invasion, siege and sacking of the city of Baghdad, the capital of the Abbasid Caliphate at the time and the modern-day capital of Iraq, by the Ilkhanate Mongol forces along with other allied troops under Hulagu Khan.

The invasion left Baghdad in a state of total destruction. A number of inhabitants ranging from 100,000 to 1,000,000 were massacred during the invasion of the city, and the city was sacked and burned. Even the libraries of Baghdad, including the House of Wisdom, were not safe from the attacks of the Ilkhanate forces who totally destroyed the libraries, and used the invaluable books to make a passage across Tigris River[citation needed]. As a result Baghdad remained depopulated and in ruins for several centuries, and the event is conventionally regarded as the end of the Islamic Golden Age.[4]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Baghdad_(1258)

 

How long did the Macedonians, the Mongols or the British occupation last? Knowing some history and going to the Afghan exhibition in the National Gallery are indeed useful.

 

The Greek Bactrian Kingdom lasted for several centuries.

The present day Hasaara are the descendants of the Mongols and still occupy parts of Afghanistan.

The British faded after several decades. Poor dental hygiene undermined the Brits.

 

I forgot to mention the Arab conquest of Afghanistan. The Arabs destroyed the preexisting Afghan Buddhist culture and set the stage for the Islamification of Afghanistan.

 

Did the Bactrian kingdom remain as a colonising power? Who cares what parts of Afghanistan remnants of Mongol tribes are alleged to occupy: did they control Afghanistan for any length of time? And as to British control of the Country, it was brief and ineffective, as we well know. There'll doubtless be a few American peasants left in a few backward villages there one day, and it will doubtless prove something to whoever is being beaten in Afghanistan then too.

 

The Greek elite had the same role in Bactria as the Norman elite had in the land of the Anglo-Saxons.

The Mongol conquest reverberates throughout history to this very day.

The British and the Welsh allies were defeated by their refusal to brush their teeth on a regular basis.

The next mass attack on America emanating from Afghanistan will see the push of a button, not occupation.

 

I don't think I've seen your illustration. And I suppose the Afgani people didn't "request" our presence, but AQ and the Taliban brought it upon them and we're now trying to do the best by the afgani people that we can.

Though I suppose some dictator taking over eventually is sort of a win as well so long as he keeps terrorists in check. Democracy is sort of a double win.

Compared to what? Have you seen some of the guys on the South American boards complaining about puppet dictators? And its not like the native Afgani warlords aren't nasty in and of themselves.

Well that one we've already cleared.

I don't know Sufis. These guys are origionally from India I believe. Might have gotten shifted into Pakistan with the whole splitting thing. Obviously I'm not an expert on their history.

 

Natural justice? I never mentioned that concept let alone excluded anyone. Where does natural justice fit in with Afghanistan and what you claimed?

 

Strange, looks like they've mostly lost at least in recent times being one of the least developed countries in endless conflicts.

 

Yes, it is. The deaths in Afghanistan have occurred because of US activities . Wheedling about proportions of blame is simply dividing up the invaded corpse.

 

The Pashtuns are vicariously liable for the activities of Al Qaeda in 2001 because they enabled those actions. What goes around comes around.

 

Sure. They must have shared their tents and sheep-dip.

 

That is probably the most absurd comment I've ever heard.

 

That is seriously messed up logic. First of all because you continue to act like we just randomly decided to invade Afganistan. But, yes, in the ensuing combat one could say something like "our choice not to let terrorist camps continue to operate against us freely and with the support of the Taliban resulted in deaths of civilians in Afganistan"

But once you're talking about bombing school and Mosques. Especially ones where people are just doing things the fundamentalists don't like, such as trying to teach girls, that's something else, and its just messed up. Deeply so.

 

Put me on ignore, and I'll do the same for you. Problem fixed.

 

Humanitarianism is an historically bogus motivating rationale underpinning Western intervention ...Wake up.

 

Humanitarianism wasn't in any way a rational for the "intervention" in Afganistan. Why do you keep brining that up?

Some of these schools are in Pakistan, and are not british or American in origin. You simply have a set of people who have a fundamentalist attitidue, and they are free to kill any who do not agree with them.

As far as I can tell you like these individuals because they also happen to not like the west.

 

Another person with historical amnesia.

 

I suppose it might have gotten mentioned if some politician was rattling off potential benifits or something.

But the reason was AQ.

 

The truth is we were given many justifications for the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan namely AQ, regime change and humanitarian reasons.

 

In that order, with the regime change because of their support for AQ. And that was more than enough. If somebody decided to add in humanitarian reasons, or drugs or something that whatever I suppose.

But the point in all this is that the reason we're there has to do with stopping those that would attack and terrorize us (and a bit of vengance). So after that it's a matter of what are the best things we can do for the afgani people left behind? I think democracy is the best thing we could do for them.

Which is an almost umprecidented question for a conqurer to ask in the first place, and I think the west deserves some credit for that in and of itself.