more turmoil in Afghanistan

[joncha]

http://www.cbc.ca/stories/2004/03/21...sination040321

Fighting flares as Afghan aviation minister killed
Last Updated Sun, 21 Mar 2004 13:20:06

HERAT, AFGHANISTAN - Roughly 100 people were killed during fighting in the Afghan city of Herat Sunday following the assassination of the country's civil aviation minister.

Unidentified attackers shot and killed Mirwais Sadiq while he was in his car, a presidential spokesperson said.
Afghan television reported Sadiq's father, Herat governor Ismail Khan, had also been targeted but escaped unhurt.

Afghan military commanders in Herat said fighting broke out between troops loyal to the governor and the military following the shooting.

Afghan President Hamid Karzai called an emergency cabinet meeting and sent extra troops to the western city to calm tensions.

Karzai said he was "deeply shocked" by Sadiq's death.

Sadiq is Karzai's second aviation minister to be assassinated. In February 2002, Abdul Rahman was killed at Kabul's airport.


Written by CBC News Online staff

Sounds like the US invasion really made Afghanistan a safer place.

[Nubclear]

I thought the "Afghanistan is a safe place!" myth was debunked long ago?

[joncha]

You'd never know it from some of the things posted in this forum.

[Ted Striker]

Nobody has ever claimed it was a "safe place."

Secondly you will notice that Karzai sent in HIS OWN TROOPS to restore order. ANd this is a city outside of Kabul.

One of the criticisms was that Karzai lacked the ability to control cities or disruptions. The fact that he has this ability proves otherwise, going from nothing to something.

By the way the President of Taiwan was also shot recently.

[joncha]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
By the way the President of Taiwan was also shot recently.

And as a result, 100 were killed? I must have missed that part.

[ErikM]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Secondly you will notice that Karzai sent in HIS OWN TROOPS to restore order. ANd this is a city outside of Kabul.

Woo-hoo, Karzai sent HIS OWN troops! In a country where pretty much an entire population armed to the teeth, it is hard not to have at least a couple of guys loyal to somebody, including Karzai.

[Giancarlo]

Nobody ever claimed Afghanistan was safe. One of my old friends just got back from there where he was serving, and said certainly it is getting better but there is a lot of work that needs to be done.

Karzai sending his own troops is symbolic. He controls the national army that should be in control of the country and as it grows it will assert its control over the warlords, shutting them down. His ability of sending troops shows that he has enough power to deal with problems that arise. The ANA (Afghan National Army) needs to be built up a lot larger but so far it has proved its usefulness.

To say Afghanistan is a failure, is one of the biggest misinformed statements I have seen yet. I mean go grow a brain. Sometimes things happen.... bad things, like this fighting. But hey, even the US had a civil war... it takes time to recover from it.

[Defiant]

Yea,
There was no murders under the Taliban rule.
How many little girls were getting an education under Taliban rule? Are they at least able to go to school now, yep Afghanistan is really failure.
Fact is, there is work to do, nothing worth while is easy, especially in a country like Afghanistan, grow up.

[Nubclear]

Defiant, we're talking about Afghanistan here, not the Republic of Kabul

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar
Defiant, we're talking about Afghanistan here, not the Republic of Kabul

Karzai controls more than you might want to think.

[joncha]

Originally posted by Defiant
Yea,
There was no murders under the Taliban rule.
How many little girls were getting an education under Taliban rule? Are they at least able to go to school now, yep Afghanistan is really failure.
Fact is, there is work to do, nothing worth while is easy, especially in a country like Afghanistan, grow up.

The invasion of Afghanistan has just replaced one group of murderous warlords with another. The new group is slightly less murderous, but far less stable. The anti-woman policies that the Taliban were rightly condemned for were enacted by the Northern Alliance in the first place.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


Karzai controls more than you might want to think.

I'm such a filhty traitor, aren't I?

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by joncha


The invasion of Afghanistan has just replaced one group of murderous warlords with another. The new group is slightly less murderous, but far less stable. The anti-woman policies that the Taliban were rightly condemned for were enacted by the Northern Alliance in the first place.

Not at all. This new group is proving to actually be more stable. But they won't be in power much longer since Karzai is getting more and more power. And Karzai is not a warlord, he is a really down to earth pragmatic guy who is very popular in his country. As long as the military he controls continues to grow so will his power over the warlords.

[joncha]

Woah, Tass, slow down... he's using the angry smiley. Be careful!

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


Not at all. This new group is proving to actually be more stable.

Yes, obviously.

[joncha]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


Not at all. This new group is proving to actually be more stable. But they won't be in power much longer since Karzai is getting more and more power. And Karzai is not a warlord, he is a really down to earth pragmatic guy who is very popular in his country. As long as the military he controls continues to grow so will his power over the warlords.

The Taliban controlled most of the country. Karzai, how ever much he is loved in the West (and he is a snappy dresser, I'll admit!) controls only Kabul. As far as puppet governments go, this is on par with what the Soviets were able to achieve. And we all know how that turned out.

[ErikM]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
And Karzai is not a warlord, he is a really down to earth pragmatic guy who is very popular in his country.

Reminds me of George W

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Comrade Tassadar


Yes, obviously.

And what was exactly going on before the taliban were overthrowned? A civil war. I mean there is still fighting but nothing close to the intensity of what happened during the taliban years. Man you can quote that article all you want.. it is not changing your ignorance.

Joncha: B.S

Karzai, how ever much he is loved in the West (and he is a snappy dresser, I'll admit!) controls only Kabul. As far as puppet governments go, this is on par with what the Soviets were able to achieve. And we all know how that turned out.

Karzai is actually quite popular with his people and the ability to send troops to other parts of the counrty shows your statement is abhorrently false. He isn't a puppet government either, but a well established one. And the US has been able to keep a relative stability with only what.. 13,000 international troops there? The Soviets couldn't even do it with 100,000.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
And what was exactly going on before the taliban were overthrowned? A civil war. I mean there is still fighting but nothing close to the intensity of what happened during the taliban years. Man you can quote that article all you want.. it is not changing your ignorance.

Whoa, the ignorance of history seems to be yours. The 20 years of Afghanistan's civil war was ended by the emergence of the Taliban as the national power. They had pushed the Northern Alliance out of 95% of the country and had achieved a great deal fo stability in the country. Sure, it was a murderous, evil, rotten government, but it was a stable one that held the country in a relatively peaceful state after gaining power. There wasn't remotely the kind of chaos we see today post-Taliban, whatever we may think of the necessity/rightness of ousting them from power.

[Hueij]

People, people, look at the bright side... Opium production under the new government has reached pre-Taliban levels

[Boris Godunov]

Well, now that we're not giving $100s of millions in bribe money to the Taliban to stop the opium production, that was bound to happen.

[Nubclear]

Originally posted by Giancarlo


And what was exactly going on before the taliban were overthrowned? A civil war. I mean there is still fighting but nothing close to the intensity of what happened during the taliban years. Man you can quote that article all you want.. it is not changing your ignorance..

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by ErikM

Woo-hoo, Karzai sent HIS OWN troops! In a country where pretty much an entire population armed to the teeth, it is hard not to have at least a couple of guys loyal to somebody, including Karzai.

The point is that these are the troops of the government of Afghanistan. Not the troops of some warlord.

You were probably one of those guys who said that Karzai couldn't project power outside of Kabul, weren't you? And here they are doing just that?

Hmmm...sounds like a step forward. Afghanistan keeps moving forward.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Whoa, the ignorance of history seems to be yours. The 20 years of Afghanistan's civil war was ended by the emergence of the Taliban as the national power. They had pushed the Northern Alliance out of 95% of the country and had achieved a great deal fo stability in the country. Sure, it was a murderous, evil, rotten government, but it was a stable one that held the country in a relatively peaceful state after gaining power. There wasn't remotely the kind of chaos we see today post-Taliban, whatever we may think of the necessity/rightness of ousting them from power.

I just got back from eating a buffet and this is what I get. The civil war didn't end with the emergence of the taliban. It was still going on. The Northern Alliance was still fighting. Like Haiti, both sides are terrible. I don't like the Northern Alliance. Also I did mention that the taliban did stabilize the country but they were supporting Al Qaeda and had to go. It doesn't matter what you think. And the majority of people even here on apolyton supported the overthrow of the taliban.. as I saw in a recent poll.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Giancarlo
The Northern Alliance was still fighting.

Yes, in the 5% of Afghanistan they still held. The Taliban had them boxed in. The other 95% of the country was virtually free of strife and very much under the control of the Taliban. While it may not have been pleasant, it was stable.

[Ted Striker]

So what?

I can't believe how "great" some of you guys think the Taliban were.

Glad you support torture of women though.

[Boris Godunov]

Originally posted by Ted Striker
So what?

I can't believe how "great" some of you guys think the Taliban were.

Glad you support torture of women though.

Originally posted by Boris Godunov
Sure, it was a murderous, evil, rotten government

I'm not sure at what your reading comprehension failed. Probably at the start, eh?

I seem to also be on record as supporting the invasion of Afghanistan. Hell, I was calling for the government to take harsher measures against Taliban before September 11th, even before Americans had heard of Osama bin Laden, precisely because of their horrific human rights abuses. So I can out self-righteous you here if you like.

But the point was academic--GC's claim that Afghanistan was less stable prior to the invasion is a lot of nonsense, and such distortions don't serve to advance an argument.

[Giancarlo]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov


Yes, in the 5% of Afghanistan they still held. The Taliban had them boxed in. The other 95% of the country was virtually free of strife and very much under the control of the Taliban. While it may not have been pleasant, it was stable.

So you think the stadium executions were fine to continue because the taliban stabilized the country? Wake up man, I did say the taliban stabilized the country.. in fact they were a welcome change in the beginning when they were a lot more moderate but they took a radical turn and started executing people in stadiums. I think right now the best thing is to support Karzai and increase his power by increasing the size of his military (last I heard it was around 20,000?? I think).

[alva]

TED:
I can't believe how "great" some of you guys think the Taliban were.

Boris:
While it may not have been pleasant, it was stable.

Boris:
Sure, it was a murderous, evil, rotten government, but it was a stable one that held the country in a relatively peaceful state after gaining power.

EDIT: Boris was faster...

[Ted Striker]

My point exactly.

The stability argument has absolutley no value whatsoever.

Nazi Germany was also very stable.