<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4611.1300" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>Dig this opening:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"The United States of America has just succeeded in bombing a country back
out of the Stone Age. This deserves to be recognized as an achievement, even by
those who want to hasten past the moment and resume their customary tasks
(worrying about the spotty human rights record of the Northern Alliance is the
latest thing). The nexus that bound the Taliban to the forces of Al Qaeda and
that was symbolized by the clan relationship between Mullah Omar and Osama bin
Laden, has been destroyed. We are rid of one of the foulest regimes on earth,
while one of the most vicious crime families in history has been crippled and
scattered. It remains to help the Afghan exiles to return, to save the starving
and to consolidate the tentative emancipation of Afghan women."</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>"Spotty" human rights record?? Didn't the NA, or whatever it was called
back when, collectively slaughter some 50,000 Afghanis? Weren't they so bad that
the Taliban were seen by many as liberators, or at least stabilizers? Now, in
Hitch's New World Order, the previous statement would be seen as pro-crypto
Taliban, which it's not -- I mean, yeah, things will be a little better for the
time being, that is, until the next round of tribal violence erupts (which,
given the history and the actors, is bound to happen unless the US is committed
to sitting on the NA for years to come). Hitch makes it seem that the worst is
over, and even bandies about the concept of "emancipation" for Afghan
women. Well, we'll see. After all, the NA didn't shoot women in soccer stadiums
a la Taliban -- they merely yanked women out of houses and off streets and
gang-raped them. Now, I suppose getting raped by several nasty, weapons-toting
men is better than having your brains blown out, so that may be a positive step
toward the "emancipation" Hitch envisions. </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Is it really a surprise that the US military was able to knock off the
Taliban? (When Hitch wrote his "Ha Ha" column, I emailed him the comments made
by Chomsky in late September, in which the old boy pretty much nailed what would
happen. I said to Hitch, "Surely you're not including Noam among the 'pacifists'
you're mocking, given his statements." Never heard back, so I suppose I'm off
his radar as well.) And will it come as a complete shock if it subdues the Sudan
and Iraq? And where to next? Libya? Why not! Gaddafi is no democrat -- off him.
Now let's see, how about Cuba? Hitch hates Castro, so I'm sure he'd be pleased
to see US bombs dropping on Havana. (Another "vile" regime extinguished.) And
given his newfound love of superpower violence and intimidation, I'm sure he had
little problem with the US telling the Nicaraguans to <EM>not</EM> elect Ortega,
or else. I mean, where does one get off this wicked train, assuming one desires
it?</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><A
href="http://thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20011217&s=hitchens">http://thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20011217&s=hitchens</A></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>DP</DIV></BODY></HTML>