Enter your email address to subscribe to Irregular Times and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 221 other subscribers

Irregular Times Newsletters

Click here to subscribe to any or all of our six topical e-mail newsletters:
  1. Social Movement Actions,
  2. Credulity and Faith,
  3. Election News,
  4. This Week in Congress,
  5. Tech Dispatch and
  6. our latest Political Stickers and Such

Contact Us

We can be contacted via retorts@irregulartimes.com

War in Afghanistan Not Helping Afghan Women

One of the main arguments in favor of the invasion of Afghanistan was that Afghan women were suffering under a fundamentalist religious regime, and needed help. Now, almost eight years later, how are women in Afghanistan doing?

Not according to a resolution that was passed on Friday, unanimously, by the United States Senate. That resolution states that “women in Afghanistan face rising insecurity and consequent physical and verbal violence in seeking political office and exercising their constitutional right to vote”.

It seems war is not the effective instrument of equality that many people thought it would be.

6 comments to War in Afghanistan Not Helping Afghan Women

  • ReMarker

    As true as your conclusion is (“It seems war is not the effective instrument of equality that many people thought it would be.”), it may be important to take some other things into consideration.

    Let’s start with the primary implication of the title of this thread. WAR IN AFGANISTAN NOT HELPING and then fill in the blank. “Afgan women” is as good a blank filler as is, soldier’s families doing without their members because they are in a war in Afganistan.

    To explain my thoughts about the War in Afganistan, I concede it doesn’t help the Afgan women or their families, soldiers or their families, Afganistan peace and prosparity, etc., at least in the short term.

    War anywhere, including Afganistan, has a “war is dumb” component and it is easy to explain and describe.

    However, the war in Afganistan has implications that may mitigate war’s dumbness. I will list a couple.

    A. The facilitator of the 911 attacks is harbored in Afganistan. America should get Osama bin Laden or we lose self respect and worldwide prestige. An America that allows itself to be attacked without retaliating will suffer a patriotic backlash, AND the people of the world, that hold America in high esteem, will lose an America that is worth their aspirations.

    B. The war in Afganistan is being directed with different principles and objectives than it was under the Bush Administration and the current “war directors”, using the new principles, objectives, and techniques, have been in charge for only 6 months. There hasn’t been enough time to fairly evaluate the results. More accurately, more time is needed for a fair evaluation. However, there are some recent good signs. Example: The Taliban leader in Afganistan, that is the primary Al Qaeda sympathiser and harborer, Baitullah Mehsud, has been killed by our forces. This may be Al Qaeda’s death nail. Link to Newsweek’s article: http://www.newsweek.com/id/210970

    Finally, Sect. of State Clinton’s interview with Fareed Zakaria of CNN explains, among other things, the Obama Administration’s aspirations for Afganistan and its people, including women. This interview can be viewed by visiting CNN’s video page and selecting “Hilary Clinton GPS podcast” (34 mins. +). I will reply to this post with a more direct link when the inteview is posted to its own url later today.

    I expect the Obama Administration to be successful.

  • qs

    How much does the Taliban have to do with Al Qaeda anyway? It always seems like we group them together, but I’ve always wondered about the strength of the associations.

    • ReMarker

      That Newsweek article breaks the Afganistan Taliban/Al Qaeda connection totally down. Check it out. The link is the 6th line above your post.

  • qs

    I think nothing will change much by Obama’s 2012 reelection. We’ll still be in Iraq and Afghanistan.

    Although who knows maybe he will surprise us, but I think most Democrats will give him a pass on the issue just as most republicans gave BushMcCain a pass on Iraq and Afghanistan.

  • qs

    Obama is pushing a troop surge that will roughly double the Afghan troop levels
    New Washingtonpost Analysis: Afghanistan will be longer and costlier than you think.
    After the new troops get there, BO will tell them that they’re probably wasting their time over there for moral, but that he needs them there to maintain good public polling.

  • qs

    I think the plan for the troops surge is to have 45000 more troops in Afghanistan right now.

Leave a Reply

  

  

  

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>