Afghanistan 2011

[mcrit]

Most people do believe that their perspective is the correct one. No one here, ........ immune to that.

There may have been truer words written on this forum, but I have as yet to find them. The person that understands this concept is much closer to enlightenment, (for lack of a better word) than the one who does not. I have often found that those who complain the loudest about others' closed mindedness have some of the most tightly shut minds around.

The distinction between a soldier and a terrorist is not a subtle one. A soldier is bound by the law of armed conflict. This essence of this law is that a military force can not kill, maim, or otherwise target civilians just for the sake of targeting civilians. It does allow that civilians may be harmed as a consequence of a strike on a legitimate military target. A terrorist need not operate under such restrictions.

[Prairie Chicken]

Gee STL, after reading thru your travel post it looks like you put quite a few of those 40 hours to good use! I'm getting a little behind on my response so let's address that commentary first.

I agree seeing for oneself is a preferred way to stay informed but is not feasible in many cases and even so, often doesn't provide the big picture. You raised the issue of Afganistan but even being informed about local & national issues here at home is a major challenge which I’ve only been able to fully grasp since I retired and had the time to comprehend what wasn't in the news, while trying to read between the media lines.

I’m inclined to think you’re making too much of the meaning of words. Words have different meanings for all of us. My ‘blue’ may not be your ‘blue’, and that is before someone throws ‘azul’ or ‘bleu’ into the mix. That is fine as long as we get

the accurate, balanced, and fair reporting with which you can draw informed conclusions

that you referred to. What concerns me most are (1) the lack of said reporting; and (2) public apathy.

Why the apathy? That’s a long discussion in itself & may be part of the concern STL was expressing when he said

We have a real tendency these days to focus on the individuals involved in any given discussion/issue while ignoring the larger systems within which they work, or which govern their actions

I agree full-heartedly with STL when he said

In a great many ways the system we work, live, play in, and fight for both literally and metaphorically is broken, very broken. There are signs of it everywhere we look, yet we ignore them and carry on as usual secure in the idea that the rationale behind it is sound. In many cases we as a whole simply do not have enough information to understand these issues or ask relevant questions to the right people, instead we leave it to the media to do it for us and the result is a self perpetuating problem.

The question is, what do we do about it? I suppose informing the public is a good first step & that is what is being pursued here.

As far as America being the "Land of the Free" ... well, we know the answer to that. Unfortunately, far too many Americans do not see it because of the aforementions problems, exasperated because many don't venture beyond their own borders. A few years ago MacLeans magazine published an article called "How Canada Stole the American Dream". Google it for an interesting read complete with statistics.

So then there is the issue of branding & use of language. And that leads me to politics ... and the media puppets ... and

that's another thread entirely.

Which takes me to STL's questions. For right or wrong we're in Afganistan. I believe our troops have made a significant difference to some Afgans in the short term, but doubt if anything will change in the long run. I would hate to see the gains we have made be lost by leaving ... but believe that is what will happen when we do leave. I suspect we're there now not to help the people but to help prevent the 'terrorists' from gaining a safe haven from which to wage their own wars against 'us'. And that leads me to another question. How much should we get get involved in our (global) neighbor's business? Were we right to try to impose our beliefs on the (then) Taliban government when they were destroying the famous Bamiyan buddahs and enslaving their women? Do we permit genocide if it is the choice of the government? Do we look the other way if our neighbor beats his wife?

Ah, I'm getting too philisophical. Time to get up & go do something useful.

[Prairie Chicken]

OK, having now had an opportunity to catch up to the rest of the thread I'm struck by the fact that most of the posters seem to have a reasonable appreciation of the history of the conflict(s) in Afganistan. I'm impressed. Are we actually getting more info from the media than I had believed, or is it simply easier to read the history & then make 'imformed' comments?

Much has been made of the word 'terrorist'. What about the word 'hero'? I personally reserve that word for someone who selflessly and without regard to their own personal safety has gone beyond the expected to provide aid. I'm thinking of the neighbor or police officer who rushes into the burning home to save someone. I'm not thinking of the fireman with all his gear & training doing the same act (although there are certainly instances when it may be the case). I do not hold a soldier who is killed by an IED in any higher regard than one who comes safely home. I give both the utmost respect for choosing to do something which I choose not to do. I give credit to those who serve--the military, the police, firemen--but I don't believe that if some of those risks you've signed on for come to be that makes you by default a hero. It may, you can still go above & beyond the normal call of duty, but I truly believe the word 'hero' is over-used & as a result has lost it's effectiveness.

I'm not quite sure how I got onto that tangent other than that it crosses my mind every time one of our fallen soldiers comes home from Afganistan. Those fallen soldiers and their families are the ones I think of when considering the Afgan conflict. I hate the fact that their sacrifices may be for so little.

[sky's the limit]

Wide awake at 0200... after a pee, not much else to do....

I’m inclined to think you’re making too much of the meaning of words. Words have different meanings for all of us.


Ah, I'm getting too philisophical. Time to get up & go do something useful.

Thanks for the input PC. Would suggest that words mean EVERYTHING. This is why we have lawyers being paid vast sums of money to define words and use them appropriately. Words are probably the single most power tool we have as a species, so I think it is vital that we put great importance on them. Words, or the careless use of them are a big part of the reason you feel so uninformed about this, and many other issues. The definition of "terrorist," as we see even here, is tough to pin down, but the meaning behind that word and how it affects anyone tagged with it these last 10yrs is enormous. A human being can be indefinitely detained simply by being suspected of being a terrorist, so this word in particular carries some very heavy overtones.

The use of words like "hero," as you put forward is important enough for governments, militaries, protesters, and pundits, to debate at length as it can be carelessly thrown around as you suggest, and to the uniformed this has great effect. As you said in your first post, we just do not get balanced, fair, reportage these days on most issues, so being able to discern between words and their meaning is not something the general public is capable of in most instances. I know on a great many topics, I have no grounding in which to allow me to consider the language used and draw my own informed opinion.

BTW, who says "getting too philosophical" isn't useful? Looks like you had to come back a second time...!

The distinction between a soldier and a terrorist is not a subtle one. A soldier is bound by the law of armed conflict. This essence of this law is that a military force can not kill, maim, or otherwise target civilians just for the sake of targeting civilians. It does allow that civilians may be harmed as a consequence of a strike on a legitimate military target. A terrorist need not operate under such restrictions.

Mcrit,

Interesting statement, and while on the surface I would totally agree, what happens when the war or context of the soldier's engagement is illegal? Say like Iraq, or when any of the military Junta's around the world use their armed forces for oppression where they certainly do target civilians without repercussions? We are not just discussing our Army, which I should mention is held in very high regard by those who've worked with it as allies, a Colonel I spoke with today was effusive in his compliments of the Canadians, which is always nice to hear.

Back to bed... take two.

stl
stl

[Shiny Side Up]

Would suggest that words mean EVERYTHING.

Why? Because while the truncheon may be used in lieu of conversation, words will always retain their power. Words offer the means to meaning, and for those who will listen, the enunciation of truth. And the truth is, there is something terribly wrong with this country, isn't there? Cruelty and injustice, intolerance and oppression. And where once you had the freedom to object, to think and speak as you saw fit, you now have censors and systems of surveillance coercing your conformity and soliciting your submission. How did this happen? Who's to blame? Well certainly there are those more responsible than others, and they will be held accountable, but again truth be told, if you're looking for the guilty, you need only look into a mirror. I know why you did it. I know you were afraid. Who wouldn't be? War, terror, disease. There were a myriad of problems which conspired to corrupt your reason and rob you of your common sense.

[Expat]

Back to topic. A lot has been said about our mission there in Af. Reconstruction, laying foundations of a democratic society, betterment of education, etc… All noble causes, which makes for a better sell to our voters and tax payers. But what has happened on the ground, during the past nine years is totally different.
Democracy there is… with stolen elections, with fraud and corruption second to none. I guess they have imported the American system…
The country is now officially an Islamic Republic, and the official law is Sharia… What the west considers barbaric practices in Iran is also common here. See the text below for an example. It seems that nobody here wants to interfere with the practices. Kunduz was Talib free until last year…
As far as reconstruction goes, the pace is so slow, that the west is now turning to Russia and the CIS countries for help.
Of course, all the information is public, and available to all. What is surprising is that most people do not bother going past the media headlines, and form opinions with very shallow information. The news concentrates on statements by commanders, about how the situation is improving, how the surge had a positive impact, etc…

From the BBC news:
By Quentin Sommerville
January 27 - The men who stoned a couple to death in north Afghanistan will be brought to justice, say officials, after footage of the killings came to light. (BBC News)
The man and woman were accused of adultery in the district of Dashte Archi in Kunduz province last August.
Hundreds of people attended the stoning but no-one was charged. The area is still under Taliban control.
After viewing the footage, regional police chief Gen Daoud Daoud said those responsible could be recognised.
"Special police investigators will be sent there, we will find them and they will be brought to justice," he told the BBC.
A mobile phone recording of the killings has only just been seen by Afghan and Nato officials. Most of the video is too graphic to be shown.
Soaked in blood
The video begins with Siddqa, a 25-year-old woman, standing waist-deep in a hole in the ground.
She is entirely hidden in a blue burka. Hundreds of men from the village are gathered as two mullahs pass sentence. As Taliban fighters look on, the sentence is passed and she is found guilty of adultery.
The stoning lasts two minutes. Hundreds of rocks - some larger than a man's fist - are thrown at her head and body. She tries to crawl out of the hole, but is beaten back by the stones. A boulder is then thrown at her head, her burka is soaked in blood, and she collapses inside the hole.
Incredibly Siddqa was still alive. The mullahs are heard saying she should be left alone. But a Taliban fighter steps forward with a rifle and she is shot three times.
Then her lover, Khayyam, is brought to the crowd. His hands are tied behind his back. Before he is blindfolded he looks into the mobile phone camera. He appears defiant.
The attack on him is even more ferocious. His body, lying face down, jerks as the rocks meet their target. He is heard to be crying, but is soon silent.
The couple had earlier eloped to Pakistan, but were lured back with the false promise that they would not be harmed.
Taliban spokesman Zabiullah Mujahid defended the sentencing.
In a telephone interview he said: "Anyone who knows about Islam knows that stoning is in the Koran, and that it is Islamic law.
"There are people who call it inhuman - but in doing so they insult the Prophet. They want to bring foreign thinking to this country."
'Fear and hatred'
Nato's senior civilian representative, Mark Sedwill, said the Taliban had an "appalling" view of Islamic justice.
But he said the Afghan government needed to improve the rule of law in the country.
"Communities that are terrorised don't have choices… that's why we have to remove the Taliban in these communities," he said.
"It is absolutely critical that the Afghan government competes head-on with the Taliban in this area - the rule of law - so that people don't face the kind of choice that this community faced."
Ahmed Nader Nadery, of the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission, watched the video in full. He said it brought back memories of when the Taliban ruled the country.
"It not only reminded me of those days in Kabul and other parts of the country, but it created a feeling of fear, and of further hatred of this group. And a fear - what if they return," he said.
Mr Nadery added: "The Afghan government and the international community have failed to deal with these grave crimes. It happened at a time when there was a debate about the future of the international community, and discussions of their timeline for leaving the country."


It seems that after nine years, the country is not what we think it ought to be… Nation building with boots does not work very well…

[Slats]

If not with boots, how then do you propose we prevent situations such as this from re-occurring? Or do we just leave, shaking our heads disapprovingly and wagging our fingers impotently?

[Prairie Chicken]

STL, Expat, what are the Afgan people like? Are they the type of people we would like to welcome into Canada as immigrants? For some time I've wondered if it was possible for a family to sponsor a young Afgan woman to come into Canada. I wonder if they would, depending on the Afgan area they live in & the Talib control, fall under the title of refugee. I know it is an idea which would be only a drop in the bucket solution, but if they are a good people (and I think they are), would Canada not be better to sponsor those that may wish to come than to follow our present course?

STL, I don't believe words without substance are quite as strong as you believe although I will grant you the internet seems to be affecting that. Perhaps it is your journalistic side coming out. I will agree that language is a defining aspect separating mankind from the beasts. And yes, having read the law for most of my career I do understand the value of not only words such as 'terrorist' but also those as simple as 'and' and 'or', as well as the power of a punctuation mark.

[sky's the limit]

Slats,

I only have a question to address your question: What makes you think that "preventing" this is our responsibility? Was it ever our responsibility? Do we take on responsibility for the actions from the later 70's that have lead this country down this path? It's a tough one to answer. As Expat and I have said, things are much, much, worse here than they were before we came, and as I outlined in a much earlier post, this did not have to be the case. Ok, ok, a question and a comment...


PC,

You may say you do not believe words carry the power I suggest they do, but I really hate to point out your last sentence gives you away...! I think you actually know they do. At the end of the day, language governs everything, and just because your life is in a context that is very secure and protected, don't forget that most of the rest of the world does not share that arrangement we take for granted at home. Ask them how language and the nuances contained in it affect their lives...

What are Afghans like? Well, Expat lives here so I'm sure he will be able to give a more detailed answer than I, but here is my take. Every Afghan I have met has been proud, welcoming, and engaged. Not to mention talented. From ANA soldiers, to architects and engineers, Embassy officials, taxi drivers, business people, joiners and potters, to translators and government people. I have always been treated very well, and with kindness and respect. The pride however should not be glossed over, these people are fiercely proud, and given the conditions that prevail in this country, I have much respect for them by virtue they are still here. This is one tough place.

Tomorrow, I will get to see the "other" side. I'm going on a 12km IED/IDF foot patrol in Kandahar province where a large number of rocket attacks stem from, and a great many IED's are found. This afternoon was spent briefing for this mission, walking it through, and part of that was learning about the potential interactions we will have with the locals, needless to say they will not be welcoming or positive in nature. After the mission is over, and with permission, perhaps I can elaborate a little bit more. Either way, I am very interested by what I will see and learn tomorrow. Perhaps I can add to the pictures below:

GTL_0494.jpg (210.87 KiB) Viewed 1363 times

GTL_0628.jpg (238.78 KiB) Viewed 1363 times

GTL_1460.jpg (499.13 KiB) Viewed 1363 times

GTL_0386.jpg (270.29 KiB) Viewed 1363 times

GTL_1492.jpg (286.89 KiB) Viewed 1363 times

GTL_0618.jpg (235.15 KiB) Viewed 1363 times

GTL_1504.jpg (147.55 KiB) Viewed 1363 times

[Expat]

I think that Afghans make very good refugees. I have met some in Canada, and they seem to adapt better than Pakistanis, and Arabs. There are various ethnicities to consider, and they are quite different. Pashtuns from the south and east are the more tribal type. In the north, you have ethnic Uzbeks and Tajiks, while in the center, the Hazaras make the population.
It may prove hard to sponsor a young female, as the traditions of not letting females travel alone are secular… Also, young females normally fetch a good amount, as a bride, and the families are not willing to let them go… But it may still possible, through some shelter programs. I know a man who offered me to take his baby daughter to Canada, but I cannot sponsor, while working here.
Afghans generally seem to lack confidence in the future of their country. They live for today, going from job to job, to whatever pays the most.
They do not hesitate to get fake diplomas to get jobs, and the real diplomas are very poor.
Their only allegiance is to their family, and clan. They have no allegiance to their employer, and will take whatever they can from him. This is the biggest challenge in working with them.
On the plus side, they are very polite, and easy to get along with. They are generally nonviolent. They respect foreigners, although they do not trust them. They are very hospitable, and take a great pleasure in inviting foreigners for dinner, or for a wedding. To be considered a brother is an accomplishment, and takes time. This is when you will get the full confidence and straight talk from them.

[Hedley]

Just got this in my email. Doubt the sentiment will be very popular with the people here:

We are asking everyone to say a prayer for "Darkhorse" 3rd Battalion 5th
Marines and their families. They are fighting it out in Afghanistan & they
have lost 12 marines in 4 days. IT WOULD BE NICE TO SEE the message spread
if more could pass it on.

God Bless America and God Bless the United States Marine Corps... Semper
Fi, Often Tested, Always Faithful, Brothers Forever

Lindsay Lohan, 24, gets her name and face all over the news because she
went to jail. Now she's getting it all over again for failing her drug
test.

But: Nothing in the media about these guys because no one seems to care:

Justin Allen, 23,
Brett Linley, 29,
Matthew Weikert, 29,
Justus Bartett, 27,
Dave Santos, 21,
Chase Stanley, 21,
Jesse Reed, 26,
Matthew Johnson, 21,
Zachary Fisher, 24,
Brandon King, 23,
Christopher Goeke, 23,
Sheldon Tate, 27,

All are Marines that gave their lives for YOU this week!

[Shiny Side Up]

As Expat and I have said, things are much, much, worse here than they were before we came,

There is a question though of how good of state was the country before we came. Hell how good was it before the Russians came? Looking back a little bit farther, we can see some of the roots of todays problems. One of the big questions I always have is why specifically a hard line religious fundemental group seems to be so attractive. Why is a hard Sharia law seem so key to the Taliban? This seems to be often - like the story Expat gave us above - one of the reasons the media loves to use to pull at our western morals to justify our staying there.

The Saur Revolution

Once in power, the PDPA implemented a socialist agenda. It moved to promote state atheism, and carried out an ill-conceived land reform, which were misunderstood by virtually all Afghans. They also imprisoned, tortured or murdered thousands of members of the traditional elite, the religious establishment, and the intelligentsia. They also prohibited usury and made a number of statements on women's rights, by declaring equality of the sexes and introduced women to political life. A prominent example was Anahita Ratebzad, who was a major Marxist leader and a member of the Revolutionary Council. Ratebzad wrote the famous May 28, 1978 New Kabul Times editorial, which declared: "Privileges which women, by right, must have are equal education, job security, health services, and free time to rear a healthy generation for building the future of the country ... Educating and enlightening women is now the subject of close government attention." Their opposition became particularly pronounced after the Soviet Union occupied the country in late December 1979, who feared the government was in danger of being toppled by mujahideen forces.

Doesn't sound very good the whole torturing and murdering of thousands, but there defenitely in the muslim world seem to be a direct relationship between socialist governments and increased women's rights. Is the emergence of the Taliban a backlash to this?

Before the revolution things didn't seem so bad either, but we might be closer to the roots.

President Mohammad Daoud Khan

His ten-year tenure was noted for his foreign policy turn to the Soviet Union, the completion of the Helmand Valley project, which radically improved living conditions in southwestern Afghanistan, and tentative steps towards the emancipation of women.

By 1956, having been rebuffed by the US for both sales of arms and loans, and in view of the independence of the former parts of the British Empire in South Asia.

Daud supported a nationalistic and one-sided reunification of the Pashtun people with Afghanistan, but this would have involved taking a considerable amount of territory from the new nation of Pakistan and was in direct antagonism to an older plan of the 1950s whereby a confederation between the two countries was proposed. The move further worried the non-Pashtun populations of Afghanistan such as the minority Tajik and Uzbek who suspected Daud Khan's intention was to increase the Pashtun's disproportionate hold on political power. During that time, the Pashtuns (or Afghans) consisted roughly 35 - 42 percent of Afghanistan's ethnic demographics but they represented over 80 percent of the government and held all important ministries, such as the Ministries of the Interior, Foreign Affairs, Economic Affairs, Defense and even most of the banks.



With the creation of an independent Pakistan, the Durand line conflict with the British colonialists was inherited by the two countries.

In 1961, as a result of Daoud's antagonistic policies and support to militias in areas along the Durand Line, Pakistan closed its borders with Afghanistan causing an economic crisis and greater dependence on the USSR. The USSR became Afghanistan's principal trading partner. Within a few months, the USSR had sent jet airplanes, tanks, heavy and light artillery for a heavily discounted price tag of $25 million.

In 1962, Daud sent troops across the international border into the Bajaur region of Pakistan in an attempt to manipulate events in that area and to press the Pashtunistan issue, but the Afghan military forces were routed by Pakistani military. During this period the propaganda war from Afghanistan, carried on by radio, was relentless.

The crisis was finally resolved with the forced resignation of Daud Khan in March 1963 and the re-opening of the border in May. Pakistan has continued to remain suspicious of Afghan intentions and Daud's policy has left a negative impression in the eyes of many Tajik tribesmen who felt they were being disenfranchised for the sake of Pashtun Nationalism.

One must admit that certain players in this game probably have no real desire to see Afghanistan back on its feet. Has everything really just been boiled down from the various ethnic groups in the area fighting over land?

[bizjets101]

From 1929 - 1978 Afghanistan was considered to be one of the most peaceful countries in Asia. They maintained neutrality during World War II, avoided wars with their neighbors, and was internally free of mass killings and mayhem.

Afghanistan had the misfortune to be located on the doorstep of the USSR.

The April 78 assassination of a prominent Parcham idelolgue led directly to the overthrow of Daoud 10 days later, and the following day communist officers brutally murdered Daoud, his family and other Government officials.

So from the Marxist Coup, the Soviet Invasion 79, the Soviet withdrawal 89, communist regime collapse 92, at that time Pakistan ruthlessly interfered with Afghan internal affairs - followed by Pakistani ethnic groups takeover of Kabul in 96.

In 2001 - 9/11 and all of a sudden - 23 years after we began the destruction of Afghanistan and an entire generation of people - we go into Afghanistan - kill another 18,000 people and another 10 years go by.

During the Soviets embattled regime - fighting American backed fighters - they managed on average to kill 240 people a day - every day, for ten years. Since Canada hit the shores - we've managed to assist in killing 5 people everyday - for ten years.

As with the Soviet backed fighters, thousands of the American backed fighters - who fought and died - where just boys - 40 percent were 18 - 35, 60 percent were either over 36 or 17 and under.

[2R]

Time to support our troops and bring them HOME.
The mission should not have taken more than three months.Something i said nine years ago when the mission was begun in error without the tools to do the job.they sent troops to do a job without the tools.
It has been the most grotesque failures of this modern military that those in charge made the same mistakes as the Soviets did in their misadventures in that region.
As soon as Nato leaves the bad guys will turn up again just like a sick game of whack a mole.
Time to abandon Afghanistan to its fate and watch the Chinese tanks roll down the old silk road to reclaim their ancestoral lands that they left in the third century.
I doubt the Chinese will make the same errors that the west has made,or the soviets.
Perhaps if you are there long enough you will see the new Chinese stealth fighters in action against the tribes that chased the Chinese out of Afghanistan in the third century long before it was called Afghanistan.They where the buddists that built most of the big buddahs that the Taliban blew up.
If you support our troops bring them HOME.

[Sheila]

Beautiful pictures STL, are you interested in commenting on news videos coming out of CBC, like this one http://www.cbc.ca/video/#/News/1221258968/ID=1768103718? These video things are strange. This one was for reporting news about Somalians recruiting kids from Toronto but it is effective if they get some Somalian youth to go on and say, "wake up Canada, or there will be blood". I hope you know there are other, recent news stories coming out about terrorists here in Canada. It disturbs me because when there used to be a story someplace someone would read it in the newspapers, and where something happened or who was involved. Then there would be more stories written to report a growing problem or issue. Now, they make a video, throw in some actors and they try to make it news. But we can't believe the "videos" (they could not be real including the persons in them)
Will you be able to see if it's true, where they destroyed villager's homes to make the villagers safer, and where the USAF gave those instructions?
If you are not interested in commenting, I know where to read good commentaries elsewhere, like in Macleans, do you read Macleans magazine?

I appreciate reading less biased, critical NEWS of Afghanistan. Thanks for writing.

[Slats]

I only have a question to address your question: What makes you think that "preventing" this is our responsibility? Was it ever our responsibility? Do we take on responsibility for the actions from the later 70's that have lead this country down this path? It's a tough one to answer.

Good point. However, if we have indeed contributed to making their situation worse, as you suggest, then do we not have some level of moral responsibility to, at the very least, repair that if not try to improve things?

As Expat and I have said, things are much, much, worse here than they were before we came

How can you say so with such confidence? You are there now to see the ongoing aftermath; were you there before our invovlement to witness anything with which to compare?

Nice pics, by the way. Love the one of the woodworking.

[Shiny Side Up]

From 1929 - 1978 Afghanistan was considered to be one of the most peaceful countries in Asia. They maintained neutrality during World War II, avoided wars with their neighbors, and was internally free of mass killings and mayhem.

Afghanistan had the misfortune to be located on the doorstep of the USSR.

Umm, I don't mean to say but did you read any of the stuff that was above? Maybe you missed:

Daud supported a nationalistic and one-sided reunification of the Pashtun people with Afghanistan, but this would have involved taking a considerable amount of territory from the new nation of Pakistan and was in direct antagonism to an older plan of the 1950s whereby a confederation between the two countries was proposed. The move further worried the non-Pashtun populations of Afghanistan such as the minority Tajik and Uzbek who suspected Daud Khan's intention was to increase the Pashtun's disproportionate hold on political power.

or

In 1962, Daud sent troops across the international border into the Bajaur region of Pakistan in an attempt to manipulate events in that area and to press the Pashtunistan issue, but the Afghan military forces were routed by Pakistani military. During this period the propaganda war from Afghanistan, carried on by radio, was relentless.

Note that while it was unfortunate that Afghanistan ended up heavily in the Soviet camp, the initial problems there had more to do with the old problems which even go farther back into British colonial rule in the area. It could also be said that it has had the misfortune of being neighbors to Pakistan and Iran too. It is also notable that Afghanistan, while remaining neutral during the Second World War, also fell into the Axis camp, being most heavily engaged in trade with Japan. During the thirties they supported various factions against the then Nationalist Chinese. After the Second World War while peace seemed to be the order of the day but there has been an ever present agitation between the various ethnic groups.

One might say trouble was brewing.

[sky's the limit]

How can you say so with such confidence? You are there now to see the ongoing aftermath; were you there before our invovlement to witness anything with which to compare?

Nice pics, by the way. Love the one of the woodworking.

I can say that with such confidence because I spend a lot of time talking to people here, people who lived in parts of the country without Taliban influence, foreigners who worked here prior to 2001, I spend a lot of time reading about this place, and it is very obvious looking at it from a variety of perspectives. How can you say with confidence Hitler was bad? Were you there? That is not a logical statement really, but if you have a hard time believing it, then I understand why you would ask. 10yrs of war is never a good way to improve a place, particularly a war that has spread significantly over the last few years. As Expat has said many times, the influence of the Taliban has increased drastically in the last 5yrs, and I wrote earlier about why. It really is not hard hard to see this at all. Glad you liked the photos - took forever to upload them.

Sheila - There is no unbiased reporting. Embedded reporting precludes investigative journalism... Don't doubt it for a minute, it's like PR for the Military. Just the way they want it. Trust me, you can hardly find any information you are not given while embedded, hence the need to be outside the wire too.

Moving on.

This is not about comparing the Soviet time here with ours. It's not a competition of who is killing less... and remember, without the BILLIONS poured into the country by the American and Saudi governments, the Soviets would not have been fighting like they did. The Taliban, while supported by Iran and other sources, have nowhere near the benefactors the Mujahideen had, or the arms, so stats like who killed more per day are rather useless as the contexts are very different. The methods have changed a great deal over time as well. The CF for example take great pains to avoid any civilian casualties, the Americans on the other hand are much more heavy handed in operations. A Cnd Major I spoke to on the subject said they figure when "we all leave," (we being the coalition nations), "then the shit will really hit the fan." His perspective. One thing about this war, it's VERY multinational, and someone is always watching.

One of the first actions of the fighters engaged against the Soviets was to destroy schools and replace them with Madrases, this was a American/Saudi backed initiative run through the Pakistani ISI (which handled almost all funds flowing into Afghanistan during the 80's) with the intention of creating an very poorly educated (secular education) population with strong religious ties to fight the atheist Soviets - it worked really well, except that the results were not really seen until the very end of the Soviet time here and into the 90's when the Taliban movement started to expand - coincidence? Not likely. There is a wonderful book called Ghost Wars that details American involvement in the country through the CIA from about 1979 to 2000, I would highly recommend reading it. The general Afghan population now has illiteracy rates in the 90% range, it is no wonder why religious teachings, extreme religious teachings, can take hold.

Anyway, again, good to see the responses here. One thing I do find interesting is the referral to the Soviet "invasion" and "occupation" in all quoted materials. Talk to any Russians about this? They don't see it quite that way... It's all a matter of perspective isn't it?

I'm off for the day, hope to have some shots to share either later tonight or tomorrow.

stl

[bizjets101]

From 1929 - 1978 Afghanistan was considered to be one of the most peaceful countries in Asia. They maintained neutrality during World War II, avoided wars with their neighbors, and was internally free of mass killings and mayhem.

This is not a statement, it is a historical fact.

[bizjets101]

Click Here Operation Enduring Freedom Individual Canadian casualties.

[Expat]

Bamyan carpet shop:

[Expat]

Salang tunnel, built by the communist government, with Soviet help. 1965. Photo of Massoud above the entrance.

[bizjets101]

Photos are excellent - must be amazing experience being there!! Lots of video's on youtube of the Salang Tunnel - I recall the huge tunnel fire when a fuel tanker blew up!!!!

Just looking at some of the videos on YouTube - amazing.

As for current events Afghanistan - I can't actually see the American's leaving in my lifetime.
They never really got over losing their proposed oil pipelines of Unocal in the 90's - had struck a deal with the Taliban, and Pakistani's to get all that Caspian Oil to Indian ports to American shores.

Now that Click Here Bridas is half owned by the Chinese - there is no way America is going to lose out on the oil again.

After passing the click here US Congress passed the Iran and Libyan Santions
Act to prevent the rest of the world from getting the oil through Iranian pipelines.

The reality is America needs peace in the region, they have to keep Pakistan happy no matter how much they don't get along or trust each other, so Canada - may as well help whoever we can while we are there - we owe the people of Afghanistan that - and much more.

I know, bummer it comes down to oil, but without it, America would have never been in the region in the first place.

[Shiny Side Up]

A condensed timeline of events.

1919 - Afganistan regains independance from the influence of the British. Afghanistan is under the rule of Amanullah Khan

1921 - An armistice is reached with the British

1924 - Khost rebellion protesting modernization is supressed.

1927-1928 - Reforms introduced including compulsory education and the abolishment of the trasitional muslim women's veil

1929 - Amanullah Khan abdicates the throne after rebel forces take Kabul in January. Mohammed Nadir Shah retakes Kabul from the rebels in Ocober with assistance from the British in India.

His wikipedia entry deserves special mention here:

Muhammad Nader Shah was criticised by many Afghan historians as an agent of Britain in Afghanistan. During his regime hundreds of thousands of innocent people were killed in Afghanistan. His family held the highest positions during his reign. His brother Sardar Hashim was Prime Minister of Afghanistan and Sardar Mahmud was Defence Minister of Afghanistan. Most of his Ministers were from his tribe called Mohammadzai. Despite the criticism, most Afghans agree that his handling of northern revolts was especially effective in that it stamped the dominance of the Pashtun tribe over the other minority tribes living in Afghanistan.

1930 - Uprisings of Pashtun Shinwari in the south and Tajiks in the North are supressed. Also border incident with Soviets involving Uzbek led groups using Afghanistan as refuge while raiding Soviet territory.

1933 - Mohammed Nadir Shah is assasinated. His assasin is executed by being cut to pieces. All of the assasin's immediate family are hanged. He is succeeded by his son Mohammed Zahir Shah. Only the age of 19 he is largely assisted by his uncles for the next 30 years.

1934 - Afghanistan joins League of Nations and formal relation between the nation and the United States begin. Wishing to avoid association with the USSR and Britain, Afghanistan pursues trade relations with Germany, Italy and Japan. Afghan volunteers are defeated at the battle of Yarkand by the Chinese.

1947 - India and Pakistan gain independance from Britain.

1949 - Border incident between Afghanistan and Pakistan. Afghanistan declares that all previous agreements with respect to the Afghan-Pakistani border (the Durand Line)are voided.

1953 - Mohammed Daoud Khan becomes Prime Minister, succeeding one of Zahir Shah's uncles who previously held the position.

1955 - SEATO and CENTO are formed. In both the member organizations uphold Pakistan's (a member of both organizations) claims in regard to the old treaties regarding the Durand Line. The UK had previously indicated this stance in 1950.

1956 - Afghanistan is rebuffed by the U.S. for the purchace of arms and loans.

1961 - Pakistan closes its borders with Afghanistan due to Afghanistan's support to militias operating along the border. This causes an economic crisis resulting in heavy Afghan dependance on the U.S.S.R.

1962 - Afghanistan send troops across the border into Pakistan, Pakistan routes the Afghan forces.

1963 - Border crisis resolved forcing the resignation of Daoud Kahn. Pakistan reopens its border with Afghanistan.

1964 - Afghanistan's new constitution is introduced including free elections, universal suffrage and women's liberation.

1973 - Daoud seizes power in a coup from Zahir Shah. Shortly after in October that year he successfully defends against a coup attempt.

1976 - The Afghan army and police supress a growing Islamic fundamentalist movement. The leaders of the movement flee to Pakistan. This group is supported by Pakistani Prime Minister Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto.

1977 - Daoud meets with Soviet leader Brezhnev. The Soviets press for Afghanistan to take a more neutral stance and are unhappy with the NATO advisers currently operating in Afghanistan.

1978 - The Saur revolution. Daoud and his family are executed. The Communist PDPA comes to power. The U.S., through the CIA, begins funding of the training of insurgents in Pakistan. The PDPA is responsible for the imprisonment and torture of thousands while attempting to push through land reforms and state sponsored atheism.

1979 - Soviet forces enter Afghanistan in December.

From 1929 - 1978 Afghanistan was considered to be one of the most peaceful countries in Asia. They maintained neutrality during World War II, avoided wars with their neighbors, and was internally free of mass killings and mayhem.

This is not a statement, it is a historical fact.

You might want to take a closer look at your fact. They might have been one of the more relatively peacful countries in Asia by comparisson. Certainly not one of the rosiest places to be on the planet during the timeframe you describe.

Talk to any Russians about this? They don't see it quite that way... It's all a matter of perspective isn't it?

Very. While the Russians have often been villified in Western eyes, they have a very different opinion on the matter. While the Russian actions there are often seen by the west as their "Vietnam" Russians have a very different perception of their "Vietnam" which stems from their unique view of the world shaped by their unique history. A very interesting book that touches on the subject if one is facinated by such things I would reccomend Soviet Air Land Battle Tactics by LTC (ret) William Baxter.

[Prairie Chicken]

bj101, I hadn't understood why Obama, reluctantly it seemed, went back into Afganistan in such a big way. This makes sense.