From: "Carsten Agger" <agger-AT-faklen.dk>
Subject: Sv: PKF: collateral damage
Date: Thu, 18 Oct 2001 22:19:21 +0200


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.



>4. The assertion that the US is disliked because it supports bad or unpopular regimes is nothing but a platitude. Hoffman knows we can't do any better than
>to back the current governments of Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and Pakistan, to say nothing of Uzbekistan and a few other new friends we're taking on - so why bother to argue the point other than making American policymakers feel guilty for living in the world ? And what if our reputed allies stab us in the back ? Well, that's just tough cookies.
>


Nor could the US, once upon a time, do any better than give its support for the coup of Pinochet -
since a repressive and murderous military regime apparently was preferable to a democratically
elected social democratic government with no great economic success ...
    "can't do anything better" than "backing" the governments of Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and
Uzbekistan? Saudia Arabia is about the worst police state in the entire Muslim world - possibly
rivalled by Afghanistan, whose Islamc revolution headed by the Taliban was by and large inspired
by the extreme wahhabite sect which is dominant in Saudi Arabia; Pakistan has a military regime
and is, BTW, also one of the worst police states in the region. And yes, let's say nothing of
Uzbekistan...
    How is it the saying goes: tell me who your friends are ... ?
    It may be that the US of A is still a free and democratic country, although one wonders, with
one of the largest percentages of incarcerated people in the entire world - but it definitely does
not appear to stand for neither freedom nor democracy in its policies towards the world
at large ...
    Now to return to the subject of this discussion. "Collateral damage" or "limited collateral damage"
is, as an exression, a rather unpleasant euphemism. "Collateral damage", of course, means
DEAD CIVILIANS.
It means houses burning and in shambles, children caught inside, burning alive. This is what "your"
glorious American planes are handing out right now, not to the Taliban, but to their victims.
    To tell you the truth, I see no justification at all for waging war against Afghanistan. Yes, the
attacks on New York and Washington were terrible atrocities and nobody is justifying them.
But ... is this a war on terror? If so, let's judge it by the merits of its probable results. Will there be
less terror as a result of bombing (or perhaps even conquering) Afghanistan? Not likely - first of
all, because a terror network as bin Laden's need few people and few resources to make a lot
of damage. I believe that bin Laden is not displeased with the American attacks - I wouldn't be
surprised at all if he actually counted on them. In the meantime, thousands of Afghans will be
bereaved of their families and will, however much they might hate the guts of the (highly unpopular)
Taliban, probably not accept the fact that  their families had anything to do with it and will
definitely not grow to love the US or the UK the more for it ...
    This knee-jerk reaction - that the anger following the deaths of thousands of innocents
in New York and Washington provokes the mightiest nation to launch an attack whose
main achievement will ultimately be the killing of even more innocents - is most likely to bring about
more terrorism, not less. And bin Laden will have reason to laugh, knowing that this reaction
will only bring him more support, even less. The US government shouldn't be so concerned
about Al-Jazeera's airing of bin Laden's statements - they are doing the most important part of
his propaganda work themselves.
    Yes, terror of this scale *should* be fought, the culprits (apart from the hijackers themselves)
should be caught and put to trial, and their network should be dismantled in order to prevent
future attacks. War won't do it - apart from the meaningless logic of avenging innocent civilians
by killing even more innocent civilians (directly, as in your "collateral damage", and indirectly,
through the famine which is very likely to be the consequence of these attacks), it's contraproductive:
It won't work.

greetings,

Carsten

   

HTML VERSION: