Wrong footing it in Afghanistan

[Cyrus]

The apolitical and humanitarian aid organization Doctors Without Frontiers is pulling out of Afghanistan. Its staff of some 80 people is leaving the country after 24 years there. The organisation’s leaders, in a press conference, denounced the American strategy of tying the Doctors' humanitarian aid to the American objectives in Afghanistan. That artificial connection, the Doctors accuse, has led to the Taliban and other anti-American forces to make legitimate targets of aid workers.

The aid organization cited, as an example, of the wrong-footed American policy, a leaflet showing an Afghan girl carrying a bag of wheat and saying that for assistance to continue, Afghans need to report information on the Taliban and al Qaeda!

So far, some 30 aid workers have been killed in Afghanistan. And since the safety of the volunteers can no longer be reasonably assured, the Doctors Without Frontiers is pulling out.

…Another good day for the war against terror – or whomever.



CNN Report (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/asiapcf/07/28/afghanistan.aid/index.html)

[MMMMMM]

One can't help but wonder what "wrong-footed" policies the doctors endured under when the Taliban was in power.

[Usul]

obviously they weren't "wrong footed" enough to make the doctors leave. The Taliban was tolerable. The US army was not. That is either very ironic, or very non-ironic, I haven't decided yet.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
The Taliban was tolerable.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder if the little girl carrying the bag of wheat thought the same when she was getting her clitorectomy.

Stu

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
The aid organization cited, as an example, of the wrong-footed American policy, a leaflet showing an Afghan girl carrying a bag of wheat and saying that for assistance to continue, Afghans need to report information on the Taliban and al Qaeda!

[/ QUOTE ]

I suspect the Taliban and Al Queda were killing aid workers long before this leaflet was created.

Stu

[Usul]

When I said that the Taliban was tolerable, I meant that only based on results. The aid workers did not have problems enough to leave when the Taliban was in power, thus I have jumped to the conclusion that conditions, although not ideal, were tolerable. Otherwise the aid workers would have left due to intolerable conditions. This however could only be accomplished by the American forces.

[Stu Pidasso]

[ QUOTE ]
The aid workers did not have problems enough to leave when the Taliban was in power, thus I have jumped to the conclusion that conditions, although not ideal, were tolerable. Otherwise the aid workers would have left due to intolerable conditions. This however could only be accomplished by the American forces.

[/ QUOTE ]

Your conclusion was in err. The Taliban and Al Queda made it intolerable for Doctors without frontiers, not the Americans. Doctor without Frontiers left Afghanistan because of wrong footed Taliban/ Al Queda policies.

Was there really anything wrong with the leaflet produced by the American's showing the little girl carrying the bag of wheat? I argue not. Aid convoys are being attacked by the Taliban and Al Queda. The message the leaflet sends is "the more you help us interdict the Taliban and Al Queda, the more likely it is you will recieve the aid instead of it being consumed in a burning convoy."

Consider maybe, Doctors with out frontiers or CNN is spinning the situation to favor thier own politcal agenda.

Stu

[ACPlayer]

There is a small difference between an organization who's goal is to provide aid and comfort by ensuring minimal barriers to the provision of the same (ie various AID agencies and NGO's) and an organization who's goal is to implement policy (ie US Military in this case, strange role for the military but that is a separate discussion).

If NGO's are forced to change their role to implement policy, they contaminate their ability to carry out the mission. Sort of like when the US Military in Iraq were forced to change their role to that of a police force and failed miserably (as was predicted by some on these boards).

But trying to understand organization complexity is a bit tougher than going rah, rah on whatever you, or some others, happen to be cheering on on a given day.

[Cyrus]

The Foreign Affairs Select Committee of the British Pariament has warned that Afghanistan is likely to "implode, with terrible consequences" unless more troops and resources are sent to calm the country.

Well, now that the Doctors Without Frontiers are leaving Afghanistan (some folks around here dismissed their departure as insignificant) there will be more room available for soldiers!


CNN Report (http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/europe/07/29/uk.afghan.iraq/index.html)

[Cyrus]

"One can't help but wonder what "wrong-footed" policies the doctors endured under when the Taliban was in power."

Wonder away.

The Taliban allowed all genuine aid organisations (non-proselytizing, non-religious, non-political organisations) to operate freely in Afghanistan. They were certainly not killing them!

And that includes Doctors Without Borders (http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/). They have been in Afghanistan for 25 whole years. But they are leaving because the Americans have been foolishly painting them politically, in order to win the locals' "hearts and minds".

Wrong-footing it can't even begin to describe the level of incompetence in this case.

[MMMMMM]

Maybe so, but the Taliban did their own share of killing--and for some of the most ridiculous reasons.

There is no excuse or justification for 7th century Barbarians enforcing their world views on others in the 21st century. Soccer stadium executions and amputations for ridiculous reasons, utter oppression of women: quite simply, the Taliban (and their partners, al-Qaeda) are the most backwards people on Earth and their overriding goal is to forcibly inflict their barbaric absolutism on as many other people as they possibly can.

Taliban and al-Qaeda = better off dead for everyone.

[Usul]

[ QUOTE ]
Taliban and al-Qaeda = better off dead for everyone.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe I'm a hopeless romantic, but I cling to the belief that there are better ways to deal with backwards people then killing them outright. Am I the only one?

[ThaSaltCracka]

[ QUOTE ]
Am I the only one?

[/ QUOTE ] probably

[Usul]

Then we are a sad species indeed...

[ACPlayer]

Avoiding the subject about the what's and why's and how's of the Doctor's without Borders leaving Afghanistan due to our policy, and going to attack a well discredited group.

Seems like you will go to any lengths to avoid talking about the subject at hand. But then you have been ducking substantive discussion from the time I first came across your posts.

[GWB]

I find it interesting that there are more Afgahnistan threads than Iraq threads on the front page of this forum now. After all the hand wringing for the last year, once things start looking up you lefties (I am not refering to anyone specifically here) sneak away without mentioning that our policy worked out OK after all.

[MMMMMM]

Usul,

If the Taliban and al-Qaeda were just backwards, I would wholeheartedly agree with your sentiments. The problem is that they are aggressively violent too, and they are irrevocably backwards as well. These fanatics are not going to be reformed ideologically in this lifetime. Their children might be reformed, but they themselves are totally gonzo. The depth of their religious fanaticism combined with their proclivity to do violence to anyone who does not follow their absolutist ideology means they are better off gone. This goes for al-Qaeda more than the Taliban, because al-Qaeda is more outwardly and virulently aggressive, but the Taliban are a close second within Afghanistan itself.

[MMMMMM]

I'm not avoiding that issue, I simply accept it; and offer an observation of my own.

You could say my secondary point is: that US policy, though imperfect, is better for the Afghanis than was Taliban policy.

[ACPlayer]

FOr a moment I thought I had missed the "acceptance", but then I scanned your posts in this thread again and all I saw was the non-sequiter criticism of the Taliban (about which no one on this forum disagrees with you, I think). So, yes, you are still misdirecting and consistently (you are good at that) offering unrelated arguments.

Incidentally, what exactly is acceptance? Is it a good thing that they are leaving? Is it a good thing that they are being made to leave? Is it a good thing for the US military to use NGO's for policy implementation? Perhaps an opinion on a subject other than your knee-jerk hatred for all that is linked with Islam may enlighten us on your views.

Any direct thoughts? Perhaps you can link this issue to Saddam, or Islam's hatred for women or .....

[MMMMMM]

"FOr a moment I thought I had missed the "acceptance", but then I scanned your posts in this thread again and all I saw was the non-sequiter criticism of the Taliban (about which no one on this forum disagrees with you, I think). So, yes, you are still misdirecting and consistently (you are good at that) offering unrelated arguments."

Again, I'm not offering an argument, but rather a question and an observation.

"Incidentally, what exactly is acceptance? Is it a good thing that they are leaving? Is it a good thing that they are being made to leave? Is it a good thing for the US military to use NGO's for policy implementation?"

Probably not a good thing.

" Perhaps an opinion on a subject other than your knee-jerk hatred for all that is linked with Islam may enlighten us on your views."

My only hatred is hatred against totalitarianism. To the degree Islam or any other political system espouses totalitarianism, I object to and hate that totalitarianism. The Taliban were especially totalitarian. Hence, in my world view, they completely suck.

"Any direct thoughts?"

No, I just felt like offering a question and observation, that's all. Sorry it upset you so much. And yes, it's too bad the doctors are leaving. Maybe the policy is wrongheaded and maybe it isn't; I don't know,; I'm not there dodging bullets and trying to stop the religious whackos from terrorizing schoolgirls into not going to school. I don't know if it is a necessary policy or not. But I do think capturing or killing al-Qaeda is something to be desired.

"Perhaps you can link this issue to Saddam, or Islam's hatred for women or ....."

I wasn't planning to, but Islam does have a long history of oppression of women and currently oppresses women severely around most of the world. I guess in ACPlayer's worldview, that's OK. It isn't in mine. Guess we'll just have to agree to disagree.