Can you please explain what a "thread" is? Along a completely different line, I highly recommend James Michener's "Caravans". An amazing novel about Afganistan that he wrote in 1963. The most striking thing for me is that life there was the same when he wrote it as it was under the Taliban. We seem to think that it was the barbaric Taliban that created the horrid life endured by the present day Afgans, but they were simply the current ruling class and maintained the status quo in a country that retained its ancient ways. The Talibans' crime was/is supporting bin Laden and Al Qaeda.
You pose two issues. One requires a simple answer the other is open to discussion.
A “Thread” is a computer expression for a topic. Our Forums consist of major areas of Optometric interest. When a subject is brought up in a Forum, that is a new topic or “Thread”.
Ordinarily for clarity if two subjects are brought up on a single post they will be divided into two separate topics or threads. Your post brought up two subjects but my intuition indicates the answer to your first question will not require a separate thread.
If however this first question would then bring up additional questions or comments such as what is a computer virus etc. and why do programmers borrow commonly used words to confuse the computer novice? Then a separate topic (thread) would be appropriate. You will notice seniordoc.org hardly uses any computer jargon.
I hope this answers your “Thread” question.
Now the more complex issue. This is personal opinion and I’m certainly no Historian or Political Scientist.
The Taliban arose as a political force with the approval of many of the local populous because Afghanistan was in a chaotic state after a civil war among various warlords. The US must bear some responsibility since we armed the various warlords in the 1980s to fight the Soviet occupation.
After the Soviets pulled out we left the task of nation building to the locals. Obviously they were not up to the task. The Taliban represented a semblance of Law and Order.
Unfortunately they also have a Fundamentalist religion that is so repressive for non-believers that the Saviors became Tyrannical Occupiers. Women could no longer work outside the home. They were forced to dress in traditional garb and escorted by a male relative for “protection” while outside the home.
All semblance of education other than basic religious training for males seemed to have vanished. The Taliban also by their economic policies drove the country into desperate poverty. Our government took a “ hands off” policy feeling this was an internal affair. The vacuum allowed Osama Ben Laden to buy the country.
Would our government and citizens have been ready to go into Afghanistan if the events of 9/11 not happened? I wonder. We certainly had our noses bloodied before without a massive response.
What of other repressive regimes that do not directly attack the US. Should our government take steps before those countries erupt? How long can repressive monarchies and dictatorships that are friendly to the US remain in power? Will they remain our allies if there is an internal revolution? Difficult questions. Certainly no answers will be coming from me on an Optometric web site.
So to answer your question Steven as I see it… We should not attempt to change a traditional culture in a country. However when a country is taken over by forces that wish to turn the clock back and enslave a population that has already moved into the 21st century, we as a government and people should respond.
It is unfortunate that it took the loss of so many American lives to give us a wake up call regarding our international humanitarian responsibilities. Additional opinions are welcome on this “Thread”.
