>I do not support priapic US-run military overreaction, but somewhat >like
Doug Henwood, I support a UN-run police action.
>But the reason I do goes to the issue of the difference between >awful
reactionary Islamic theocracies and Islamic clerical fascist >movements and
states.
There is nothing in the present mix in Afghanistan that says that a Taliban-ruled Afghanistan wouldn't evolve into just another reactionary Islamic theocracy.
Also, if they are essentially fascist, then why have they cooperated with international aid agencies to such an extent?
It's interesting just how much is being projected on to Afghanistan by all the heavy, key players in the region and in the religion in question--by Pakistan, by Saudi Arabia, by Iran, by the Turkish Islamic countries of the former Soviet Union, by the Russians, of course by the US, But it's also interesting just how wide open most of Afghanistan is to all these projections.
As for police action, realize that this choice went out of the picture a long time ago, even in the case of OBL and Afghanistan--for a start, like when Clinton decided to fire up OBL and his organization with cruise missiles.
As they say on the streets where you live Chip, Payback is a motherfucker (that is, if OBL is directly involved and dragged the Taleban in on it).
Anyone want to start talking about UN police actions in the Sudan, Syria, Pakistan, and Iran for rather blatant support of various 'terrorist' groups? BTW, some of these groups really can't be eliminated from the roster of suspects who might have carried out 9/11 and the current anthrax.
Charles Jannuzi