By: peacepundit

peacepundit — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 16:08:40 +0000

The small pop-ups are just hints of what is behind the links. To read the text, click on the links.

As you say, it’s a complicated world. This includes the situation in Afghanistan.

The people of Afghanistan are called Afghans, not “Afghanis”. The Afghani is their name for the nation’s currency.

Afghanistan was not a land of “dopers”. They produced opium poppies mainly for export. The dopers were (and still are) scattered around the world.

When the Taliban were in power after kicking the Soviets out in the 1980s, they stopped and banned opium production because they considered it sinful. Now that they are out of power, they are (hypocritically) using opium production to help fund their resurgence.

The U.S. would have a better impact on Afghanistan if instead of waging war, we waged peace, i.e., sent in the Corps of Engineers to build schools and wells, while using U.N. peacekeeping forces to keep peace.

Read the book “Three Cups of Tea”, about Greg Mortenson, and you’ll understand what I mean.

By: RUTH MCKENNEY

RUTH MCKENNEY — Wed, 24 Jun 2009 14:07:36 +0000

The small pop-ups that indicate further reading display such small print that I cannot decipher what they are trying to say. WHAT ARE THE CONSEQUENCES OF FAILING TO HELP AFGHANI PEOPLE? IN MY VIEW, FAILING TO KILL ALL TALIBAN IS A VERY DANGEROUS POINT OF VIEW/ACTION. To add to these questions, AFghanistan has been a land of “dopers” and opium sources since before Jesus was born! How is that helpful to this complicated world? Why save that?
DO YOU SEE MY VARIED ARGUMENTS? tHANKS! ruth mckenney springfield mo. 65804

Comments on: Support Congr. Jim McGovern’s Afghanistan Timetable Bill

By: peacepundit

By: RUTH MCKENNEY