Thread: Афганистан: как история повторяет себя

Довольно интересная статья в ИноСМИ о ситуации в Афганистане:

http://www.inosmi.ru/translation/233446.html

Мне особенно понравилось вот это:

Я побеседовал об этом с Эдмундом Макуильямсом (Edmund McWilliams): в конце 1980-х гг. он занимал пост поверенного в делах в американском посольстве в Кабуле. Дипломат подтвердил, что обстановка в последние годы советской оккупации мало отличалась от сегодняшней. В городе действовал комендантский час; штаб-квартира КГБ находилась в том же здании, где сегодня разместилась резидентура ЦРУ. Президент-коммунист Мохаммад Наджибулла, если ему надо было куда-то лететь, на несколько часов перекрывал все воздушное движение; сегодня точно так же поступает Карзай. Небо над Кабулом кишело боевыми вертолетами и истребителями.

Тем не менее, в конце концов русским пришлось вывести войска. Они даже подкупили повстанцев, чтобы те не нападали на их части, отходившие через перевал Саланг. Сделка была заключена по тайным каналам, не менее засекреченным, чем те, что Редьярд Киплинг описывает в Киме. Однако о ней стало известно за неделю до вывода войск. В общем, в Афганистане секретов не существует. Помните, совсем недавно готовился теракт с использованием смертника на авиабазе Баграм, когда там должен был находиться вице-президент Дик Чейни (Dick Cheney) - а ведь никаких предварительных сообщений о его визите в Афганистан не распространялось.

Хорошая статья. Только она никого ничему не научит. В Афгане и Ираке полнейший провал политики США, тем не менее, многие считают, что за неимением лучшего, такая политика оправдана. Хотя, с другой стороны мы видим две вещи - результат бездарной внешнией правления президента США, котрая казалось бы должна погрузить Штаты в пучину позора (я думаю, История это сделает в конечном итоге), и то как остальные западные лидеры, подобно российким чинушам, используя политику тупого соглашательства и "одобрямс" пытаются учить другие страны уму-разуму.

Афганистан, путевые заметки. 2011

Смелый хлопчик сделал интересный репортаж про современный Афган (та еще помойка).

Фотопутешествия и еще. - Афганистан, путевые заметки, день 1

Вообще, кто-нибудь мне может внятно объяснить чего мы все там забыли?

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Вообще, кто-нибудь мне может внятно объяснить чего мы все там забыли?

That it's a bad idea to start a war in Afghanistan.....
As the UK found in the 19th century, as the USSR found, and as the USA & co are "re-discovering".
Those people should be left alone!

Originally Posted by Hanna

That it's a bad idea to start a war in Afghanistan.....

Yes, that's true too. It's a bad idea to start a war in Afghanistan. But, I'm asking WHY???????? What's so interesting in Afghanistan? Is that some kind of the magic land that whoever has the control over it would rule the entire world?

"Is that some kind of the magic land"
Афганистан страна чудес - зашел в кишлак и там исчез.

Originally Posted by gsold

Афганистан страна чудес - зашел в кишлак и там исчез.

Чудна страна Афганистан: любой крестьянин там - шайтан.

У Киплинга в "Киме" и "Индийских рассказах" очень интересно описываются пуштуны.
И честно говоря у меня складывается ничем не подкрепленное чувство, что "горцы" очень похожи - наверное их модель социального поведения формируется суровой средой.
Сваны, гуркхи расстояния между этими народами огромные, но как ни странно оба народа похожи.

Originally Posted by Crocodile

Yes, that's true too. It's a bad idea to start a war in Afghanistan. But, I'm asking WHY???????? What's so interesting in Afghanistan? Is that some kind of the magic land that whoever has the control over it would rule the entire world?

You're forgetting about the ordinary Afghan people... What do you think, was it cool for them to be ruled by the talibs???

Originally Posted by Eric C.

You're forgetting about the ordinary Afghan people... What do you think, was it cool for them to be ruled by the talibs???

Aren't talibs ordinary Afghan people?

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Aren't talibs ordinary Afghan people?

Like each criminal or terrorist is an "ordinary" representative of some nation.

Probably a large proportion of ordinary Afghanis DO support the talibans. They are a kind of a guerilla movement, aren't they? A bit like the Viet congs in the Vietnam war. They hide among the people, and the people protect them and help them. Who knows why? Not my problem!

And even if the Afghanis don't like the Talibans at all.... SO WHAT???!! Why should America get involved? There are lots of countries that are ruled by groups or people that are not popular.

It's THEIR responsibility to sort out their own country.
Likewise it's the Libyans responsibility to sort out their country, and the Egyptians, Syrians and Bahraini's theirs...

Афганистан - чудес страна, кто ни придет, тому - хана.

Originally Posted by Hanna

And even if the Afghanis don't like the Talibans at all.... SO WHAT???!! Why should America get involved? There are lots of countries that are ruled by groups or people that are not popular.

It's THEIR responsibility to sort out their own country.
Likewise it's the Libyans responsibility to sort out their country, and the Egyptians, Syrians and Bahraini's theirs...

Following your logic, when you get robbed or terrorized by some criminals, why would the police get involved? That's your own business, and you can perfectly deal with that on your own. Right?

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Following your logic, when you get robbed or terrorized by some criminals, why would the police get involved? That's your own business, and you can perfectly deal with that on your own. Right?

That is an irrelevant allegory that does not make sense in the argument. People and countries are two different things.

If I, as a civilian, get robbed or terrorized by criminals, I expect the local police to do their job and help out, whether I am in the USA, EU, Afghanistan or anywhere else. Tax payers pay for this sort of protection, through the police. This however, has nothing to do with the argument.

Afghanistan did NOT ask anyone to come and interfere in their country, and neither the USA, nor NATO, the EU or any other organisation has a mandate to be a "world police" and invade countries.

The reasons that the UN approved the resolution to go in there was:
1) Exaggerated/incorrect information about "Al-Qaeda" (which might not even exist) allegedly operating from Afghanistan. The group of moslem terrorists arround bin Laden was small, and the number of people that support this type of islamic extremism have grown rather than diminished in connection with the war. Furthermore, we now have tons of "refugees" from these areas which are not exactly the sort of citizens that the EU needs.
2) Sympathy for the USA after 11 Sept. Sure it was terrible, but large numbers of people die of violence around the world all the time. The amount of coverage that the event got would indicate that 1 American life is worth 100 times more than 1 life in any other country. Already, over 100,000 Afghan civilians have died in events that would not have taken place, were it not for the invasion
3) Russia and China did not veto the UN sanction, for whatever reason.

Personally I don't like the Talibans at all, but what they do, in their country is not my problem, it's the problem of the Afghans.

Originally Posted by Hanna

3) Russia and China did not veto the UN sanction, for whatever reason.

The reason was obvious, you've named it yourself:

Sympathy for the USA after 11 Sept.

But after Iraq invasion without UN resolution and even without a sanction of NATO council, lies about WMD in Iraq and some other issues (deploying of 3rd position area of US missile defence in particular) attitude has changed.

Originally Posted by Eric C.

Like each criminal or terrorist is an "ordinary" representative of some nation.

Isn't the political movement, which gained enough people's support to take power in a country, full of armed men, and keep it until the foreign invasion, something more than just several criminals and terrorists?

Originally Posted by it-ogo

Isn't the political movement, which gained enough people's support to take power in a country, full of armed men, and keep it until the foreign invasion, something more than just several criminals and terrorists?

When terrorists take over a bus, for instance, you can ask the passengers if they like their new "authorities". I bet there wouldn't be one against them. Fear and Stockholm syndrome...

Originally Posted by Basil77

The reason was obvious, you've named it yourself: Sympathy for the USA.

Yes... But one has to wonder what the Chinese were thinking. Somehow they don't strike me as a government that would shed any tears over some lost lives in the USA - they are even willing to shoot down their own countrymen, and big tragedies happen there on a regular basis. It wouldn't surprise me if they thought something like: 'You want another Vietnam.... be my guest! hehe.... good luck boys - we can lend you some more money if you like...... "

Afghanistan is not in their sphere of influence exactly, and perhaps the ethical issue with invading a country on the other side of the globe did not worry them. (But wait until the UN tries to vote about a country on their border, like North Korea.)

Who knows, maybe Russia was thinking the same thing, although it's really strange in my opinion, that Russia did not at least TRY to stop it! If nothing else, I think that narcotics are coming into Russia from there, and it's destabilising for countries in Central Asia. But then, the whole world was like in a trance at that time. For months, you practically saw nothing on the news other than those planes again and again, and crying Americans. Maybe it got to the Russians too.

The fact that no Europeans vetoed it just shows how brainwashed most are to love America no matter what they do, and never question their actions. At the time, I did not think much about it myself, I was only mildly against it.

Interestingly, Bin Laden himself said that his reasons for the attack was that he hated American military bases in Saudi. As crazy as he was.... Well yes. American bases in other countries are bad. If they didn't have them, Sept 11 might never have happened.