Post #17,997
11/13/01 12:08:20 AM
|
Taliban may have abandoned Kabul.
Mass exodus of vehicles is reported by [link|http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-111301kabul_wr.story|Los Angeles Times].
[link|http://www.aaxnet.com|AAx]
|
Post #18,004
11/13/01 12:58:30 AM
|
Oh good. Now we have a new chaos
This Northern Alliance doesn't exactly make one confident.
Now, perhaps, we send in troops to "help" impose order, only they themselves *MAKE* order?
"Beware of bugs in the above code; I have only proved it correct, not tried it."
-- Donald Knuth
|
Post #18,013
11/13/01 4:53:54 AM
|
Northern Alliance not much better then the Taliban
[link|http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/13/international/asia/13AFGH.html|Executions of P.O.W.'s Cast Doubts on Alliance]
"They searched him and emptied his pockets. Then, one soldier fired two bursts from his rifle into the man's chest. A second soldier beat the lifeless body with his rifle butt. A third repeatedly smashed a rocket- propelled-grenade launcher into the man's head.
The killing occurred minutes after Northern Alliance soldiers, advancing toward Kabul, surged deep into Taliban territory. They chose to celebrate with executions.
...
Looting was widespread. Alliance soldiers, who have received extensive backing from the United States, plundered Taliban bodies and bunkers, stealing shoes, bags of sugar, flashlights and anything else that they could find. "I got 700,000 afghani!" a soldier who was leaving an abandoned Taliban bunker shouted, flashing a wad of bills worth $20. "I got 700,000!"
The killings here suggested that alliance soldiers might prove difficult to control as their victories build.
...
The commander of 300 soldiers in the special Zarbati units, "Captain Habib," who took part in the attack, seemed unconcerned when told of the killings. "The soldiers must have been very angry," he said, and he shrugged."
|
Post #18,037
11/13/01 10:37:09 AM
|
Wrong mission.
Our military isn't good at imposing order.
Just killing people and breaking things.
We don't want the Soviets in there, so we back ObL.
We don't want ObL in there, so we back the N.A.
Anyone want to put odds on whether we'll like the N.A. long term?
|
Post #18,039
11/13/01 10:44:13 AM
|
Probably not
One of the main reasons why the Taliban was able to expel the Northern Alliance from places like Kabul was because of the massacres that the Northern Alliance perpetrated when they previously took power. If I remember correctly, the Taliban at least imposed order when they took power.
This is just another repeat of the failed American foreign policy, prop up "our" dictators, who cares that they are dictators, etc., at least they are "our" dictators. Look at Saudia Arabia. They don't even pretend to have democracy or human rights, yet the US goes right along propping them up.
|
Post #18,046
11/13/01 11:12:54 AM
|
The Saudis have always been "good guys", honest.
[link|http://www.smh.com.au/news/0111/08/world/world4.html|http://www.smh.com..../world4.html]
London: United States special agents were told to back off the bin Laden family and the Saudi royals soon after George Bush became president, although that has all changed since September 11, a BBC television program has claimed
BBC2's Newsnight also said on Tuesday night that it had secret documents from the FBI investigation into the terrorist attacks which showed that despite claims that Osama bin Laden is the black sheep of the family, at least two other US-based members are suspected of links with a possible terrorist organisation.
The program said it had obtained evidence that the FBI was on the trail of bin Laden family members living in the US before September 11. A document showed that special agents from the Washington field office were investigating Abdullah, a close relative of Osama, because of his relationship with the World Assembly of Muslim Youth (WAMY), a suspected terrorist organisation, it said.
The US Treasury has not frozen WAMY's assets, and insists it is a charity, the program said, yet Pakistan had expelled WAMY "operatives" and India claimed WAMY was funding an organisation linked to bombings in Kashmir. The FBI did look into WAMY but for some reason agents were pulled off the trail, it said.
The former head of the American visa bureau in Jeddah from 1987 to 1989, Michael Springman, told the program: "In Saudi Arabia I was repeatedly ordered by high-level State Department officials to issue visas to unqualified applicants - people who had no ties either to Saudi Arabia or to their own country. I complained there. I complained here in Washington ... and I was ignored." He added: "What I was doing was giving visas to terrorists, recruited by the CIA and Osama bin Laden to come back to the United States for training to be used in the war in Afghanistan against the then Soviets."
The program said it had been told by a highly placed source in a US intelligence agency there had always been "constraints" on investigating Saudis, but under President George Bush it had become much worse.
After the elections, the intelligence agencies were told to "back off" from investigating the bin Laden family and the Saudi royals. The policy was reversed after September 11, it reported.
|
Post #18,061
11/13/01 12:02:13 PM
|
Note
We have been backing the NA somewhat, but we have also been trying to put together a government independent of the NA. This is the reason people are talking to the old king of Afghanistan. He has no real power, but he would make a good figure head for a new government.
This is one of the reasons the military and the politicians are in conflict over the war. The military wants to cripple the Taliban as quickly as possible. The politicians don't want the Taliban to fall until they have a replacement that the US can live with.
I think what happened is that the Taliban's control over much of Afghanistan was more fragile then people thought because many of the regional warlords are willing to support any side that will leave them in power.
Jay
|
Post #18,212
11/14/01 6:28:23 AM
|
Interesting column by Maureen Dowd
[link|http://www.nytimes.com/2001/11/14/opinion/14DOWD.html|Go Fly a Kite, Taliban]
"We give the Northern Alliance an air force and they embarrass us with savage force.
...
The color our foreign policy will be wearing this fall is gray. We have to capture Osama bin Laden and quell terrorism, so the Bush administration is making compromises and offering carrots where it once turned up its nose.
Mr. Rumsfeld bristled defensively when asked about reports of Northern Alliance atrocities. But the retired general Wesley Clark spoke bluntly to Wolf Blitzer: "War is a matter of relative evils. We're not legally responsible for all this and we're probably not going to be able to physically stop it, either."
Based on this senior American officials may be able to be tried for war crimes under the same theory that many want to try Ariel Sharon for Sabra and Shatilla, which was perpetrated by Lebanese Christian militiamen, namely the US leaders allied themselves with the NA and clearly knew that the NA would commit these massacres and did nothing to stop them.
|
Post #18,317
11/14/01 5:37:29 PM
|
You aptly remind us (a constant need, that)
The first casualty of war is truth
Let us not believe *anything* except the direct utterance of a Fairwitness in her official capacity.
What? You say we have no such creatures?
Then, Da capo, Jump to [Start], Loop.
|
