Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

why doesnt afganistan get reported anymore?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    why doesnt afganistan get reported anymore?

    because its a success story

    http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/20...nt_2358354.htm

    KABUL, Dec. 20 (Xinhuanet) -- Under the leadership of President Hamid Karzai, Afghanistan has made great achievements in 2004, andthe adoption of a post-war constitution and the presidential election are the two major bolsters of the war-ravaged country's faster reconstruction.

    In early January, over 500 delegates from across the country attended the historic Constitutional Loya Jirga or Grand Assembly.During the three weeks, they solved all crucial issues in the draft constitution prepared by the transitional government and unanimously ratified the first constitution in the post-Taliban nation.

    "I pray to God the Almighty that this constitution would lead to building a civil society and achievement of economic, social, political and cultural prosperity for all and ensure peace, equity and brotherhood within the Afghan nation," Karzai said after the adoption of the constitution.

    The constitution, which has 12 chapters and 160 articles, paved the way for the country's first-ever direct election on Oct. 9, and Karzai, who came to power with the US backing after the fall of Taliban three years ago, got the mandate with 55.4 percent of the votes to govern the nation for another five years.

    With the election, a determined Karzai, who turns 47 on Dec. 24,not only strengthened his authority but marginalized his political rivals, mainly Jihaid leaders or former anti-Soviet resistance figures.

    Through the polls, Karzai also managed to isolate his armed opponents, the fundamentalist anti-US Taliban remnants, whom he had failed to wipe out in a military way.

    In addition, Karzai aggressively pushed ahead with the UN-backed Disarmament, Demobilization and Reintegration (DDR) program launched late last year, under which over 27,000 former militia combatants have been disarmed.



    This just goes to show the bias of the media. For those of you who are going to say" dont trust commie sources", ive seen the amazing work thats been done on a program which was aired on tv when no-one would watch it. People have running water and lots of roads have been constructed, among other things. also the people were friendly to the soldiers, giving them the oportunity to walk around without obnoxious helmets on. Granted , bush may be a controversial leader , and iraq may be a mess at the moment, but come on, lets give the man credit for the change in afganistan, a place where its no longer acceptable to shoot women in football stadiums, and where girls can now get an education. By no means am i saying afganistans perfect, it still has alot of poverty and the drug trade to tackle, but its working.

    EDIT : oops i lost the other article :confused2
    Last edited by LOVED2BLOVED; 12/20/2004 2:43pm, .

    #2
    Because more dead soldiers would look bad on the US admin.
    Ghost of Charles Dickens

    Comment


      #3
      Because "Saddam Hussein" is the real evil mastermind behind everything.

      I mean, fucking bin Laden is SO last year.

      Comment


        #4
        What LLL and Freddy said.

        Just wait until the new govt gets its hands on some of that opium money comin' out of there! WOOOO HOO it'll be Christmas in Afghanistan!
        "All warfare is based on deception." -Sun Tzu, ca. 400BC


        Reverse punch Kiaii!!!

        Comment


          #5
          The attention span of the American public is so terrible that our own country was attacked by a man who dissapeared and was forgotten while we wasted all of our money going after a man who had nothing to do with it.

          Comedy.
          "All warfare is based on deception." -Sun Tzu, ca. 400BC


          Reverse punch Kiaii!!!

          Comment


            #6
            Originally posted by Freddy
            Because more dead soldiers would look bad on the US admin.
            in iraq, TOO many soldiers are dying, which is evident from the terrorist attacks everyday there.

            however, it would be nice if the media reminded us of the goal the coalition is trying to achieve in the middle east.
            take a look at these:








            i think there needs to be more of a balance to show the positive aspects, such as these pics

            Comment


              #7
              Originally posted by LLL
              Because "Saddam Hussein" is the real evil mastermind behind everything.

              I mean, fucking bin Laden is SO last year.
              And what makes you think BinLadin is in Affhanistan?

              Comment


                #8
                Originally posted by PeedeeShaolin
                The attention span of the American public is so terrible that our own country was attacked by a man who dissapeared and was forgotten while we wasted all of our money going after a man who had nothing to do with it.

                Comedy.
                What?

                Comment


                  #9
                  Originally posted by LOVED2BLOVED
                  in iraq, TOO many soldiers are dying, which is evident from the terrorist attacks everyday there.

                  however, it would be nice if the media reminded us of the goal the coalition is trying to achieve in the middle east.
                  take a look at these:

                  i think there needs to be more of a balance to show the positive aspects, such as these pics
                  The actual amount of financial support for Afghanistan has been poor. Not to mention Afghanistan has once again become the world's largest supplier of opium. There were no issues of democracy or women rights when the Taliban/Mujahadeen was being supported by the U.S. government (nor was there even during the Afghan civil war). There were no tears of sympathy for the Afghan people (from any nation) when the Taliban came into power. The altruistic notion is still a thin assertion.
                  Last edited by Freddy; 12/20/2004 6:57pm, .
                  Ghost of Charles Dickens

                  Comment


                    #10
                    Originally posted by Freddy
                    The actual amount of financial support for Afghanistan has been poor. Not to mention Afghanistan has once again become the world's largest supplier of opium. There were no issues of democracy or women rights when the Taliban/Mujahadeen was being supported by the U.S. government (nor was there even during the Afghan civil war). There were no tears of sympathy for the Afghan people (from any nation) when the Taliban came into power. The altruistic notion is still a thin assertion.
                    If you are going to make cold war arguments, you need to put them in the cold war context.

                    Comment


                      #11
                      Who gives a fuck about how many pictures of females in classrooms you can take? What kind of strategic indicator is that?

                      What IS the US strategic doctrine? And HOW is it being accomplished? It is most certainly not to take pictures of Afghani women in schools.

                      To pump that kind of shit as "evidence" would be propaganda.
                      Normally, I'd say I was grappling, but I was taking down and mounting people, and JFS has kindly informed us that takedowns and being mounted are neither grappling nor anti grappling, so I'm not sure what the fuck I was doing. Maybe schroedinger's sparring, where it's neither grappling nor anti-grappling until somoene observes it and collapses the waveform, and then I RNC a cat to death.----fatherdog

                      Comment


                        #12
                        While I agree with The Wastel that the education of females was not really a strategic objective, in does none-the-less provide some evidence of successful nation building. However, we need to avoid the temptation to jump of the nation building bandwagon. That's a slippery slope.

                        Comment


                          #13
                          Originally posted by punchingdummy
                          While I agree with The Wastel that the education of females was not really a strategic objective, in does none-the-less provide some evidence of successful nation building. However, we need to avoid the temptation to jump of the nation building bandwagon. That's a slippery slope.
                          The objective was to capture binny which has not yet been achieved , however the taliban has been ousted and thats been pretty much achieved, ok there are some remnants left who are causing trouble, but more and more of the taliban force is being detached from the rest of the Islamic conclave. It is not receiving the muslim support it once received.

                          so this is 1 strategic success in its self surely?

                          Comment


                            #14
                            Originally posted by Freddy
                            The actual amount of financial support for Afghanistan has been poor. Not to mention Afghanistan has once again become the world's largest supplier of opium. There were no issues of democracy or women rights when the Taliban/Mujahadeen was being supported by the U.S. government (nor was there even during the Afghan civil war). There were no tears of sympathy for the Afghan people (from any nation) when the Taliban came into power. The altruistic notion is still a thin assertion.
                            Only if . .. .

                            Afganistan : Here you can have Bin Laden.

                            US : Why thank you. Here are some new tools for you, utilizing the lastest technology. Behold the wife beater 2000. And a billion dollars. Carry on.

                            Comment


                              #15
                              http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3721932.stm

                              http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3757420.stm

                              http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4093997.stm

                              Seems to me like interest has been lost in Afghanistan. It looks like they have problems with warlords who can now get money from opium. Uutside of Khabul security seems shaky. Doesn't sound like a success story to me. Sounds like another US foreign policy fuck up

                              Comment

                              Collapse

                              Edit this module to specify a template to display.

                              Working...
                              X