Then you're in agreement with al-Qaeda. 9/11, by your moral compass, was a positive thing.
> > Millions were saved from starvation.
>
> Not by the bombings. The food aid could have gotten in much easier
without worrying about bombs
> flying everywhere.
Not true. The intervention staved off a famine. Had the Taliban been in power over the winter, countless more lives would have been lost to starvation than have been to US bombs.
> Half the Afghan population were virtual slaves under the Taliban.
>
> And are in Saudi Arabia and a number of other countries as well. Should
Saudi Arabia be bombed?
Read Rashid's book. Afghanistan was a staging area for the theocratic terror you diminish. Saudi Arabia, while repellent, was not. If you're going to push this angle, try Pakistan.
> > Even RAWA admits that there are more openings now.
>
> And I agree with them. They also opposed the bombing, which I also agree
with. I welcome the fall
> of the Taliban and I hope the new government falls as well and is replaced
by a better regime. The
> ends do not justify the means. Arguing that bombing Afghanistan and
making allies with the Northern
> Alliance thugs is a justifiable means to overthrowing the Taliban is like
arguing that the Nazi's
> invasion of the USSR is a justifiable means of overthrowing Stalin.
The Taliban provided cover for Islamic fascists who are openly committed to kill as many people, Muslim and non, as it can in pursuit of its twisted goals. Bin Laden is on the record saying as much. Your Hitler/Stalin analogy doesn't hold up.
> The US is a greater threat because the US created Al-Qaeda and a number
of other monsters. The IMF,
> CIA and a number of other imperialist institutions have murdered far more
people then Al-Qaeda. Yes,
> Al-Qaeda should be on our enemy list along with the CIA, etc. But we have
far greater enemies to
> worry about then a relatively minor group like Al-Qaeda. The number of
people they've killed is
> nothing compared to the CIA (who also happened to play a key role in
creating Al-Qaeda).
So now you're going by numbers historically killed than by immediate political reality? By that measure the US should never have fought the Nazis, given the slaughter of the native population and enslavement of Africans.
DP