There was plenty of lost opportunity to lean on the Taliban before 9/11. I fault both the Clinton Administration and the Republican Congress for this.
The only organizations taking the Taliban seriously as a tyranny at that time were feminist groups. They, of course, didn't count.
Why concern ourselves with demanding adherence to international standards of behavior by a nation ruled by anti-Communists who are friends of the Saudis?
Now, after the law had been undermined (by the Taliban's behavior and our refusal to face it) and terrible crimes have been committed against us, we went to war with the Taliban. But the Saudis are still our friends. Tell me some more about knowing right from wrong and how the simple application of moral rectitude makes all things clear.
Regards--
Mary Anne
Current Events » in reply to You Missed The Part About Alternative Solutions
PS re: the Taliban and "alternative solutions"
The whole thread (40 posts)
- A lot of brainwashing going around.
- Scouring "Government Resources"
- re: Canadians were not fooled by the WMD story, or by your ambassador's threats of economic sanctions
- Oh, for Gods sake, Justin
- What's the difference...
- wow, too negative. . . Kinder/Gentler/Corrected manifesto
- re: wow, too negative. . . Kinder/Gentler/Corrected manifesto
- The exercize of conscience
- What Is And Is Not Appropriate
- re: The exercize of conscience
- The absence of conscience
- If there are changes to America that will improve things...
- Do I understand you correctly?
- No, you don't: there's a principle involved
- You're wrong on this one.
- What You Neglect
- Tyranny is in the eye of the beholder
- No
- Define "harm". I will stipulate to murder and torture.
- No
- Tyranny is in the eye of the beholder
- No, you don't: there's a principle involved
- re: If there are changes to America
- Do I understand you correctly?