Is Afghanistan worse off now than under the Taleban?
- Yes
- No
0 voters
Just curious to see how this compares to the Iraq one…
Well, I vote no. The Taliban are a bad bunch. IMO, it would be very difficult to find a more ideologically driven master, and for women in particular the Taliban were despicable.
In fact, imo, that’s one of the big problems with these Wahabbi-style Islamists. If they’re in control of a given country, then at a starting point half their human capital is held out of the market (the female half).
Bad news all the way around, the Taliban are.
If only Gallup people (or even our troops) could move freely through the third or so of Afghanistan that is now ruled by the resurgent Taliban we might know the answer to this question…
The operative word is “freely” but we do move through all of Afghanistan. And even by your comparison, one third is a lot better than three thirds no?
Looks like voter registration is proceeding beyond anyone’s wildest expectations.
Another thing about Iraq (side note), given that it has become the main theater for Islamofascists, it can be argued that this has drawn a lot of terrorists and insurgents who would be fighting in Afghanistan and Algeria and other countries. It has diverted them from sending terrorists to the US and Europe by tying their hands. We need to take out Fallujah and clean out that rat’s nest once and for all. This is the major sources of our troubles now and election or no election, it needs to be cleaned up. If Bush is not re-elected, it might be the perfect opportunity for him to do two things. Clean out Fallujah and bomb Iran’s nuclear sites.
Perhaps we would have all of Afghanistan free (and Osama Bin Laden in custody) if the Bush presidency didn’t have attention deficit disorder when it came to foreign affairs. Would have been a lot smarter to clear out Tora Bora when we had OBL on the run.
Instead of having the terrorists cowering in their caves, they and their Taliban buddies have American soldiers stuck in little bases in and around Kabul.
Ah but Tora Bora occurred BEFORE we even got started on Iraq. In fact, it occurred nearly 1 year and four months prior to our invasion of Iraq. Face it, there were risks and benefits with the strategy we adopted in Afghanistan. Ditto for Iraq, but not one of the critics has ever outlined a credible alternative to these strategies. They have remained content to say they were wrong and by virtue of that fact, George W. Bush is an evil idiot capable of brilliant and successful machinations of the American people etc.
The total fiasco that bears the name Tora Bora did happen before Iraq, but it was indicative of the U.S. unwillingness to commit troops to a struggle that needed our full attention to succeed. Poor Karzai is now just a puppet president of a warlord-owned territory, sitting out his days in Kabul and waiting for the day when the U.S. pulls out completely, leaving him to be the first up against the wall when the Taliban comes back.
Diverting attention, resources, etc. to Iraq was a travesty in light of the unfinished work in Afghanistan. Tora Bora was a symptom of serious problems with our “war on the cheap” ideas, and we should have ensured that the Afghanistan effort and the hunt for OBL were carried through to a successful conclusion.