[thelist] Afganistan from another perspective

Ron Jourard jourard at criminal-lawyer.on.ca
Sun Sep 16 20:53:06 CDT 2001

I received the letter below from one of the lawyers' lists I belong

Ron Jourard

This letter, by Tamim Ansary, an Afghan living in the US, Please read
and get it out to as many people as you can. thank you.

  Dear Friends,

  Yesterday I heard a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back to
Stone Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio allowed that this would mean
killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this
  "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage," and he asked,
else can we do? What is your suggestion?" Minutes later I heard a TV
discussing whether we "have the belly to do what must be done." And I
thought about these issues especially hard because I am from
  Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years I've never
track of what's been going on over there. So I want to share a few
with anyone who will listen.

  I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There is
doubt in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity
in New
York. I fervently wish to see those monsters punished.

  But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not even
government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant
psychotics who
captured Afghanistan in 1997 and have been holding the country in
ever since. Bin Laden is a political criminal with a master plan. When
think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin Laden, think Hitler.
And when
you think "the people of Afghanistan" think "the Jews in the
camps." It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with
atrocity. They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would
for someone to eliminate the Taliban and clear out the rats nest of
international thugs holed up in their country. I guarantee it.

  Some say, if that's the case, why don't the Afghans rise up and
the Taliban themselves? The answer is, they're starved, exhausted,
and incapacitated. A few years ago, the United Nations estimated that
  are 500,000 disabled orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no
economy, no

  Millions of Afghans are widows of the approximately two million men
during the war with the Soviets. And the Taliban has been executing
women for being women and have buried some of their opponents alive in
  graves. The soil of Afghanistan is littered with land mines and
almost all
the farms have been destroyed . The Afghan people have tried to
the Taliban. They haven't been able to.

  We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone
Trouble with that scheme is, it's already been done. The Soviets took
of it. Make the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their
  Done. Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their
hospitals? Done. Destroy their infrastructure? There is no
Cut them off from medicine and health care? Too late. Someone already
  all that.

  New bombs would only land in the rubble of earlier bombs. Would they
least get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the
eat, only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and
(They have already, I hear.) Maybe the bombs would get some of those
disabled orphans, they don't move too fast, they don't even have
wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul and dropping bombs wouldn't really
be a
strike against the criminals who did this horrific thing. Actually it
be making common cause with the Taliban--by raping once again the
they've been raping all this time.

  So what else can be done, then? Let me now speak with true fear and
trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in there with ground
troops. I think that when people speak of "having the belly to do what
to be done" many of them are thinking in terms of having the belly to
  many as needed. They are thinking about overcoming moral qualms
killing innocent people. But it's the belly to die not kill that's
on the table. Americans will die in a land war to get Bin Laden. And
just because some Americans would die fighting their way through
to Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that, folks. To get any
to Afghanistan, we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would they let us?
likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be first. Will other
nations just stand by? You see where I'm going. The invasion approach
is a
flirtation with global war between Islam and the West.

  And that is Bin Laden's program. That's exactly what he wants and
why he
did this thing. Read his speeches and statements. It's all right
there. At
the moment, of course, "Islam" as such does not exist. There are
Muslims and
there are Muslim countries, but no such political entity as Islam. Bin
believes that if he can get a war started, he can constitute this
entity and
he'd be running it. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It
seem ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into
Islam and
the West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the West wreaks a holocaust
Muslim lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, even
  better from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong about
in the end the west would probably overcome--whatever that would mean
such a war; but the war would last for years and millions would die,
just theirs but
  ours. Who has the belly for that? Bin Laden yes, but anyone else?

  I don't have a solution. But I do believe that suffering and poverty
the soil in which terrorism grows. Bin Laden and his cohorts want to
bait us
into creating more such soil, so they and their kind can flourish. We
let him do that. That's my humble opinion.

  Tamim Ansary

More information about the thelist mailing list