NP Afghanistan

[jbor]

lycidas2 at earthlink.net wrote:

> This is simple I know,  but I'm simply suggesting that there are
> alternatives to a USA led military option.

It seems pointless to say this now, once that military operation has
virtually done its job. Are you saying that there should have been no
bombing and that the Taliban's planes and armouries, and the terrorist
encampments and communications networks, should have been left intact? I
can't see how that would have been good for anyone, American or Afghani. But
whatever, it's irrelevant now. The attacks, the refusal to negotiate, the
bombs: these have already happened. It's what comes next which is important.

Of course there are refugees fleeing the bombs and fighting. That doesn't
mean that they support Osam and the Taliban leaders, or that they won't
return to their homes if and when the Taliban regime is ousted. I think that
it's pretty important now to at least finish off what has been started, for
the sake of the Afghani people if nothing else. From all accounts that's the
plan.

It would be nice to see those humanitarian aid organisations and the UNHRC
getting their act together to help the refugees at the Pakistani border, as
well as those languishing in the detainment camps (i.e. gaols) elsewhere,
putting pressure on govts to expedite the processing and repatriation of
refugees. The propagandists try to make out that the tide of refugees has
only just begun, and is the result of the U.S.-led campaign. This is
patently false. 

Also, last week there were reports that a flood of cheap heroin was hitting
the markets in countries neighbouring Afghanistan as the Taliban sold off
its stockpiles. The regime seems ready to collapse: there have been
defections from and divisions within the Taliban as well it seems. It might
be time to start putting together a plan for a replacement government, such
as that suggested by the former King in the article David Morris posted:

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/1,,2001370904,00.html

best