doctorhugo said:
Nation-building in a land of primitive cave dwellers and tribal warlords committed to trafficking in hard drug raw material. A nation state barely existing as such with no concept of personal freedoms to be propped up as a venture in democracy. Sheer idiocy!
Now...this really bothers me. And the fact that you cap the ignorance with a "idiocy" remark is really pitiful.
Afghanistan was a country that was modernizing in the mid-twentieth century.
In 1964, Afghanistan's King deliberately abandoned 200 years of autocratic rule and diminished his family's power in order to give his people democracy. He knew that absolute monarchy in the twentieth century would not ensure his nation's survival like a democracy would. Unfortunately, in 1965, among the many political parties, was The People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan. It was strongle influenced by that of the Soviet Communist Party. Other Socialilist political groups began to emerge.
During this phase, nations like the U.S., Britain, and the Soviet Union was channeling financial aid into the country. If you look at pictures of Afghanistan during this period, you will see a country you don't see on CNN. You will see modernization. There were thousands of enterprises underway. Major exports were cotton and fruit. There were two majopr discoveries in the 1960s. Natural gas was discovered in Shiberghan and iron ore in Bamiyan. Extensive traces of other mineral deposits were later discovered. There is a large sulphur deposit near Nangarhar. Coal is present and would later be mined in small quantities. There is also significant lead, manganese, marble, gypsum, barite, gold, beryl, and uranium deposits here and there. Until these mining operations could be brought into production, it was understood that agriculture had to be Afghanistan's primary economic prosperity for some time.
In the mean time, pictures of the past would show you schools full of women learning about medicine. It's most prominent leaders in the mid-1960s were four female deputies elected to the lower house of the parliament. Women were abandoning the veil. When President Kennedy visited he was surrounded by business suits. Pictures of the men in the surrounding area would be beardless and many without robes. Hell, as far back as the 1920s, you would see pictures of men in suits sitting on bicycles and cars. In the 1960s you would read about the news in a couple magazines that were emerging from the free press. You would hear about your political party or the global happenings from a radio station. They were modernizing.
Take a guess at what happened. Never mind, I'll help you. Three factors were crucial to Afghanistan's failure to modernize.
1) Due to the education system, few were engaged in the political processes. Most in the country couldn't read (over 80 percent still can't). It was largely up to the Pashtun and they were being influenced by the Soviets at the time. This meant that mass fair circulation of the press was not only hampered, but most couldn't read it anyway.
2) Those that were elected by those who were educated enough to know what they were doing were inflexible, which meant that they constantly sought ways to improve upon their power.
3) The reflexive panic of the King and his family whenever they or the system they devised came under fire meant that no coherent, legitimate opposition could develop. The only alternatives to not trusting the natural instability of democracy meant that autocracy or anarchy was always in the shadows.
The communist leaning political parties eventually gained strength and allowed the Soviet Union to gain influence. The West (America and Britian) was shoved out. The Soviet Union assumed to bank roll highways, irrigation systems, and other projects. The Soviet policy to "Russianize" Afghanistan took its toll on the tribes. Tribes in the north began to rebell against the communist parties in Afghanistan. Russian presence became more and more. The Soviets decided that invading into Afghanistan to help the struggling government was a good idea. It was a the last clear example of imperialism in history. During the years of warfare, the population radicalized, Islamic warriors traveled to find the latest jihad, agriculture fields were destroyed, irrigation systems were destroyed, social systems were destroyed. After we assisted the Mujahadeen to defeat the Soviets, we left. They turned on their own people and headed straight into a decade of civil war. Afghanistan led the world for amputees. Even more destruction ensued and the farmers of Afghanistan turned to poppy not only to feed their family, but to appease the Taliban's demands for financial support. The Taliban (means students - it's to show their conviction to learn
true Islam) won at the end of the decade and two years later 3,000 Americans died across the Atlantic Ocean because of an international terrorist organization they harbored. Today, we can't burn the poppy fields because it means the death of their families when Taliban agents come to collect. It also means that without those irrigation systems and other systems that were destroyed, farmers only have poppy. Without it, we may as well usher them to the taliban so that they can pay them for digging holes to set IEDs for twenty bucks.
"Primitive cave dwellers?" "No concept of personal freedoms?" Assuming that democracy is something that entered their world only after we showed up to engineer them out of their mess is ignorant. What was that about "sheer idiocy?" Read a ****ing book, then vomit an educated opinion.
