Comments on: Frontline/World: Children of the Taliban http://registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/ Central Asia News -- All Central Asia, All The Time Sun, 12 Feb 2012 23:53:13 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Gmarley http://registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/comment-page-1/#comment-380003 Gmarley Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:21:34 +0000 http://www.registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/#comment-380003 Oh, and yes, I also see that very dichotomy as being a facet of any war where ideology is concerned, as in the U.S. campaign in Afghanistan. Yes, we retaliate because of September 11th, but we also want democracy to be left in our wake, maybe/sorta. I fear that each side is played up depending on convenience, but the religious overtones of the Taliban make them appear just as fierce on both sides of the coin. I'll stop using the coin metaphor now. Oh, and yes, I also see that very dichotomy as being a facet of any war where ideology is concerned, as in the U.S. campaign in Afghanistan. Yes, we retaliate because of September 11th, but we also want democracy to be left in our wake, maybe/sorta. I fear that each side is played up depending on convenience, but the religious overtones of the Taliban make them appear just as fierce on both sides of the coin. I’ll stop using the coin metaphor now.

]]> By: Gmarley http://registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/comment-page-1/#comment-380002 Gmarley Wed, 15 Apr 2009 17:15:11 +0000 http://www.registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/#comment-380002 Josh, I think your friend's point of fighting for what people have is an important compliment to the concept of fighting for what people want. I mean, you're welcome from Captain Obvious over here, but the doc showed a really interesting dichotomy in the Taliban's thinking. During the interview with the "child recruiter" (I feel dirty for using that term, I don't know why) he plainly said there wasn't a need to fight the Pakistani Army because they had been viewed as Muslims. However, once the fighting did start, the Taliban started demanding cultural and legal shifts toward what they favored, thus indirectly admitting they did see a "lacking" in Pakistan that they want to "correct." Am I blowing that aspect out of proportion? If not, which do you feel is more motivating to them? Josh, I think your friend’s point of fighting for what people have is an important compliment to the concept of fighting for what people want. I mean, you’re welcome from Captain Obvious over here, but the doc showed a really interesting dichotomy in the Taliban’s thinking. During the interview with the “child recruiter” (I feel dirty for using that term, I don’t know why) he plainly said there wasn’t a need to fight the Pakistani Army because they had been viewed as Muslims. However, once the fighting did start, the Taliban started demanding cultural and legal shifts toward what they favored, thus indirectly admitting they did see a “lacking” in Pakistan that they want to “correct.” Am I blowing that aspect out of proportion? If not, which do you feel is more motivating to them?

]]> By: Joshua Foust http://registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/comment-page-1/#comment-380001 Joshua Foust Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:21:37 +0000 http://www.registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/#comment-380001 Well, yes, I like slippery slopes too, but be mature for a minute. He was saying that, at a fundamental level, people are people and they tend to defend what they have. It's the same reason many people don't like admitting that the South might have had morally and ethically legitimate reasons for fighting the Civil War because we've chosen to make it about slavery. Blah blah blah, it's all a rich tapestry. His point remains sound: the people we are fighting think they have the force of God on their side, and therefore have righteousness, and all the other moral and ethical components we add to our own wars. That's an important realization -- not that we must agree with it, but merely recognize that it exists and must be accounted for. Well, yes, I like slippery slopes too, but be mature for a minute. He was saying that, at a fundamental level, people are people and they tend to defend what they have. It’s the same reason many people don’t like admitting that the South might have had morally and ethically legitimate reasons for fighting the Civil War because we’ve chosen to make it about slavery.

Blah blah blah, it’s all a rich tapestry. His point remains sound: the people we are fighting think they have the force of God on their side, and therefore have righteousness, and all the other moral and ethical components we add to our own wars. That’s an important realization — not that we must agree with it, but merely recognize that it exists and must be accounted for.

]]> By: zenpundit http://registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/comment-page-1/#comment-380000 zenpundit Wed, 15 Apr 2009 15:12:25 +0000 http://www.registan.net/index.php/2009/04/14/frontlineworld-children-of-the-taliban/#comment-380000 "Nevertheless, my friend’s followup comment was deeply insightful: “i’m serious. are we all that different? we all defend what we have.” Following that logic, the British Army = the Vietcong= the IDF=the Taliban = the Crips= the U.S. Army= the Zulus = the SS = the Sioux = the Kamikaze = the Vikings ...ad infinitum. What one fights for and how has greater moral bearing than the common denominator of fighting. “Nevertheless, my friend’s followup comment was deeply insightful: “i’m serious. are we all that different? we all defend what we have.”

Following that logic, the British Army = the Vietcong= the IDF=the Taliban = the Crips= the U.S. Army= the Zulus = the SS = the Sioux = the Kamikaze = the Vikings …ad infinitum.

What one fights for and how has greater moral bearing than the common denominator of fighting.

]]>