Pakistan has spent $300 million plus in humanitarian aid to Afghanistan. This is an enormous amount, considering the dismal state of our own economy where we could use the money ourselves. As a percentage of GDP, it is over twice that spent by India and is amongst the highest of any country helping Afghanistan. As for the Arab governments, I don't expect anything from the self-serving shiekhs. It doesn't surprise me that they are dragging their feet.
No, that was an excuse. If you want to help Afghanistan, help them. Don't come up with bullshit excuses about perceptions of Muslim domination and other crap. You have 150,000 troops in their country. Trust me, perceptions are the least of your problems!
What is 'help' is broad. In the execution of such 'help', especially when there are military turmoil in the country, part of that help is security. We do not care about the muslims' perception of the military presence. Really...We do not. Those who express their criticisms, like you and many others here, do not have your boots in the grounds. You do not know the many situations well enough to understand sometimes the immediate authority, be it military or civilian, has to make difficult choices. All of your perceptions, from those who believe we are incompetent to those who believe we are in Afghanistan with nefarious intent, serves only to highlight your collective confusion.
I make no excuses. I am pointing out the fact that
IF we are to execute an Afghanistan version of the 'Marshall Plan', the
SCALE of the military and civilian presence in Afghanistan would enforce the perception that we are there with nefarious intent, not that the fear of that perception deterred us. Instrumental to this 'help' require Pakistan, an immediate neighbor to Afghanistan, first militarily secure her own territory to deny the unwanted forces in Afghanistan an escape route and sanctuary. If you grant yourself the authority to call US/NATO military efforts in Afghanistan as incompetent, be honest and call Pakistan's efforts to secure Pakistani territory as equally incompetent. All the humanitarian aid Pakistan sent to Afghanistan will be for nothing if the Taliban can find respite in Pakistan and return to Afghanistan to destabilize the peace that Pakistan helped to create with those humanitarian aid. What do you think the world's perception of Pakistan when Pakistani territory is being used by the Taliban, a force that most here admitted is not good for both countries? Do you even care about that perception? When you have suicide bombings in Pakistani towns and cities, trust me, the world's perceptions are the least of your problems.
No, it's an American responsibility since it was American bombs that demolished the country -- whatever was left of it after the Soviet war.
Please...Stop...You are killing me...Afghanistan never had any 'country' to 'demolish' even when the Soviets were there. All roads lead to Rome in the Roman Empire. But does Afghanistan have enough roads to lead to Kabul? As Biden and others pointed out -- No. Afghanistan's already difficult terrain and lack of the amenities of civilizations that we take for granted encourages and enforces tribalism. Tribes do not create civilizations, only scratches in rocks to fascinate later and more advanced societies. What our bombs destroyed in Afghanistan affected only the immediate beneficiaries of those few amenities of civilizations, not the many tribal fiefdoms accessible only by dirt trails and pack animals. And we can easily rebuild what we destroyed.
Whatever the Muslim governments do or don't do doesn't absolve the Americans of their responsibility to leave the place better than they found it.
Does that 'do' involve 'say' as well? The less one 'do' the less relevance what one 'say'. That is why Brad Pitt make more money than Roger Ebert. We encourage the muslims to embarrass US in Afghanistan in creating an Afghan nation-state at least on a par with Pakistan. Why Pakistan? Why not? It is easier to emulate one's immediate neighbor than one thousands of miles away. Keeping up with the Joneses, as we say in America. Or in the ME -- Keeping up with the Alis. Anyway...The muslims united behind Iraq under Saddam Hussein when they perceived Iran under Khomenei to be a great threat. The muslims united behind Pakistan in Afghanistan when they perceived the Soviets to be a great threat. Why no equal unity against US and NATO? Because those muslim governments do not believe the US to be after their oil via Karzai-Unocal, nor do they believe al-Qaeda is a CIA/Mossad front, nor do they believe the US is trying to create additional US states in the ME, nor do they believe in many other loony conspiracies, major and minor, popular in this forum. So why are there so much more Western NGOs in Afghanistan than muslim ones?
NGOs in Afghanistan
Those Western NGOs are not always under their respective governments' authority. They pretty much come and go as they please. Or as they can muster up enough courage to go anywhere. The mullahs called up the wrath of Allah to exhort muslims to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan but why does the muslims need any religious encouragements to go to Afghanistan to help Western NGOs build roads or hospitals? Why are the muslims, ordinary and governments, afraid of an improved Afghanistan? Yes...This is in no way remove American responsibilities in Afghanistan, especially when we do have a history of involvement in the country and the region. But why should this indictment prevent the muslims, ordinary and governments, from helping Afghan muslims out of poverty and backwardness? Would
Medicins Sans Frontiers turn away a group of muslims doctors and nurses showed up at the doors because the muslims' governments did not authorize their assistance to the infidels? If there is a guarantee that begging would create a return to Afghanistan by the muslims, except this time to build roads and dig wells instead of shooting off Stinger missiles, I will be the first in line to plead. I will even rub onions and habanero peppers to my eyes to create tears to placate muslim pride if necessary.
So there is a discrepancy between the muslim governments and the ordinary muslims they ruled over. The muslim governments do not perceive US presence in Iraq and Afghanistan to be a threat. Their lack of a comparable response to the Soviets support that perception. The ordinary muslims, however, believe that the US is in Iraq and Afghanistan to 'oppress' the muslims, to 'steal' their oil, to prepare for the return of Jesus, to create more territories for the Jews, to assorted loony conspiracies, etc...etc...And the muslims governments do nothing to dispel what they know to be false perceptions. The Afghan muslims will be left to the well meaning but clumsy administrations of the infidels. The muslims will not hesitate to boast about their military victories over the Soviet infidels, but stay away under the cover of false perceptions when challenged to
DO works of peace in Afghanistan. Do little but say much.
Military power, and mission, is only a means to an end. A political end. What is the political end that the invasion was meant to achieve? The West clearly hasn't a clue.
And we can conclude that by staying away, the muslims are equally clueless. So much for
YOUR criticisms that we do not understand the social differences and dynamics of the locals. Someone once said that it is a worthy goal for a wise man to deceive a fool. Of course, the corollary for that would be it is equally a worthy goal for the same wise man to correct the fool and to show the world who is the clear superior when warranted. Do much but say little. By all means,
YOU leave comfortable Australia the wise man for Afghanistan and show US how foolish we are there. Do deceive the fools for entertainment when nothing else is at stake, but now there are fellow muslims in Afghanistan who needs help. So what does the muslim 'wise men' like yourself do? Zilch.
How on earth do you manage to glean that conclusion from my statement? My point was that if NATO, i.e. the Western governments, really had Afghan wellbeing as their primary goal, they would have implemented policies to that effect. Biden is only an example. Take his plan, take any plan, and implement it. If there are military prerequisies of stability, then execute a strategy to achieve those objectives. What is all this fancy military might for? If it can't achieve the political objectives, is it just for show? Or is NATO so incompetent that it can't achieve the objectives set for it?
So the implication as highlighted is that we are not in Afghanistan for the sake of the people. So what are we there for? But...Of course...To 'oppress' the muslims...To 'steal' their oil via the Karzai-Unocal pipeline...To create more territories for the Jews...To prepare for the return of Jesus...I hope I covered all the major loony conspiracies.
