TIME - What Happens if We Leave Afghanistan

Atasas

Active member
1101100809_400.jpg

Not sure weather worth saying much...

But Hell, lets read!:firedevi:
http://www.bagnewsnotes.com/2010/07/your-turn-what-happens-if-we-leave-afghanistan/
What’s going on (or, going wrong) with this traumatic cover?

I’ve got some questions to kick things off (…then I’m heading down to the discussion thread to see where you’re going with this.)

1. With her thick black hair, which looks richer for the reflective light; her high cheekbones; her full lips; her receptive, more than piercing or demanding gaze; her silvery, sequin-like dress with the exotic and stylish Oriental pattern and the not overly-modest neckline; with the light reflecting off her left cheekbone and also reflecting off the shawl — not a hijab by the way, but worn just off her head to suggest one — I’m wondering (with your eye being more distracted by the eyes, and by the light reflecting off the hair, the cheek and the rich purple shawl) if you even attend all that much to the nose?

2. How much is this photo actually playing off the romanticized, and quite famous photo of Steve McCurry’s “Afghan Girl“ — only minus the covered head, the fierce expression and the torn clothing. (In comparison, by the way, does Aisha look more like a model whose nose has been photoshopped away?)

3. Any surprise this “tug at your heart” cover comes out just days after Wikileak brings the failure of the Afghan campaign into the light — and just as the campaign against Wikileak and Julian Assange gets going in the MSM? …By the way, anyone want to ask TIME how long they had this story set-and-ready-to-go?

4. What happens if we leave??? Didn’t this girl meet this fate after we’d been there nine years?

5. If you happened to read Nicholas Kristof’s fantastic NYT Op-Ed today, he argues that we could and should end our military involvement immediately, but then stay and invest a small fraction of what we were spending on soldiers and bombs to fundamentally transform Afghanistan by building hundreds of schools. Isn’t this title, on the other hand, applying emotional blackmail and exploiting gender politics to pitch for the status quo — a continued U.S. military involvement?
 
Nothing new, but I think this type of stories needs to be told for those who really haven´t gotten what we are doing in the Stan.

Some people still wont get it, that´s a damn shame but they have the right to be fu*king stupid.

BTW, here is the original article:

Our cover image this week is powerful, shocking and disturbing. It is a portrait of Aisha, a shy 18-year-old Afghan woman who was sentenced by a Taliban commander to have her nose and ears cut off for fleeing her abusive in-laws. Aisha posed for the picture and says she wants the world to see the effect a Taliban resurgence would have on the women of Afghanistan, many of whom have flourished in the past few years. Her picture is accompanied by a powerful story by our own Aryn Baker on how Afghan women have embraced the freedoms that have come from the defeat of the Taliban — and how they fear a Taliban revival. (See pictures of Afghan women and the return of the Taliban.)
I thought long and hard about whether to put this image on the cover of TIME. First, I wanted to make sure of Aisha's safety and that she understood what it would mean to be on the cover. She knows that she will become a symbol of the price Afghan women have had to pay for the repressive ideology of the Taliban. We also confirmed that she is in a secret location protected by armed guards and sponsored by the NGO Women for Afghan Women. Aisha will head to the U.S. for reconstructive surgery sponsored by the Grossman Burn Foundation, a humanitarian organization in California. We are supporting that effort. (Watch TIME's video on photographing Aisha for the cover.)
I'm acutely aware that this image will be seen by children, who will undoubtedly find it distressing. We have consulted with a number of child psychologists about its potential impact. Some think children are so used to seeing violence in the media that the image will have little effect, but others believe that children will find it very scary and distressing — that they will see it, as Dr. Michael Rich, director of the Center on Media and Child Health at Children's Hospital Boston, said, as "a symbol of bad things that can happen to people." I showed it to my two young sons, 9 and 12, who both immediately felt sorry for Aisha and asked why anyone would have done such harm to her. I apologize to readers who find the image too strong, and I invite you to comment on the image's impact. (Comment on this cover.)
But bad things do happen to people, and it is part of our job to confront and explain them. In the end, I felt that the image is a window into the reality of what is happening — and what can happen — in a war that affects and involves all of us. I would rather confront readers with the Taliban's treatment of women than ignore it. I would rather people know that reality as they make up their minds about what the U.S. and its allies should do in Afghanistan. (See the cover story "Afghan Women and the Return of the Taliban.")
The much publicized release of classified documents by WikiLeaks has already ratcheted up the debate about the war. Our story and the haunting cover image by the distinguished South African photographer Jodi Bieber are meant to contribute to that debate. We do not run this story or show this image either in support of the U.S. war effort or in opposition to it. We do it to illuminate what is actually happening on the ground. As lawmakers and citizens begin to sort through the information about the war and make up their minds, our job is to provide context and perspective on one of the most difficult foreign policy issues of our time. What you see in these pictures and our story is something that you cannot find in those 91,000 documents: a combination of emotional truth and insight into the way life is lived in that difficult land and the consequences of the important decisions that lie ahead.





//KJ.
 
Last edited:
Not that disagree, but atrocities like such where are and will be present in A-stan, only if ordinary people would get new, more humane values to accept as a norm...
 
Not that disagree, but atrocities like such where are and will be present in A-stan, only if ordinary people would get new, more humane values to accept as a norm...


NATO leaving Astan will create a power vacuum. Guess who's waiting to fill that. The Khazari administration won't last a hot minute before it's toasted from within or without. Guess who's waiting in the wings? They know how to control a largely uneducated population, they've done it before. Factor in tribal differences and Astan returns to the 7th Century douchebaggery of the Taliban, in about half a heart beat.
 
NATO leaving Astan will create a power vacuum. Guess who's waiting to fill that. The Khazari administration won't last a hot minute before it's toasted from within or without. Guess who's waiting in the wings? They know how to control a largely uneducated population, they've done it before. Factor in tribal differences and Astan returns to the 7th Century douchebaggery of the Taliban, in about half a heart beat.
Tough one!
Staying in, doesn't get appreciated, because of "foreign ISAF"; influence from TaliFu$ks is accepted as there is too big of a gap between present there and world today + religion gets promoted/ covered by. On a top of locals distancing themselves from current NATO supported "troops", central government is as corrupt as it can be (alien structure to tribal country anyway), neighboring countries don't really want A-stan to succeed and yes- as soon as ISAF patrol leaves village Talibs are straight back, if to leave country all together- as you say- minute or two and all was for nothing. the way out, I believe to get as many locals in to the combined control groups and keep smaller, but localized units in every gorge and village until arms supply is dried out/disputes would become managable by local police(in towns) and tribal elders(in villages) perhaps... :sarc:
Back to the article: to us fact of a young mutulated girl, to them a sinister wife; to us inhuman treatment, to them rightful punishment for grave sins and it with mercy- she's still alive. I have already accepted the fact, that our morals and believes are hard to implement on ever so different nation (nations- much more accurately) and ordinary people out of poverty and despair is turning in to religion more than society, where weirdos interpenetrates in to something like Talib rules.
 
It may well be that we are not in Afghanistan to develop a European or an American democracy. But we are there to develop a democracy as an effective bulwark against terrorism.

But must you accept partial female oppression and partial free speech freedoms? Or should we demand that democracy means literally, so that when we one day leave Afghanistan, we leave a thriving community that has developed democratic freedoms modes that makes the idea of the extreme part of the Taliban return to power unimaginable? At one point the NATO troops in Afghanistan, of course, most come home. But we are not yet there. Despite Karzai´s shortcomings and electoral fraud, he is the best card and we will have to live with him. There is hardly an alternative. Progress has been dearly bought. Therefore, it is also bitter that a democratic process has not functioned optimally. But far worse is the fact that some politicians and some in the military lose courage and support for the many who are fighting for reconstruction in Afghanistan. The alternative is not there. If we pull out now, the Taliban will be back at full strength. We must focus on the small but decisive steps forward. You must have been a great optimist to have believed that Afghanistan by now would be a perfect society. Therefore, it is disappointing that there are politicians who, spiritually speaking, have started the withdrawal. The thousands who are struggling with the democratic forces in Afghanistan do not deserve that. They deserve politicians who stand firm.
 
I think creating something in our image is misguided.
Solutions are as diverse as the problems themselves.
However, the Taliban need to be terminated.
If we cannot win the hearts and minds of people being oppressed by the Taliban, we won't be able to win the hearts and minds in ANY conflict.
 
Please don't ban me for this (might sound extremely prejudiced)...
Afghan nation in whole is way undereducated and is living day to day, without clear understanding on how to go forward them-self, so if "us" try to help and teach them better way forward- we get brushed aside unless we pay money, whilst disillusioned Talibs have got upper hand in being "brothers" by culture and most importantly religion.
No good results/examples economic and security in a village with ISAF- not ever the hearts war is going to be won!
BTW phrase: " you can not buy Afgan! you can buy his loyalty for load of money and for a very short time... " has been brought back from USSR intervention by my cousin, that served and survived.
 
That is certainly a very strong point as well.
What if they would rather die than side with someone who's not the same religion?
What might come as a surprise is a number of South Korean soldiers converted to Islam prior to deployment to Iraq and Afghanistan. I wonder what sort of impact that had in their operations.
 
Please don't ban me for this (might sound extremely prejudiced)...
Afghan nation in whole is way undereducated and is living day to day, without clear understanding on how to go forward them-self, so if "us" try to help and teach them better way forward- we get brushed aside unless we pay money, whilst disillusioned Talibs have got upper hand in being "brothers" by culture and most importantly religion.
No good results/examples economic and security in a village with ISAF- not ever the hearts war is going to be won!
BTW phrase: " you can not buy Afgan! you can buy his loyalty for load of money and for a very short time... " has been brought back from USSR intervention by my cousin, that served and survived.

This is bollocks.
Firstly the Taleban are killing as many if not more civilians as the coalition, only they pay "blood money" faster and to the correct source.
Secondly, we are overestimating the support for the Taleban that is shown once we have bounded a few villages together to defend themselves.
It´s a pretty good deterrent and Taleban influence over that area are dwindeling.
This is however a timeconsuming effort, but it´s what we have to do now since we dropped the ball 7 years ago.
During the early stages of the invsion we were set up for success.
I doubt noone in modern history has been that close to changing leadership in Afgh and getting people to go along with it.
A good FID/UW program and in small scale winning hearts and minds.
Then someone decided the troops on the ground were needed elsewhere and were replaced with other troops not trained for this kind of job.

Now we are going to need the right resources and above all time, something that the attention span of western society will hardly give us.

We won´t change Afgh into a McDonalds eating western civilization but I think most people have guessed that by now.
It was never about that to start with.
What we can do, and what we set out to do from the start is to give the people of Afgh a realistic option to the Taleban leadership.
One they are ready to defend on their own.

MHO on the subject.

//KJ.
 
I know what Afgh looks like, did you have a point with posting a map or did you post it because you liked all the colors?

BTW it is inacurate, the pashtun areas goes alot further north to the west of Mazar e Sharif.
 
Last edited:
'kay then!
The map is old, as stated, but we are not wining the war of hearts so far, your strong believes doesn't really materialize as our understanding of humanity/society have very different value there. To add another headline catching incident:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/a.../index.html?hpt=T2#fbid=yKXgw9EhIcj&wom=false
Pregnant widow accused of adultery executed by Taliban
Kabul, Afghanistan (CNN) -- The Taliban has executed a pregnant widow accused of adultery in western Afghanistan, provincial and district officials said Monday.

The 47-year-old woman, Sanam Gul, also known as Sanam Bibi, was killed in Badghis province Saturday morning, said Ashrafuddin Majidi, the provincial governor's spokesman.

The district governor of Qades, Hashim Habibi, confirmed the execution. He said the woman was accused of adultery that left her pregnant. The Taliban shadow district governor, Mullah Abdul Hakim, and his judge ordered the woman to be executed, he said.

Mohammad Yousuf, a Taliban commander, carried out the execution, shooting the woman in her head, Habibi said.

The International Security Assistance Force in Afghanistan condemned the killing. "This tragic gruesome brutality is an example of Taliban justice," said U.S. Army Col. Rafael Torres, director of the ISAF Joint Command Combined Joint Operations Center. "This is not what the people of Afghanistan want -- they want peace and freedom and that's what we're going to help provide."

The statement from the ISAF cited reports that the widow was whipped 200 times before she was shot.
story.taliban.gi.afp.jpg
 
Why yes the taliban does practice 7th Century Douchebaggery. Thanks for 20 year late intel brief.
 
'kay then!
The map is old, as stated, but we are not wining the war of hearts so far, your strong believes doesn't really materialize as our understanding of humanity/society have very different value there. To add another headline catching incident:
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/a.../index.html?hpt=T2#fbid=yKXgw9EhIcj&wom=false
Pregnant widow accused of adultery executed by Taliban

story.taliban.gi.afp.jpg

This is another great example why the Taleban are an unexeptable ruling body..Well this and their harboring terrorist networks.
As you can see from the article you yourself posted this was not done in a village where ISAF has precence.
Your understanding of the Afghan situation is flawed sir.
You think people want to live like this.
Not if given a choice.
Northern alliance anyone?

A number of districts banded together to fight the Taleban regime.
Do they eat McDonalds, no.
Did they want to get rid of the Taleban, yes.

Didn´t matter that they were different tribes or even people.
 
Another related "news"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704268004575417293032620332.html
Karzai Slams 'Foreign Advisers'
Afghan Leader Seeks Ban on Private Security Firms,Escalating Tensions With U.S.

KABUL—Afghan President Hamid Karzai lashed out at foreign interference and called for a ban on the private security companies that protect many Western installations here, in a speech that ratchets up recent tensions with the U.S. over two American-backed anticorruption agencies.
WO-AC050_AFKARZ_D_20100808180244.jpg

We have the ability to rule and govern our country and we have our sovereignty. We hope that NATO countries and the U.S. pay attention," Mr. Karzai told a gathering of Afghan civil servants in a speech on Saturday. "No Afghan administration will be successful unless it lays off its foreign advisers and replaces them with Afghans."

The call to ban private security companies came a week after a convoy of DynCorp International, which provides security in Afghanistan under a U.S. State Department contract, was involved in a car accident that killed an Afghan civilian in Kabul. The accident sparked rioting and anti-American protests.

The 10 aid workers killed last week as they returned to Kabul from a remote part of the country didn't have a security detail.

The Afghan leader's defiant weekend speech came days after U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton phoned Mr. Karzai to press him to live up to his anticorruption commitments, according to U.S. officials, warning that his recent attempt to weaken two U.S.-mentored antigraft agencies could endanger the chances of congressional approval for billions of dollars in aid to Afghanistan.

Mr. Karzai, Afghan officials say, told her that the Major Crimes Task Force and the Sensitive Investigative Unit—which investigate high-level corruption in the Afghan government and operate with heavy involvement from the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation and Drug Enforcement Agency—have violated the Afghan constitution.

"We don't want our Afghan administration to be run by two different sets of people and to be accountable to two different sources. It's destroying the national sovereignty of Afghanistan and we will not allow it," Mr. Karzai said in his Saturday speech.

The State Department said Sunday that the Afghan government last week "reiterated its commitment to fighting corruption" and that it was expected soon to "further define regulations" relating to the MCTF and the SIU. The department said the U.S. looks forward to working with the Afghan government to help implement Mr. Karzai's pledges "to increase transparency, accountability and tackle corruption."
The latest confrontation with Washington flared after the MCTF and the SIU last month, without Mr. Karzai's approval, raided the home of a senior Afghan presidential aide who had been taped while allegedly soliciting a bribe.

The scandal is threatening to become the most serious crisis in the U.S.'s relations with Mr. Karzai since the controversy over accusations of widespread fraud in the presidential elections a year ago. Mrs. Clinton phoned Mr. Karzai last week after he created a commission to oversee the MCTF and the SIU.

The rift over the agencies appears to have wiped out any residual goodwill from Mr. Karzai's May trip to Washington, where he was praised for his pledges to clean up the Afghan government.

Mr. Karzai has also had a stormy beginning with the new U.S.-led coalition commander, Gen. David Petraeus. U.S. commanders were upset last month when Mr. Karzai issued a statement condemning coalition forces for allegedly causing 52 civilian casualties in a rocket attack in Helmand. The coalition military says it had no record of carrying out such an attack—and that local hospitals had no record of such casualties from that area.

"The people who are working in private security companies are against Afghan national interest, and their salaries are illegal money. They are thieves during the day and terrorists during the night," Mr. Karzai said in Saturday's speech. "If they want to serve Afghanistan they have to join the Afghan police."

A coalition spokesman, U.S. Air Force Maj. Joel Harper, said the international forces are "working with the Afghan government to build its police capabilities and capacity so that private security companies are no longer required."

Many of the 52 registered security companies operating in Afghanistan are foreign, but some of the bigger ones are Afghan-owned, and have close links with prominent government officials and members of Mr. Karzai's family. They employ an estimated 30,000 people.

Private companies provide security for Western diplomatic missions and aid agencies, coalition installations, hotels and major infrastructure such as airports. They also guard supply convoys that bring vital goods to landlocked Afghanistan from neighboring countries.

Many Western government agencies and contractors operating in Afghanistan are wary of relying on the Afghan police force, which is often infiltrated by the Taliban.

"There aren't enough state or international security forces to provide all the services that private security companies do," said John Dempsey, an analyst at the U.S. Institute for Peace.

There is no firm deadline for shutting down the security firms, but Mr. Karzai wants them closed "as soon as possible," said the president's chief spokesman, Waheed Omar, on Saturday. "The process needs to start," he said.

In mid-July, the U.S. special representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan, Richard Holbrooke, had held up the MCTF in Senate testimony as proof of Mr. Karzai's seriousness in curbing graft. That followed a move in June by a congressional panel to freeze some $4 billion in aid to Afghanistan, after The Wall Street Journal reported that billions of dollars in cash—some of it in aid money—was being taken out each year through Kabul's international airport.

The Kabul offices of the financial company most prominent in this outflow, the New Ansari Exchange, were raided by the SIU in January. The company has connections with senior members of the Afghan government and some of Mr. Karzai's relatives.

New Ansari has denied any wrongdoing.

The presidential aide detained by the MCTF and SIU last month, Mohammed Zia Saleh, head of administration for Afghanistan's National Security Council, was taped while allegedly discussing a bribe in the form of a car for quashing an the New Ansari investigation.

Mr. Saleh, who has been freed on Afghan government orders, couldn't be located to comment.

According to Western and Afghan officials, the MCTF and SIU are working normally so far, and their sensitive investigation files—including those targeting senior government figures—haven't been taken by Mr. Karzai's commission, which is headed by Attorney General Ishaq Aloko.

Asked whether the files could be seized, an aide to Mr. Karzai said: "The president issued an order asking the commission to review all the cases, so it could happen."

Dont get me wrong- I dream we'd succeed, but so many things are rotten through about this country, that all of the efforts are getting more and more distant to any goal to achieve in foreseeable future
 
This is another great example why the Taleban are an unexeptable ruling body..Well this and their harboring terrorist networks.
As you can see from the article you yourself posted this was not done in a village where ISAF has precence.
Your understanding of the Afghan situation is flawed sir.
You think people want to live like this.
Not if given a choice.
Northern alliance anyone?

A number of districts banded together to fight the Taleban regime.
Do they eat McDonalds, no.
Did they want to get rid of the Taleban, yes.

Didn´t matter that they were different tribes or even people.
It does matter! nations/tribes and religion is the biggest factor in supporting and standing against Talib
 
It does matter! nations/tribes and religion is the biggest factor in supporting and standing against Talib

Disagree, security is.
Then religion and tribalculture. Not many tribes support the Taleban activly.
They do not however have the capacity to stand up against them alone..
Reread my posts (or atleast read them), all of them.
 
Disagree, security is.
Then religion and tribalculture. Not many tribes support the Taleban activly.
They do not however have the capacity to stand up against them alone..
Reread my posts (or atleast read them), all of them.
we have to agree to disagree on what is really matter and order of to whole nation of Afghanistan. Just going to add, that, apart from numbers of potentially supporting Talibs are bigger, than, the ones oppose (tribal population ways) and attacks/insurgency is opening in previously believed to be "talib free" areas lately
 
Back
Top