[Barry the Sprout]

Yes Talthyr has a point here. We wouldn't have killed civilians in the same way as the Soviets... we let the NA do it for us. Sorry, sorry, cheap shot I know. I don't dispute the point about us trying to act humanely, but I think that this action could have been avoided as I am sure anyone who has read my posts will know.

Yorick, the Soviets had a hell of a time taking the country as there army had appalling morale and we armed the resistance to the teath. Also people would fight to retain their sovereignty which isn't really an issue just yet. No one funded the taliban against us and they are the fourth poorest government in the world. The contest was the equivalent of me (10 stone, 5'10", 19 years old) against Mike Tyson (you get the picture). I am not in the least suprised the Taliban have given up the ghost of governance. But they havn't given up on killing people just yet. Now we have to see how many more people they will kill from their various hiding places, probably US and UK soldiers included (possibly even figuring prominantly) in that number. A whole host of precedents spring to mind. The British Army in Northern Ireland is one (I don't mean to bang on about this but I know a fair amount about it I am afraid). However hard we stamped on the terrorists another soldier got killed the next day. We were sitting ducks out there and we will become so again. Basically what i am getting at is that we have taken it easily, but what will we lose in keeping it?

The Taliban still have popular support Ronn! Sorry, but do you think that the photos of people shaving their beards off, or children flying kites, were entirely spontaneous? I doubt it myself, this is a country that gave public support to the Taliban as they were:
A. Anti American, and
B. Anti NA.

And now the Americans and NA are in charge and we are expected to beleive that they are happy about it. I strongly doubt it myself.

It should also be pointed out that politics simply doesn't work in the same way in Afghanistan as it does here. 60% of the Afghan population is Pashtun (as is, worryingly, the government of Pakistan). The Taliban are Pashtun and as such gain support pretty much whatever they do from 60% of the population. It is an extremely different way of looking at things over there that is very hard to explain but basically if you had an election right now the Taliban would still get more votes than Tony Blair did in England at the last General election. That is nothing to do with their policies or their record, just who they are.

And finally, referring to the idea of Afghanistan for the Afghans. As I have said above - politics is very different over there. The people of the Taliban and the Northern Alliance already have a considerable power base. That is why they are in the positions they are. If there was to be a democratic and free election then they would be put straight back into power. People know who they are and feel they that represent them (see above). So we end up having to ban certain candidates or simply appoint people instead. Good one, we are fighting for our way of life - democracy and freedom. Am I the only one who sees that irony? And even then how do you expect to prepare a largely illiterate population for an election?

But I take your point about being too negative. There is one thing out of this whole mess that I can see is good. The bombing has stopped. Now, I don't know which to weigh greater in my mind, the fact that it has stopped or the fact that it should never have started. Hmmm, decisions, decisions... But seriosly Ronn, that is the only good point I can see personally.