- Joined
- Jul 23, 2005
- Messages
- 6,923
- Reaction score
- 1,738
- Location
- Staffs, England
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Very Liberal
Reading the article, it seems like this is one of many proposals that have been discussed, though not advanced. I'll reserve judgment until then.
Sure but isnt the fact that we,re talking about appointing anyone symptomatic of the fact that we,re not as keen democratising Afganistan as we claim to be?
Sure but isnt the fact that we,re talking about appointing anyone symptomatic of the fact that we,re not as keen democratising Afganistan as we claim to be?
What is really sad is that the ****bags in Afghanistan cannot handle this situation thesleves. This is because Afghanistan is ripe with corrupt ****bags that sold their souls to the Taliban.
The Afghans are a confused people who are plagued with terrorist ****bags.
And your proposed solution is.....?
My proposed solution is a MASSIVE strike in the lawless tribal region where Al Quack is hiding.
Then we bring our troops home and focus on our own issues.
1) Show me where:
2) If this were a good idea, how come none of the military commanders have suggested it? Do you think they might have a better idea of how to deal with this problem than you or I?
I hope that this decision is a joint NATO one, and not a unilateral U.S. one, given how much of the slack the other Western powers have picked up after the U.S. changed its focus to Iraq. I have no personal problem with the U.S. installing a different leader, so long as we honestly acknowledge that the U.S. is not truly a nation that universally supports democracy. This action would prove it further.
Any installation of a leader that bypasses the electoral process of the Afghani people would be a violation of democracy. I prefer not to sugar coat that fact.
Just as all roads do not necessarily lead to Democracy, so it is that not all democratically elected leaders lead to a strong and peaceful Democracy. Maybe Karzai just can't deliver the goods.
We saw in Algeria that a democratically elected leadership CAN actually oppose Democracy.
That's not to say that Karzai opposes Democracy, but to make the point that blind Democracy isn't the end-all be-all some think it is.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?