GameBanshee Forums

Originally posted by Fas:
<STRONG>Ghurkas are nepali soliders trained for mountain combat.

The NA aren't demcractic from what i know they are just as bad as the Taliban in my opinion.</STRONG>

Thanks for the definition! And, regarding your opinion of the NA: ARGH! When will we learn!? Seriously, though if anybody has some solid information about this group, I would really, really appreciate a link. It makes me just that much more suspicious, though, that I HAVEN'T heard anything about them. If they were really a positive group, we would probably hear Bush giving them praise.

The NA aren't extremists, they are more liberal than the Taliban.
However they aren't a cohesive unit or obey their leaders.

Originally posted by Lazarus:
<STRONG>@loner72: That link you provided is a secure sight (it says I need a password) - ? </STRONG>

Figures Sorry about that. I'll cut and paste.......

Alright easy everyone. With some of us are emotions are running high. Some of us are on edge. I don't think anyone is trying to pick a fight. Let's all just relax and have a mug of tea.

We are all friends here, no reason to bicker. Or I'll send you all to your rooms with no dessert.

@Lazarus - The Ghurkhas are highly trained commando regiments from Nepal who serve both the British and Indian armed services They are especially trained for combat in poor terrain...

Originally posted by Fas:
<STRONG>The NA aren't extremists, they are more liberal than the Taliban. However they aren't a cohesive unit or obey their leaders.</STRONG>

So, Fas, are you an Afghani? You sound like you know the area. I have heard people talk about using the former King of Afghanistan as a possible figurehead for any future government, too. Any idea of his political thoughts?

[url="http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/northern_alliance.htm"]http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/northern_alliance.htm[/url]

Fas on the NA

Originally posted by Lazarus:
[QB]Does the Northern Alliance have ANY idea of what democracy and freedom are all about? QB]

No, but why should they? Western-style democracy is not a sine-qua-non, and many people would rather have an entrenched monarchy or dictatorship that fulfills their needs, provided those it deals efficiently with basic needs as defined by the culture, itself. Several Americans who came to reside in 19th century Japan, for example, came to the conclusion in print that freedom of government was defintely not all it was cracked up to be. Many Israelis are perfectly happy with a theocratic government--that is, one that has strict religious views as its foundation. Many people that live under some of the more enlightened MidEastern governments are happy with autocratic rulers who follow the Islamic precepts of providing free housing, schooling, and food for the poor, as the Qu'ran instructs.

As for the Northern Alliance--you have to remember, they (and the Taliban) were originally US clients. After the Soviet installed a puppet regime in Afghanistan, the US armed all these "mujahadin" (holy warriors). That left the mujahadin, under powerful warlords, to squabble over rulership in a vacuum when the Soviet departed. Their country went from a repressive monarchy to a Soviet dictatorship to fighting warlords to a repressive bunch of far right religious fanatics only interested in their literalist interpretation of Scripture. It's all the nation's ever known.

[ 10-07-2001: Message edited by: fable ]

Originally posted by Lazarus:
<STRONG>So, Fas, are you an Afghani? You sound like you know the area. I have heard people talk about using the former King of Afghanistan as a possible figurehead for any future government, too. Any idea of his political thoughts?</STRONG>

Pakistani that me.
And the King has refused to serve as the figure head.

Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG>Figures Sorry about that. I'll cut and paste.......</STRONG>

Loner and Lazarus, I posted a few links to human rights resources reports about Afhganistan last in page 1, I think they should work.

Originally posted by Fas:
<STRONG>[url="http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/northern_alliance.htm"]http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/northern_alliance.htm[/url]

Fas on the NA</STRONG>

FAS = Federation of American Scientists. Is that where you take your moniker from? I read through the link, but it doesn't say a whole lot about what these people think politically. Oh, except mentioning that Masood tortures his prisoners - that can't be a good sign. But didn't he get assasinated a few weeks back?

@Loner - I heard the former King of Afghanistan did not have any intentions of reinstating monarchy in the event that the Taliban are overthrown. He was quoted as being interested in a presidential position.

BTW re the NA, Russia have said they will supply the NA with weapons and supplies to fight the Taliban...ironic isn't it?

[ 10-07-2001: Message edited by: Yshania ]

Originally posted by fable:
<STRONG>No, but why should they? Western-style democracy is not a sine-qua-non, and many people would rather have an entrenched monarchy or dictatorship that fulfills their needs, provided those it deals efficiently with basic needs as defined by the culture, itself. Several Americans who came to reside in 19th century Japan, for example, came to the conclusion in print that freedom of government was defintely not all it was cracked up to be. Many Israelis are perfectly happy with a theocratic government--that is, one that has strict religious views as its foundation. Many people that live under some of the more enlightened MidEastern governments are happy with autocratic rulers who follow the Islamic precepts of providing free housing, schooling, and food for the poor, as the Qu'ran instructs....

[ 10-07-2001: Message edited by: fable ]</STRONG>

Good point. I would note, however, that whatever cultural background you have, the basic function of a government should remain the same: protection of individual rights. To the extent that a government does this for it's people, it is a good government; to the extent that it violates individual rights, it is bad.

[url="http://www.afghan-politics.org/Reference/NorthernAlliance/Northen_Alliance_main.htm"]http://www.afghan-politics.org/Reference/NorthernAlliance/Northen_Alliance_main.htm[/url]

FAS are the initials of my name.
Masood is dead.

Yshania writes:
BTW re the NA, Russia have said they will supply the NA with weapons and supplies to fight the Taliban...ironic isn't it?

No, very clever. When we were sitting in Budapest and first heard from the BBC about the horrific terrorist attack and Dubbyah's "war on terrorism" which was going to be international, I turned to my wife and said, "You watch. The US will suddenly start flipping policies on situations throughout the world in order to get other nations on its side. We'll suddenly see the US State Department refer to the rebels in Chechnya as "terrorists," since we want Soviet cooperation."

And that is exactly what's happened. We've given the Russians carte blanche on attacking the Chechyan opposition as terrorists, while the Russians have been all-too-happy to arm the Northern Alliance with a few outdated weapons at reduced prices, and look like a team player.

I have to wonder just how far this policy will go, however. A high-ranking Saudi diplomat was quoted by the BBC as tartly stating that "We will not accept the Israeli view of what constitutes a terrorist organization." And that may be the biggest stumbling block of all, since George Jr, unlike George Sr, isn't willing to face off against the Israelis and get tough.

Originally posted by Fas:
<STRONG>[URL=http://www.afghan-politics.org/Reference/NorthernAlliance/Northen_Alliance_main.htm]http://www.afghan-politics.org/Reference/NorthernAlliance/Northen_Alliance_main.htm[/UR L]

FAS are the initials of my name.
Masood is dead.</STRONG>

I think this link is bust, too.
@CE: Whoah! I looked through the UN site, and did a search for "northern alliance" - lots of hits! Most just refered to the NA as an aside, though.

Originally posted by Lazarus:
<STRONG>FAS = Federation of American Scientists. Is that where you take your moniker from? I read through the link, but it doesn't say a whole lot about what these people think politically. Oh, except mentioning that Masood tortures his prisoners - that can't be a good sign. But didn't he get assasinated a few weeks back?</STRONG>

Lazarus, both Amnesty and HRW have reports that concern the Northern Allience. They have also been violating human rights during the last years.

Originally posted by Lazarus:
<STRONG>Good point. I would note, however, that whatever cultural background you have, the basic function of a government should remain the same: protection of individual rights. To the extent that a government does this for it's people, it is a good government; to the extent that it violates individual rights, it is bad.</STRONG>

"The protection of individual rights" is a rather amorphous phrase, though. Which individual rights? The right to a roof over your head, or the right to criticize the government? The right to earn a living, or the right to free medical benefits? The right to privacy, or the right to have your security protected by certain procedures which invade privacy?

@Fas: What do you think about the exile government of Afghanistan, the one that still holds the UN seat? Do you think it would be beneficial to reinstall them?

Originally posted by C Elegans:
<STRONG>Lazarus, both Amnesty and HRW have reports that concern the Northern Allience. They have also been violating human rights during the last years.</STRONG>

I'll say it again: ARGH! When will we learn!? I have no problem with funding people and providing them with arms IF - IF! - they are fighting for something more than raw power over their people. As it is, it seems like we're just setting up another petty dictatorship that will someday turn on us - they always do.