Don't know who this person is. He is not a subscriber to our BOGGS list, so the following "bounced" to me. However, I am forwarding this as "food for thought". And Kevin, if you're out there in cyber-space somewhere and don't know how to subscribe to the BOGGS list, just let me know. Bev Listmanager: BOGGS and MAGGARD MikesHoney@aol.com > Subj: {not a subscriber} RE: [BOGGS-L] September 11th > Date: 09/16/2001 7:52:13 AM Central Daylight Time > From: rev_kev@peakonline.com (Kevin) > To: BOGGS-L@rootsweb.com > > > > > An important perespective as we respond as a nation: > > [This commentary comes from Tamim Ansary, a writer and columnist > in San > Francisco, who comes from Afghanistan. ] > > > I've been hearing a lot of talk about "bombing Afghanistan back > to the Stone > Age." Ronn Owens, on KGO Talk Radio today, allowed that this > would mean > killing innocent people, people who had nothing to do with this > atrocity, > but "we're at war, we have to accept collateral damage. What > else can we > do?" Minutes later I heard some TV pundit discussing whether we > "have the > belly to do what must be done." > > And I thought about the issues being raised especially hard > because I am > from Afghanistan, and even though I've lived here for 35 years > I've never > lost track of what's going on there. So I want to tell anyone > who will > listen how it all looks from where I'm standing. > > I speak as one who hates the Taliban and Osama Bin Laden. There > is no doubt > in my mind that these people were responsible for the atrocity > in New York. > I agree that something must be done about those monsters. > > But the Taliban and Ben Laden are not Afghanistan. They're not > even the > government of Afghanistan. The Taliban are a cult of ignorant > psychotics > who took over Afghanistan in 1997. Bin Laden is a political > criminal > with a > plan. When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you think Bin > Laden,think > Hitler. And when you think "the people of Afghanistan" think > "the Jews in > the concentration camps." > > It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to do with this > atrocity. > They were the first victims of the perpetrators. They would > exult if someone > would come in there, take out the Taliban and clear out the rats > nest of > international thugs holed up in their country. > > Some say, why don't the Afghans rise up and overthrow the > Taliban? The > answer is, they're starved, exhausted, hurt, incapacitated, > suffering. A > few years ago, the United Nations estimated that there are > 500,000 disabled > orphans in Afghanistan--a country with no economy, no food. > There are > millions of widows. And the Taliban has been burying these > widows > alive in > mass graves. The soil is littered with land mines, the farms > were all > destroyed by the Soviets. These are a few of the reasons why > the Afghan > people have not overthrown the Taliban. > > We come now to the question of bombing Afghanistan back to the > Stone > Age.Trouble is, that's been done. The Soviets took care of it > already. Make > the Afghans suffer? They're already suffering. Level their > houses? Done. > Turn their schools into piles of rubble? Done. Eradicate their > hospitals? > Done. Destroy their infrastructure? Cut them off from medicine > and health > care? Too late. Someone already did all that. > > New bombs would only stir the rubble of earlier bombs. Would > they at least > get the Taliban? Not likely. In today's Afghanistan, only the > Taliban eat, > only they have the means to move around. They'd slip away and > hide. Maybe > the bombs would get some of those disabled orphans, they don't > move too > fast, they don't even have wheelchairs. But flying over Kabul > and dropping > bombs wouldn't really be a strike against the criminals who did > this > horrific thing. Actually it would only be making common cause > with the > Taliban--by raping once again the people they've been raping all > this time > > So what else is there? What can be done, then? Let me now speak > with true > fear and trembling. The only way to get Bin Laden is to go in > there with > ground troops. When people speak of "having the belly to do what > needs > to be > done" they're thinking in terms of having the belly to kill as > many as > needed. Having the belly to overcome > any moral qualms about killing innocent people. Let's pull our > heads out of > the sand. What's actually on the table is Americans dying. And > not just > because some Americans would die fighting their way through > Afghanistan to > Bin Laden's hideout. It's much bigger than that folks. Because > to get any > troops to Afghanistan, we'd have to go through Pakistan. Would > they let us? > Not likely. The conquest of Pakistan would have to be first. > Will other > Muslim nations just stand by? You see where I'm going. We're > flirting > with a > world war between Islam and the West. > > And guess what: that's Bin Laden's program. That's exactly what > he wants. > That's why he did this. Read his speeches and statements. It's > all right > there. He really believes Islam would beat the west. It might > seem > ridiculous, but he figures if he can polarize the world into > Islam and the > West, he's got a billion soldiers. If the west wreaks a > holocaust in those > lands, that's a billion people with nothing left to lose, that's > even better > from Bin Laden's point of view. He's probably wrong, in the end > the West > would win, whatever that would mean, but the war would last for > years and > millions would die, not just theirs but ours. Who has the belly > for that? > Bin Laden does. Anyone else? > > Tamim Ansary > >