Text 1700, 68 rader
Skriven 2007-03-20 05:22:10 av Bob Ackley (1:2905/3)
   Kommentar till text 1694 av Alexander Koryagin (asni1)
Ärende: Have I written  [2/2]
=============================
Replying to a message of Alexander Koryagin to Bob Ackley:

 AK> By the way during last time there has been a lot civil wars with
 AK> number of victims much higher than in civil war which occured when
 AK> Yugoslavia had broken apart. You can see now, for example, Danfur in
 AK> Sudan and some other African countries. There are millions of victims
 AK> there but for some reason the military intervention is not the
 AK> option. The double standart and cinicism. It seems to me that there
 AK> is only one explanation - there is a force which hates Serbia more
 AK> than attrocities in Africa.

There's another explanation:  oil.  

 ak>>>>> Just opposite - the invasion in Afganistan provides best
 ak>>>>> agitation among moslems to join Al-Queda.

 BA>> Actually, most of the world agreed with the US actions against
 BA>> Afghanistan, it was the invasion and conquest of Iraq that has set
 BA>> things off in the Middle East.

 AK> Nethetheless, I think and repeat that Talib's Afganistan was not a
 AK> threat to America.

The problem was that they were protecting bin Laden and refused to hand him
and his people over for trial and punishment after 9/11.  That's certainly an
adequate cause for a war (and many wars in history have been started over
less provocation.

 AK> The US got nothing in Afganistan, only done thing
 AK> worse. They have not completed a single reasonable task. The US has
 AK> not caught Bin Laden, has not destroied Al-Queda, has made Afgan
 AK> people poorest people in the world, has made Afganistan the biggest
 AK> opium exporter in the world and nothing can be done with it.

As far as I know Afghanistan has *always* been the largest exporter of opium.

 AK> As you
 AK> see, that with Taliban the situation could has been more stable for
 AK> whole world.

 AK> America for long time conducted the policy of expediency. The
 AK> dictatorship in the country (for example in Pakistan) is good for
 AK> America because it will be worse if this dictatorship fall, and the
 AK> country plunge into the quite chaotic perestroyka with the obscure
 AK> rezult.

Not obscure at all.  It will become a fundamentalist Islamic state, and will
most likely ally with Iran (as will, eventually, most of Iraq).

 AK> The invasion to Afganistan is not less adventurism than
 AK> invasion to Iraq. There was a calm hive, but now it is dangerous to
 AK> turn back round. As for American security it of course could be
 AK> strenthened without war.

 AK> In short the aim of Bush in Afganistan - REVENGE (for 911, but to
 AK> those people who had not done it). The aim of Bush in Iraq - REVENGE
 AK> (his father could not topple Saddam). The price - two senceless wars
 AK> and sea of blood.

If you have Internet access, look into the "Project for a New American
Century,"
or "PNAC."  Those folks have been clamoring for the conquest of Iraq and the
establishment of a permanent US military presence in the Middle East since the
mid-1990s, and many of the people who signed off on that mission statement now
hold high positions in the current administration.

--- FleetStreet 1.19+
 * Origin: Bob's Boneyard, Emerson, Iowa (1:2905/3)