BS: Taliban Back?

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: Bobert
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 08:22 PM

Yeah, Dougie, my friend, lookin' more and more like Junior is regressin' to his womaninzin' frat boy days in that he just doesn't do well with long term relationships. Yep, the boy never met a war not worth startin'...

And what McGrath says is true. Bush and Rumsey got their jollies in Afganistan and now it's on the bigger and better things.

I'll tell ya what, A.D.D. ain't a good quality to have in a president!

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 07:08 PM

According to this interesting site there is currently a total of less than 5,000 members of the peacekeeping force (including the Americans) in Afghanistan, and they are pretty well confined to Kabul.

The Afghan Army has well under 2,000 soldiers. There are something like 200,000 armed members of militias answerable to warlords controlling 90% of the country - and one third of them are identified as hostile to the government in Kabul.

This doesn't really seem to be viewed as a very high priority by the countries who waged the war.

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: DougR
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 05:20 PM

Bobbert, you evidently are not aware that U. S. troops have not abandoned Afghanistan. They are still there, trying to restore peace to the region and seeking out the groups you refer to so they can blow their sorry asses to kingdom come.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 08:53 AM

"The Afghans are pragmatists and will give support to whoever holds power in their region."

Now why does that sound familiar? "The .......... are pragmatists and will give support to whoever in any region will enable them to maintain control."

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: Troll
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 08:37 AM

I don't believe that anyone ever said that they had gone. They simply lost political and military power and a great many members but were not dirven out or destroyed.
There are Afghans who now support the Alliance Government that would support the Taliban in a heartbeat should they gain ascendancy again. The Afghans are pragmatists and will give support to whoever holds power in their region.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: Rapparee
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 08:05 AM

Why does anyone think that the Taliban ever left?

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 06:02 AM

When you change sides it doesn't mean you change in any other way.

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: Bullfrog Jones
Date: 14 Jan 03 - 04:29 AM

Oh... I thought the thread title referred to a spinal deformity caused by hiding in caves!

BJ

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: khandu
Date: 13 Jan 03 - 10:55 PM

"And the giant tried to stamp out all the ants, but there were too many. And the small people saw the giant at his labor and began to laugh at him. In their laughter, they realized how absurd they were to fear and follow such a being. They arose as one in the revelation and saw that they were greater than the giant."

"The Book of Wanderings"

khandu

Subject: RE: BS: Taliban Back?
From: mack/misophist
Date: 13 Jan 03 - 10:18 PM

Put not your trust in rulers. They are faithless as the wind.

Subject: BS: Taliban Back?
From: Bobert
Date: 13 Jan 03 - 04:13 PM

Seems that while the current Bush administration has it eye on a new, sparkly clean war in Iraq "there are reports of a new enemy, made up of former Taliban forces and those of another extremist faction, that may be operating training camps and preparing for concerted military operations" in Afganistan. (Washington Post, Jan. 13, 2003, P.A-20 "Sustaining Afganistan").

Seems to me that Bush has grown bored with his *other war* and between his lack of interest and his raiding the piggy bank to buy the *new war* that Afganistan could very well be headed for anarchy and fueding warloards, who now control much of the country.

Like, what gives?

Bobert