Karzai effectively handed 2nd term as Afghan president

Monday 02nd November, 06:31 AM JST

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

› Login to comment

Latest 15 of 63 Total Comments Show All

yabits at 02:52 AM JST - 4th November

s a difference between people who want to see the US out of the Middle East and people who are willing to blow themselves up to do it. People who do the latter are indeed radicals. You shouldn't romanticize them.

I can feel more respect for someone who is willing to sacrifice his own life for a cause than for someone who can blow away innocent Afghan people from an unmanned drone thousands of miles from harm's way and then go home to a nice dinner shortly after that. (Even Karzai had to protest loudly, since that makes his position as the U.S. buddy far less tenable to his own people.)

I know better than to romanticize either one of them. Both are deluded fools.
yabits at 03:01 AM JST - 4th November

Until you're willing to take the blinders off and look at the global nature of Al Queda, what their future plans are, and who they've attacked, you're just swatting a fly with chopsticks.

The simple fact is that, with less than 3% of the world's population, the profligate U.S. lifestyle demands that we continue to consume 25% of the world's non-renewable energy. THAT is the way of life that Americans have chosen that compels us to act the way we do, and, as a result, to have created the enemies we have.
bushlover at 08:05 AM JST - 4th November

Yabits, I congratulate you on your great intuition of the nasty nasty world order the US of A is trying to impose on the peoples of the world. So maybe oil hasn't made your 3rd world country rich and you feel left out thinking somehow America has caused you some debt. This is proof that they are evil and deserve to be at war with Al Quaida. Is AQ at war with all those other countries that have companies that are also contracting to take oil from these poor poor countries? And I must really congratulate you on taking the upside down ice-cream cone crown from Smitty as our most "intellectual" poster. I'm sure he's wishing ol George could be back in office so he might have a chance at winning that crown back.
SuperLib at 09:28 AM JST - 4th November

Yabits: Al Qaeda was formed to rid the Islamic world of non-Islamic influences. The U.S. is now the primary enemy. Those who help the U.S. are seen as enemies as well.

Everyone is seen as the enemy who does not follow Al Queda. The US could drop off the the map tomorrow and their war would not change. You're just looking for an excuse to validate them by describing their actions as a result of someone else's actions. The far left's, as Martin Luther King said, is that they pretend true evil doesn't exist.

Prior to 9/11, the U.S. was hosting representatives of the Taliban in Texas (among other places) in an attempt to gain the go-ahead for the massive infrastructure project, which happened to be a gas pipeline. (Any large project requiring the leaders of a nation to put their country in debt would have worked nicely.)

Are you talking about the meeting with Unocal? Last I checked Unocal doesn't represent the US government nor do they control the US military. Nor do they have a voice in deciding if other countries participate in conflicts in the Middle East.

The primary reason for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan from the start has been to achieve the stability needed to gain leverage over the resources located in the region to the north of the country.

The primary reason for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan is 9/11. Without that there would be no U.S. involvement in Afghanistan just like on 9/10. You can talk about business deals that have happened as a result of the US going into Afghanistan since 9/11, but claiming that that was the purpose for the invasion is beyond belief.

(It is why we were supporting Al Qaeda and other jihadist groups against the Soviets during their occupation.)

The US did not support Al Queda during Afghanistan any more than we supported Al Queda after Saddam attacked Kuwait. Two separate entities sharing the same goal is a far cry from two entities working together and supporting each other.

I can feel more respect for someone who is willing to sacrifice his own life for a cause than for someone who can blow away innocent Afghan people from an unmanned drone thousands of miles from harm's way and then go home to a nice dinner shortly after that.

Here we go again... Are you on autopilot now? Obviously you'll only mention terrorists when you can compare them to the US. But my guess is that if the article were about the US killing innocents you wouldn't rush to remind everyone of what the Taliban does. You don't like it when a terrorist is called a terrorist. You need someone to else to blame or someone else to deflect criticism onto.

The simple fact is that, with less than 3% of the world's population, the profligate U.S. lifestyle demands that we continue to consume 25% of the world's non-renewable energy.

And the US also produces roughly the same amount of the world's GDP, and US consumer also drives the economic engine for the entire world.

Look, it's obvious you aren't here to have any kind of honest conversation about Al Queda or The Taliban. You just hate US business practices so Afghanistan is just a way for you to get on your soapbox and lecture others about "what's really happening." On one side you have the rich/evil US government, and on the other you have the poor locals who need a protector, and that would be Al Queda. It's a simple rich vs. poor debate to you and you want to feel good and sided with the poor even if they're terrorists.
yabits at 11:42 AM JST - 4th November

Everyone is seen as the enemy who does not follow Al Queda.

The vast majority of Moslems do not follow Al Qaeda. One would have to be crazy to believe that they are seen as enemies.

as Martin Luther King said, is that they pretend true evil doesn't exist.

True evil exists within everyone, and is closer to the surface among those who try to justify violence. One would have to be mentally deranged to believe that, by attempting to understand the motives for violence, one is justifying violence.
yabits at 11:50 AM JST - 4th November

primary reason for U.S. involvement in Afghanistan is 9/11. Without that there would be no U.S. involvement in Afghanistan just like on 9/10.

Well, that is just not very bright. The U.S. was involved in Afghanistan long before 9/11. You are conflating one brief military operation in 2001-2002 to represent the sum total of U.S. involvement. Not even close.
yabits at 11:56 AM JST - 4th November

Obviously you'll only mention terrorists when you can compare them to the US. But my guess is that if the article were about the US killing innocents you wouldn't rush to remind everyone of what the Taliban does. You don't like it when a terrorist is called a terrorist.

If we are going to call people "terrorist" who hold a few dozen people hostage or blow them up, what are we going to call people who hold entire nations hostage, and launch military actions against them -- killing and displacing hundreds and thousands -- at will?
SuperLib at 12:06 PM JST - 4th November

The vast majority of Moslems do not follow Al Qaeda. One would have to be crazy to believe that they are seen as enemies.

I was talking about the situation from Al Queda's point of view. They don't care if you're American or not. They kill other Muslims, American, Europeans, Asians, Africans, anyone. But all of your posts point to the problem as exclusively America vs. Al Queda.

One would have to be mentally deranged to believe that, by attempting to understand the motives for violence, one is justifying violence.

And one would have to be naive to think that rushing in to "explain" the violence doesn't blur the lines with justification, especially if you refuse to condemn it. Again, when the US has collateral damage, do you only speak of understanding the motivation? Do you remind us of Al Queda's violence? Or is it a one-way street that always ends with indicting America and "explaining" the Taliban no matter who kills?

You are conflating one brief military operation in 2001-2002 to represent the sum total of U.S. involvement. Not even close.

And you're ignoring 9/11 entirely as a motivation for being in Afghanistan. Not even in the ballpark.

If we are going to call people "terrorist" who hold a few dozen people hostage or blow them up, what are we going to call people who hold entire nations hostage, and launch military actions against them -- killing and displacing hundreds and thousands -- at will?

Call them whatever you want. I really don't care. Just make sure you say how much you respect their power and be sure to say that they're a force to be reckoned with. Oh, and don't forget to explain their actions and refuse to condemn anything. And if someone else bring up the violence by said country, have some good examples of Taliban violence to force into the conversation so we can mute any criticism of the other party.
yabits at 12:38 PM JST - 4th November

And one would have to be naive to think that rushing in to "explain" the violence doesn't blur the lines with justification, especially if you refuse to condemn it. Again, when the US has collateral damage, do you only speak of understanding the motivation? Do you remind us of Al Queda's violence? Or is it a one-way street that always ends with indicting America and "explaining" the Taliban no matter who kills?

If you invade another person's country, as the U.S. has Afghanistan, especially when you are announcing it as a way to "keep the fight over there," it is far more understandable to me why people over there want to resort to violence to take the fight to you to defend their turf. On 9/11, the U.S. got a taste of the kind of treatment that we, through the past 60 years, have all too often dished out to others, both directly and through our proxies.

When you point a finger at someone else, you've got four more pointing right back at you. I can not endorse evil on either side. But I honestly perceive that the ledger of evil weighs far more heavily on my country's side. You appear to prefer to deny and whitewash the greater evil in your attempt to amplify the lesser acts of evil -- as heinous as those are.
SuperLib at 07:44 PM JST - 4th November

Why not just cut to the chase and say those with power are always guilty and those without power are always victims? Obviously this is more about your own personal hangups about a class struggle than anything else.

You're not even making sense anymore. "Defending their turf"???? Sure, by burning down schools and cutting off the heads of girls. And that's all you have to say...? Defending their turf?

Jeeze, why not just get in there and join the fight yourself. Show those rich Americans a thing or two... Just think of how you could do you part to right the wrongs of the past 60 years with your Taliban brothers.
yabits at 09:07 PM JST - 4th November

Why not just cut to the chase and say those with power are always guilty and those without power are always victims?

Because that would not be literally true. Power corrupts, and the greater the power the greater the corruption. Within Afghanistan, those without much power -- women especially -- are nearly always victims. Karzai's political position of authority has certainly not made him any less corrupt.

To imply that the United States, being the most powerful nation, is somehow too "superior" to be corrupted by its power is to fall prey to the kind of extreme folly that begets very great evil. Your attempt to brush it off as personal hangup only demonstrates how unaware you are. (A person who tries to justify violence committed by a superpower should not go around quoting from King.)

You're not even making sense anymore. "Defending their turf"???? Sure, by burning down schools and cutting off the heads of girls.

Such are the tactics employed against those who do not scare easily, deplorable as they are. Ultimately, it is a philosophy that is inspiring people to commit these acts -- and minds have been known to change. The greater evil arises when people start to act on the belief that someone else's mind can not change. Those who thirst after (or want to maintain) greater power especially in the guise of "security" are particularly subject to that bent.

We Americans have been shown a thing or two, or ten. We don't seem to learn, however, and send ourselves further down the tubes traveled by every empire that has crumbled in the past. If we truly did attempt to apply values that are more fitting with the Judeo-Christian values we often profess with our mouths, the philosophy of groups like the Taliban and Al Qaeda would find very few takers.
sailwind at 10:56 PM JST - 4th November

If we truly did attempt to apply values that are more fitting with the Judeo-Christian values we often profess with our mouths, the philosophy of groups like the Taliban and Al Qaeda would find very few takers.

Blowing up and targeting innocent civilians on purpose is wrong......The Taliban and AL Queda do it on purpose and revel in it, they have taken to it they have taken pretty good Yabits don't you agree.
yabits at 11:39 PM JST - 4th November

Blowing up and targeting innocent civilians on purpose is wrong......The Taliban and AL Queda do it on purpose and revel in it, they have taken to it they have taken pretty good Yabits don't you agree

There is an awful lot of wrongdoing in the world today, and the Taliban and Al Qaeda represent a tiny fraction of it. I question the motives, morality, and wisdom of expending thousands of lives and over a trillion dollars to go after that tiny fraction. What is really stupid and immoral is blowing up the danger that those ragtag groups represent as though it were an existential threat to the United States.

Those groups' greatest threat comes from within themselves. All it takes is one person of influence to deviate from what some other person thinks is right and soon you've got a schism that tears the group apart. The only force that can really prevent that from happening and pull them together is giving them a common enemy.

In understand why those who have enriched themselves by the wars over there want this latest one to continue forever.
Adamwesti at 06:53 AM JST - 5th November

Am I to understand that our drones firing missiles are only killing people that we've targeted? Since Obama administration there have been over 40 drone flights and the biggest majority killed were women and children. I personally think it's time to pack up and leave the country.
diggerdog at 11:41 AM JST - 5th November

maybe we are ignoring the fact that america doesnt really want to wipe out AQ. Just look at all the things that they are blamed for and all the things that we can do by having them as a constant threat. AQ have become synonymous with terrorism and fear and are supposedly a constant threat to our freedom and world peace. When ever bush wanted to do something all he had to do was whip out the AQ and terrorism card. Just look at him talking before the iraq war, how many times did he mention AQ and terrorism even though AQ had nothing to do with iraq. AQ will never be stopped because it isnt in the USAs advantage to do so.