John Kerry, Hillary Clinton: Afghanistan Nearing Turning Point

[Beacool]

By Ken Thomas 11/15/13



WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry and his predecessor, Hillary Rodham Clinton, say Afghanistan is reaching a turning point that will be critical to maintaining advances made by women since the end of Taliban rule.

Kerry says Afghan women and girls have made great progress since 2001, enjoying greater access to education, health care and technology.

But he says many women are concerned that the country could return to the days of Taliban control, when girls were barred from attending school and women were forced indoors.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/15/hillary-clinton-john-kerry-afghanistan_n_4284460.html?utm_hp_ref=hillary-clinton

What happens to the girls and women of Afghanistan is a major concern. What will happen to them once we leave? Will the country return to treating women as they were treated when the Taliban ruled the country?

[KG]

1. bilge.

[cali]

2. utter bilge pushing that corporate creature, hillary.

[Beacool]

4. This is not about Hillary.

Some of you have a one track mind when it comes to the Clintons.

[cali]

6. if it's not about hillary, why are YOU making it about her with your OP

You have the one track mind when it comes to HC.

[Beacool]

8. I posted the title as written.

I made zero comments about Hillary.

[cali]

10. lol. and the picture? Why post that?

[Beacool]

12. The pic also included Kerry.

What's your problem?

[Wilms]

35. The pic also includes Shillary.

Like your avatar.

But let's go on and on about Afghan girls being able to wear lipstick.

[Beacool]

42. I think that you lost your way.

Free Republic is to your right..........



As for talking about Afghan women wearing lipstick, I'll bite my tongue of what I think of your dismissive, disgusting tone. If that's what you think this is about you are very ignorant on the subject.

[Wilms]

68. Then hit the alert.

I'm tired of biting my tongue every time I see these puff-pieces about the wonderful things we're doing in nations where we've sent hundreds of thousands to death and worse.

[Beacool]

70. I don't need to hit the alert button. I can defend myself without running to the moderators.

That name you called Hillary is a common nick used by RW sites. It's inappropriate to use RW talking points on a Democratic site. There are other ways to express your point of view.

[polly7]

69. As you were regarding the status of Iraqi women pre-invasion. nt.

[dionysus]

80. shillary? what is this, 2008 all over again?

[Whisp]

33. yes it is about Hillary. That is All you talk about.

you were bashing Kerry the other day about his wording to Saudi Arabia and human rights, now he's a pal because he's hugging the Queen.

[Beacool]

44. And bashing her is all you talk about.

Try a new tune, this one is getting old.

[Ken Burch]

66. Part of the problem is that the tone of your OP link

(I know you didn't write it, but it's there)sounds like every article that got printed between 1965 and 1973 about somebody in the admin. of the day coming home from Saigon with glowing reports of how well things were supposedly glowing.

The article makes it sound like HRC and Kerry are competing to out-Dean Rusk or Henry Kissinger each other.

I think that is triggering sense memory for a lot of people here.

[Beacool]

67. Maybe so, but that happened before my time.

Lesson learned. Last time I'm posting anything on this site regarding the plight of the women in Afghanistan.

[Ken Burch]

71. Nobody's saying don't post stuff about helping women in Afghanistan

The problem is when what gets posted, sometimes in spite of the intents of those posting, looks like it is an apologia or argument for extending our troop involvement.

BTW, you aren't the only one who cares about helping the women of Afghanistan. We ALL do.

It's not as if the ONLY way we can help those women is to continue our status as an invading army there.

It's not even clear that we actually ARE helping those women by staying on militarily. We may well be doing them more harm than good, especially if we make it look like their liberation(a goal these women are fighting for bravely on their own terms, and probably much more effectively than our generals are) is going to be seen by the majority of the Afghan population...including a lot of women, as it happens...as an exercise in Western colonialist meddling.

And, as you study the history of U.S. foreign policy(you need to read a lot more Chomsky, for one thing)you will learn that our leaders have never been motivated solely or even primarily by honorable intent like helping the innocent and oppressed(remember, it was U.S. foreign policy geniuses under Reagan that pretty much invented the Taliban, because nothing mattered more than getting those evil, baby-eating Commies out of there).

Be in solidarity with Afghanistan's women, and oppressed people everywhere...but be there with open eyes.

[Beacool]

72. It goes beyond this thread.

The vile stuff and nastiness against any Clinton post or their supporters is only going to divide Democrats. This appears to be a throwback to 2008, except that the political climate is not the same. It'll take a lot of hard work to keep the WH in 2016, all Democratic votes will be needed. The constant nastiness is going to make some of us sit on our hands.

BTW, I mostly agree with Chomsky's views on foreign policy. I don't think that the US has given a crap about most of the countries where it has interfered. The situation in Afghanistan now is more about making lemonade out of lemons since we are already there.

[Ken Burch]

74. the people you've sparred with see HRC as the chamipion of the status quo on foreign policy

If that bothers you, you and others who back her but are to her left need to be pushing her to break witht he status quo, to sound less Scoop Jackson-like.

You should also be pushing her to ease away from her gung-ho position on trade deals. It's almost impossible to back things like NAFTA and the proposed treaties with Latin America and Europe without sounding like you want total corporate dominance of life. Those who raise this issue with HRC are afraid that her position about how the world should be run is pretty much the same as Malcolm Forbes. And that position is NOT popular, so she really has nothing to lose in backing away from it.

[dionysus]

78. oh Bea, you silly "shillbot", you!

[Beacool]

83. Hi, sweets!!!

[Beacool]

3. Meaning?

No one is saying that we should continue the war in Afghanistan, but what is our moral responsibility to the girls and women of the country?

[cali]

5. what does that even mean- "our moral responsibility"?

I find it completely devoid of meaning if you don't offer realistic measures that the U.S. could take beyond the use of force.

[Beacool]

11. We invaded their country.

Girls and women have had a few more freedoms since we have been there that they didn't have before, such as girls being permitted to pursue an education. Now that we are about to leave, how can we protect them from the Taliban enforcing their repressive rule against them once again?

[cali]

14. No. There is little we can do.

and anyone paying attention knows that for the past few years, the situation has been regressing as far as the rights of women in Afghanistan- even with U.S. forces there.

It's tragic.

[Vox Moi]

9. Good question.

I have no idea why civil rights for women is being discussed in the context of military intervention.
If the war in Afghanistan is not a factor, why focus on Afghanistan?

[Beacool]

13. The US made promises to the women of Afghanistan.

Women there are very concerned as to what is going to happen to them once the US leaves the country. They have good reason to fear. The Taliban repression was brutal to women and girls. As SOS Hillary promised that the US would not abandon them. The issue is how are we going to be able to help these girls and women once we leave?

[cali]

15. So what are your suggestions?

[Beacool]

20. I don't know.

But the US promised not to abandon and forget the women there. I don't think that it will be easy to do. Afghanistan is more primitive than Iraq in their treatment of women.

This is from last year. One of the few positive things to come out of the fiasco that is the war in Afghanistan.

"On Wednesday March 21, Secretary Clinton will host a celebration for the 10th anniversary of the U.S. – Afghan Women’s Council with special guest Mrs. Laura Bush, in appreciation for the work and ongoing dedication of the Council’s members to support the women and girls of Afghanistan. Afghan Foreign Minister Zalmay Rassoul will also participate, with other U.S. and foreign dignitaries. The event will be held at approximately 12:00 p.m. in the Ben Franklin Room of the U.S. Department of State.

Founded by U.S. President George W. Bush and Afghan President Hamid Karzai in 2002, the U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council connects the U.S. Government, the Afghan Government, the private sector, academia, and nongovernmental organizations to identify needs and to develop and implement initiatives in support of Afghan women and girls. Since 2009, Secretary Clinton and the State Department continue the work of the Council, now housed at Georgetown University. Georgetown University President John J. DeGioia serves as co-chair of the U.S.-Afghan Women’s Council with Ambassador at Large for Global Women’s Issues, Melanne Verveer. Mrs. Bush, an honorary advisor, continues to play a supporting role."

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/prs/ps/2012/03/186099.htm

Kerry is now taking the lead, as he's the current SOS.

[cali]

25. holy moly. I'm sorry but your statement about how Afghanistan is more "priimitive

than Iraq in their treatment of women", reveals a real lack of knowledge about women in Iraq. Not even in the same ballpark. Iraq has a large number of educated women and opportunities for women in Iraq have historically been much greater than those for women in Afghanistan.

Repeating over and over again that the U.S. has an obligation to the women of Afghanistan doesn't change that there is little we can do.

[polly7]

31. Women in Iraq had, at one time, led the ME

in opportunity for education and pretty much everything else. Iraq had more women doctors, educators and top professional positions than most anywhere in the region.

But then ..... I can recall reading the same thing, how the invasion of Iraq had actually improved the lives of these formerly successful women.

[Whisp]

38. yes they did! But Poppy, Billie and Chimperor put an end to that!

the OP obviously does not read any real history of actual events in Iraq so I doubt there is real knowledge about Afghanistan either.

If OP is doing PR work for the Hillary 2016, I say let her speak! She is doing more harm than good for the 'image'.

[Beacool]

57. Iraq is a different story than Afghanistan.

I still fail to understand fully what Bush expected to gain from that invasion.

[David Zephyr]

64. Thanks for saying what needed to be said.

Using the plight of girls and women to now 1.) justify the mayhem of this total failure of a war (Laura Bush said much the same thing long after we invaded, occupied and began losing the war, by the way); or 2.) to create a puffy story about a potential candidate for President with "a turning point" headline is disturbing.

We need to demand that our President speed up his December 2014 deadline, which is now being morphed with new language and conditions by our Generals, and bring our troops home. It's the right thing to do. It's the only thing to do.

There was no "good" that justifies what we did in Afghanistan. History will report our venture there was as doomed and harmful to the populace as that of the Soviet Union.

[Whisp]

34. suggestions guesses:

elect Hillary and she will Hillitary her way back in Afghanistan to save all the women and children and there will be peace and love throughout the word just like that! Cuz she's tough you know. And always tired.

:gawd:

[Vox Moi]

18. What promises, exactly? How would they be kept?

Sincerely, I would like to know.
This thread has been under criticism and I think maybe we're misunderstanding your point.

[Beacool]

23. The misunderstanding is because I posted it, as simple as that.

This is not about Hillary, Kerry or anyone else. The post is about what are we going to do for the women of Afghanistan once we leave next year? It may not be a concern for too many people here, but I for one care. The promise was not to abandon them to their fate.

This is the story of one young woman. Advances have been made and it would be a pity if the country regressed to the Taliban ways, although they still rule the countryside.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013-04-18/local/38647635_1_taliban-rural-southern-afghanistan-head-scarf

[Ken Burch]

51. We can't do ANYTHING for those women with troops.

Military intervention can never be feminist, and we haven't liberated any of the women of the Middle Eastern countries we've occupied and essentially turned into our colonies.

In "free" Iraq, for example, sharia law is now in place, which automatically means women have fewer rights than they would without it(and it's extremely unlikely that sharia will ever be repealed there, since, to my knowledge, no country that has ever adopted it has ever repealed it).

[Beacool]

53. I agree with everyone here who thinks that we shouldn't have been there in the first place,

but that horse left the barn years ago. The question is what to do now. Pretend that we were never there and leave with a "see you, good luck to all of you"?

[polly7]

19. Concerned about those women and girls right from the start ....

(not. Considering how many of these warlord wives are young girls and women forced into 'marriage' under total control of their husbands, often living lives filled with brutality, rape and suffering).

Little Blue Pills Among the Ways CIA Wins Friends in Afghanistan

By Joby Warrick,December 26, 2008

The Afghan chieftain looked older than his 60-odd years, and his bearded face bore the creases of a man burdened with duties as tribal patriarch and husband to four younger women. His visitor, a CIA officer, saw an opportunity, and reached into his bag for a small gift.

Four blue pills. Viagra.

"Take one of these. You'll love it," the officer said. Compliments of Uncle Sam.

The enticement worked. The officer, who described the encounter, returned four days later to an enthusiastic reception. The grinning chief offered up a bonanza of information about Taliban movements and supply routes -- followed by a request for more pills.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2008-12-26/world/36891808_1_cia-officer-afghanistan-veterans-taliban-commanders

[NuclearDem]

27. I don't for one second believe the bullshit propaganda about "helping the women of Afghanistan."

We've had plenty of times to help before. We had the chance to rebuild Afghanistan after the Soviet withdrawal, but we didn't. We had the opportunity to not prop up warlords, and we did. We had the opportunity to focus our resources on stabilizing Afghanistan, but we ran off on a lie-based debacle in Iraq.


Funny the only times anyone in a position of authority gives a flying fuck about Afghanistan's women is when they're flailing around trying to justify continuing an occupation. Fucking disgusting.

[polly7]

29. +1,000,000! nt.

[cali]

37. well said! It is fucking disgusting.

[Whisp]

39. Hillary gave a lot of shit about the women of Iraq, didn't she?

While Bill made their lives and the lives of their children miserable and short for 8 fucking years.

the hypocrisy is overwhelming. Never saw anything like it before from 'this' side of the aisle.

[David Zephyr]

62. Yep.

Laura Bush said the same thing long after we invaded Afghanistan: it was to help the women.

You wrote: "Funny the only times anyone in a position of authority gives a flying fuck about Afghanistan's women is when they're flailing around trying to justify continuing an occupation. Fucking disgusting."

Yep. Disgusting.

[bigtree]

7. sure

. . . but, they're going in circles.

Out, now.

[Skittles]

16. riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight

[polly7]

17. There seem to be differing opinions on that ...

Democracy Now video and transcript: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/3/imperialism_fundamentalism_have_joined_hands_malalai

MALALAI JOYA: Yeah, as I said, U.S. troop is there for this criminal war, since the war, as they occupied our country, will not leave Afghanistan voluntarily soon, as situation for millions of Afghan by presence of tens of thousands troops is like hell, especially in Farah provinces. And women, still they are the most and prime victims, and they—for example, rapes, domestic violences, acid attacks, burning the girls’ schools, and many other violence is increasing more and more, as right now I’m following the case of Shakila, a 16-years-old girl who has been raped and killed by a member of the provincial council and three other parlimentarian so-called member of Parliament. They are partner in this case in trying to forge the medical report of the raped girl. And even a few kilometers away from Kabul just a few months ago, a young girl has been prosecuted publicly by one of the criminal fundamentalist party, Hezb-e Islamic party, that run by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, this terrorist. Also Taliban in different provinces, they are doing public executions, without at least to bring these women to this fundamentalist or mafia court that we have. And many other example like this, that they control Afghanistan day by day, they are getting powerful. That’s why we want the withdrawal of the troops as soon as possible from Afghanistan, because they double our miseries and sorrows of our people. And if, honestly, they leave, at least these warlords and these Taliban, these terrorists, will not be more powerful, to be easier for them to eliminate democratic people of Afghanistan and suffer or kill innocent people there.

[Beacool]

21. I guess that we'll just have to wait and see, won't we?

I remember what happened when the Soviets withdrew and the Taliban took over. Girls were not allowed to have an education and women were denied medical attention because a man was not allowed to touch them.

[polly7]

22. You don't seem to understand .... women in Afghanistan are saying those things,

and much worse ... are already happening and have been all along.

MALALAI JOYA: Underground, I mean despite wearing burqa and have bodyguards, not safe moving from one place to another place, that to not be easy target. As last year on 10 of March, these terrorists attacked my house and office in Farah province, that 12 of my bodyguards brutally has been injured. And this is about seven assassination attempts they do against me. That’s why I have to be underground. I mean that I can’t have office or a house, that [inaudible] much easier for an activist to have it. But unfortunately, for security reasons, it’s not only me, there is many other democrat men and women activists that are risking their life, struggling, but have to be underground.

And regarding your question about consequences of the 12 years of occupation of U.S. and NATO, unfortunately, was more bloodshed, crimes, women rights, human rights violations, looting of our resource and changing of our country into mafia state, as during these 12 bloody years tens of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed by occupation forces and terrorist groups. And they have changed Afghanistan to the center of the drugs. That’s more than 90 percent of opium produced from Afghanistan, as I believe opium is even more dangerous than al-Qaeda and war as it destroy and spoils the life of Afghans. Around two million Afghan addicted, most of them are women and children. And also, there’s a report Afghanistan is the second most corrupt country in the world. And according to UNIFEM, Afghanistan is the worst place to be a woman. And many example like this, this list can be prolonged, that they unfortunately committed crimes against our people. Still this war, disgusting war, is going on, and even right now trying to negotiate with terrorist Taliban, as these 12 years were saying to our people, "We are there to fight against Taliban and al-Qaeda," but now U.S. officials and puppet regime of Karzai shamelessly publicly they say that Taliban are not their enemies anymore and going to negotiate with them, invite them to join this puppet, corrupt mafia regime.

http://www.democracynow.org/2013/10/3/imperialism_fundamentalism_have_joined_hands_malalai

I get that it needs to be seen as a success for 'someone', but please ..... don't ignore what the women of Afghanistan are saying themselves.

[Beacool]

24. I'm not ignoring them.

Do these women honestly think that if all Western aid (I'm referring to relief organizations, not to our military forces) leave that they would be better off? Fine, but I think that they will revert to the same situation that they were under when the Taliban had free reign over the entire country. BTW, I doubt that the women quoted in your article reflect the sentiment of the entire female population of the nation, as I have read, watched and observed otherwise.

[NuclearDem]

26. I'd say what's on my mind about this, but I'd prefer to not get PPR'd.

Though I will say it wouldn't be directed at the Afghan women.

[cali]

28. I wish you would say. Can you put it in terms that won't cause

certain people to run for the alert button?

[Beacool]

48. Go ahead, I have never alerted on anyone.

Unlike others who proclaim to be sooo liberal, but hit the ignore and alert buttons the minute they disagree with someone.

[Tierra_y_Libertad]

30. They are still trying to justify an unjustifiable (and lost) war.

[99Forever]

32. What's even worse...

.. is how they insult our intelligence by thinking we believe their bullshit.

This is why Hillary Clinton must not ever be President.

[Beacool]

43. No one here is trying to justify any war.

Gee..........

[David Zephyr]

60. Exactly.

[roamer65]

36. Bullcrap.

We are no different than the Soviets in 1989. Time to leave and let the mayhem begin.

[Beacool]

46. I agree on that point.

What happened after the Soviets left? The country was left to the Talibans.

[roamer65]

81. You got it. We will end up doing the same.

We have left a horrible legacy in Iraq and Afghanistan.

[hughee99]

40. I think believing that requires a willing suspension of disbelief. n/t

[liberal_at_heart]

41. so I guess we're suppose to stay for another decade or two or three. I don't think so.

[Beacool]

45. Last time I checked, we are still in Japan, Korea and even Germany.

[Ken Burch]

49. We aren't killing people in those countries, though

(at least, as far as I know of).

And really, at this point, there's no good reason for us to be in ANY of those countries...the Cold War is over, and all we're doing in Korea is keeping tensions unnaturally high.

[Beacool]

50. I think that what Kerry was talking about was not about killing people.

I think that he meant a similar presence as we have in the aforementioned countries.

[Ken Burch]

54. We would never have a troop presesnce in Middle Eastern countries as benign

as the one in Germany.

Our leaders don't believe in treating Arab and Muslim people with respect-OR in accepting that those people have the right to control the resources of their own countries, rather than Western-owned corporations.

We should get out of Germany, Japan, and Korea, though. Our presence there was justified solely by the Cold War, and we're done with that, now. Keeping the troops there is code for saying "as far as we concerned, it's STILL 1953".

We should also reduce our nuclear presence in Europe now. Russia doesn't want to invade the West, it just wants to keep the West from invading Russia....and given what the west did in 1919 and 1939, they are kind of entitled to a bit of paranoia and overkill on their response to that. We still haven't had any of the Western nations, for example, apologize for launching the White Revolution...the barbarous and completely unjustified overthrow attempt of the new Soviet state(at a time when that state was not yet Stalinist and still had a real possibility of having a humane and democratic path), or for the role of Western corporations in backing and trading with Hitler up 'til 1938, backing that had a lot to do with Hitler coming damn close to taking over the USSR in the early '1940's(a result that would have produced a Russian puppet state that would have been ever bit as brutal as Stalin's, if not more so, especially since that state would have had IBM punchcard technology to organize its repression).

I'm not defending Stalin there(he was a bastard and a blight on the socialist cause)but Stalins and their ilk are the inevitiable result of things like the White Revolution and most other western "interventions" in non-Western countries. Democracy, by contrast, almost never follows.

[NuclearDem]

59. Then Kerry needs to pick up a history book.

1) The Germans, Japanese, and Italians didn't have fervent religious objections to foreign troops in their land. On the other side, even a small contingent of American troops in Saudi Arabia was enough to form a cornerstone of bin Laden's recruitment efforts.

2) Germany didn't have centuries of bad blood with the United States and other Western countries over invasions and occupations. The Middle East, on the other hand, has the Crusades to remind them of Western aggression and occupation.

3) Most of Europe was rebuilt swiftly thanks to unprecedented levels of foreign aid and unified against the threat of Soviet aggression. The Middle East has no such unifying force or cause; in fact, their most brutal conflicts are amongst themselves, thanks in no small part to the Sunni/Shi'a division and decolonization.

That sort of thing wouldn't work. At all.

[liberal_at_heart]

85. That's part of the problem. We need to shrink our military complex and close some of the bases

we have around the world.

[Ken Burch]

47. A turning point...from absolute hopelessness to suicidal despair?

Wow...THAT'll get you out the door with a spring in your step and a song in your heart...that is, if the drones haven't blasted away your door and ripped your feet off.



But don't worry..."Into the valley of the shadow of death, rode the..."er I mean"the boys'll be home by Christmas".

[Beacool]

52. OK, what do you all think the US should do/

Leave and try to forget that we went there?

[Ken Burch]

55. We should listen to the Radical Afghan Women's Alliance

A group that were never cheerleaders for the U.S. intervention.

We should recognize that nobody in Afghanistan, on any side, will ever see outside military intervention as a good thing(they didn't like it when the Brits and the Russians did it either).

We should then actually ASK the people of Afghanistan what they would want of us.

[Beacool]

56. Good points.

I have no idea whether Karzai would agree to a continuing US presence in the country anyway. I still think that the minute the US leaves the country completely, that the treatment of girls and women will deteriorate.

[Ken Burch]

61. Perhaps we should grant all Afghan women and girls immediate political asylum or refugee status

I'm serious about that. Let's see how long the crazies could keep an all-male country going.

The basic problem is, yes, things might get a bit worse for women if the troops left, but at some point they Afghan people will end up driving our troops out anyway. Staying in Afghanistan now is no more sustainable than staying in Vietnam was in 1972(or really, ever). How much of a favor are we doing for the women and girls of Afghanistan by making their emancipation into a symbol of colonialist meddling? In the end, don't we just make them scapegoats for the arrogance of our own leaders?

Our party needs to be the one that says "NO...the days when we treat the world as ours to control and manipulate are over. The notion that we, or any other 'advanced' country were or are entitled to 'lead the world' is what led to all the acts that made most of the world hate us".

[Beacool]

75. I don't think that would pass Congress.

I guess that we'll just have to wait and see what happens in Afghanistan.

[Ken Burch]

77. I'm trying to have a dialog with you...please don't take that "oh well" tone

It's not as if we have to have the troops there for non-military western help, given without conditions, to be able to continue.

[rudolph the red]

58. Just bring them home

I don't care what excuse they use or what fantasy they want us to believe, just get our men and women out of there.

[David Zephyr]

65. Yes. And we need to stay on this.

The "end of the war" date of December 2014 is too late and our Generals are now suggesting new meanings for that "end of war."

We lost. The damage done will far outweigh any good we can make of what we did there.

And we still have a generation of unemployed young people who will have to pay for two stupid wars for the rest of their lives not just in taxes, reduced domestic standard and quality of living, but also in careers that will never be because we were too busy spending money making war (government spending) instead of investing in our own country, our infrastructure, public education and our people.

These two wars will have sidelined the life, liberty and pursuit of happiness of the American People for over 1/2 of a century. We've not yet even begun to feel the financial pain and the social pain that these wars have threaded into our fabric.

[Deep13]

63. So it will get even worse? nt

[treestar]

73. I hope not

It is sickening the way the Taliban treated women. And everyone.

[dflprincess]

76. Because the U.S. has always been so concerned about the plight of women in Afghanistan

that must be why we made it so difficult for the few who did manage to escape to get asylum here.

[William769]

79. Kick & recommended.

[Beacool]

82. Thank you!!!

[William769]

84. Your welcome.