Monday, February 22, 2010

What's Another Year in Afghanistan?

After eight years of a corrupt, brutal, unelected puppet-government, propped-up by foreign troops and gangster warlords? After eight years of arresting farmers, some of whom joined the insurgency in response to the depredations of the torturing, thieving, raping government forces, and others who hadn't taken up arms against anyone at anytime, and handing them over to that same Afghan government where they were tortured, perhaps killed?

After eight years of subjecting our own troops to witnessing children being raped at the hands of the government forces we're propping-up, arming and training?

After eight years of civilians killed by NATO air-strikes?

What's one more year of this?
NATO forces confirmed in a statement that its planes fired Sunday on a group of vehicles that it believed contained insurgents who were about to attack its forces, only to discover later that women and children were in the cars.The strike hit three minibuses that were driving down a major road in the mountainous province. There were 42 people in the vehicles, all civilians, Bashary said.

The careers of several Canadian politicians must be destroyed as a result of this abomination.

5 comments:

no_blah_blah_blah said...

I really fail to see the difference in the end result between insurgents burying explosives underneath the sand and NATO forces dropping explosives from the sky.

As a partial aside, here is an interesting article about American perceptions of war, especially post-WWII.

double nickel said...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8529693.stm

Todd said...

nbbb said:

"I really fail to see the difference in the end result between insurgents burying explosives underneath the sand and NATO forces dropping explosives from the sky."

Depends on the target, no?

opit said...

'Insurgents' is a pejorative term used in place of a familiar 'virtuous' word : Resistance. Likewise roadside explosives target a transportation system installed by the invaders for their convenience when moving armament and supplies rapidly from one place to another : while bombing from the air means people can be killed in their beds with impunity.
Difference ?
What's not to understand ? A purported defensive alliance formed to protect free access to the North Atlantic is engaging in land war in Asia. The only correct response is to cite George Orwell in his description of the lies of foreign war used to subdue domestic dissent.

no_blah_blah_blah said...

Good points. I was just making an off-the-cuff remark comparing how both methods (buried and aerial bombs) can randomly kill those unlucky enough to be in the way... as well as how despite the "cowardly" way insurgents/resisters supposedly fight, attacking with impunity from air seems equally "cowardly" (with equal disregard for collateral plus virtually no possibility of retaliation from the ground).