Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Friday, July 10, 2009
Michael Gerson :: Townhall.com Columnist
One Reason We Fight in Afghanistan
by Michael Gerson
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Was the Copenhagen Global Warming Summit Walk-Out a Win for the U.S.?


WASHINGTON -- Being an educated, professional woman in Afghanistan could not have been easy at any time during the last few decades. I recently met with a group of female government officials, brought to Washington by USAID and the U.S.-Afghan Women's Council. One, during the Taliban years, had run an underground school in her home for the criminal purpose of teaching girls. Another had built a community development program employing 25,000 Afghan women before she was put under close guard by the Taliban. Her home was looted, and her children were threatened with kidnapping.

Afghanistan is a country were women have made significant progress -- but only compared to a comprehensively oppressive past. Seven million children now attend school, compared to 1 million six years ago. The women I met now play public roles in education, public works and agriculture -- unimaginable under the Taliban.

Yet Afghanistan is also a nation where girls have had acid thrown in their faces while walking to school and female police officers and public officials have been targeted for assassination. Taliban and foreign extremists seem to take a particular interest -- the kind of interest Freud could explain -- in the intimidation, repression and humiliation of women.

And patriarchal attitudes are not confined to the fringes. The Shiite family law, recently passed by the Afghan parliament and signed by President Hamid Karzai, legalized marital rape and restricted the travel of women. (Under domestic and international pressure, the law is being revisited.)

Afghanistan remains one of the most difficult places on Earth to be a woman. A reaction of anger and militancy would be understandable. But the Afghan women I met take a different approach. Uniformly they argue that "education" is the most important response. By education, they do not mean only literacy. "People need to be educated in the values of our own religion," says Rahela Hashim Sidiqi, a senior adviser at Afghanistan's civil service commission. "They need to learn from other Islamic countries, such as Indonesia and Bangladesh. Even in Arab countries, education is not denied."

The main challenge, says Sidiqi, is "the lack of education about Islam itself, particularly in rural areas where culture and Islam are mixed. People don't see the difference between tradition and religion." These women talk of the Quran's teaching on property rights and respect for women as a source of progressive reform within Afghan culture. They speak with particular respect for Khadijah, Muhammad's wife, who, they argue, was educated and conducted business while married to the prophet. And they identify a number of prominent Afghan imams who defend these views. "They are the key," says Sidiqi. "We need a positive approach."

Clearly, this is a different kind of feminism. Rather than asserting an individualistic conception of rights, these women are arguing for respect and legal protection from within their religious tradition. They do not seek to overturn a cultural order, but to expand and humanize it. "If it shows respect to wear a scarf," says Sidiqi, "I wear a scarf." "We respect other people -- and we expect respect." This conservative approach to social change may be the only one that works in a deeply traditional society.

The rights of Afghan women are not always seen at the forefront of American interests. Some foreign policy "realists" seem open to an accommodation with Islamist groups in Afghanistan that would sacrifice human rights in the cause of stability. Some conservatives seem to view all nation-building as social engineering -- beyond our capability and beyond our concern.

These women offer a practical rebuttal. They point out that the reconstruction of Afghanistan will not take place without the knowledge and skills of 52 percent of its population. They believe women in Afghanistan possess the political advantage of being untainted by past warfare and corruption; that they represent a chance for Afghan politics to start anew. And they have seen, according to Sidiqi, "that women are always fighting for the rule of law, because women and children are hurt most when there is no rule of law."

Why should America, in the midst of a costly war, care about the rights of Afghan women? Because Afghanistan, without the participation of women, will remain a failed and dangerous state.

And there is another reason -- because the betrayal of courage always matters, and always dishonors those who commit it. The dignity of women is not the only reason America fights in Afghanistan -- but it is a good one.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Michael Gerson writes a twice-weekly column for The Post on issues that include politics, global health, development, religion and foreign policy. Michael Gerson is the author of the book "Heroic Conservatism" and a contributor to Newsweek magazine.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Michael Gerson's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
War: our final export!
The United States made it 300 years before women could participate in this democracy; and American women did not need foreign invaders to "free" them.

And here one hundred years later America is nigh a failed and dangerous state. Not that giving women property rights or allowing them to vote led to America's demise; b/c we all know those evil liberals are the real cause of our troubles!

Let's start a real war! Free the Uighurs! Bomb China (we are going to have to wipe out that debt sooner or later)!

Wrongheaded foreign policy
--
Writes Mr. Gerson:

"Why should America, in the midst of a costly war, care about the rights of Afghan women? Because Afghanistan, without the participation of women, will remain a failed and dangerous state."

Wrong.

The reason for American military forces to be involved in Afghanistan - or anyplace else outside the boundaries of these United States - is to address a "real and present danger" to the people of our country.

Not to improve the lot of women or children anywhere outside the jurisdiction of our federal government, no matter how noble or satisfying that thought might be.

The purpose of the Coalition's presence in Afghanistan is to deny the use of that country as a resource from which Islamic terrorist groups can strike at the member nations of that Coalition.

If the people of Afghanistan benefit in the process, that's nice. But turning the whole damned country into trinitite would do just as well.

"Kill 'em all, and let Allah sort 'em out."

In our republic, government has a very limited purpose.

Government is the agency to which we, the people, delegate the exercise of our individual right to use deadly force in the defense of our lives, our liberties, and our property.

We delegate the exercise of that right - within a very limited scope - but nothing an officer of our government does is lawful except as it derives from your own personal right to break things and kill people if that's what it takes to protect yourself, your friends, and your family from violent aggressors.

From the moment when Al Qaeda struck at U.S. embassies during Bubba's godawful administration, a state of war existed between these United States and the Taliban government of Afghanistan.

That's it for our policy in Afghanistan.

Let Them Earn It...


Freedom is not handed from one party to another.

If a group accepts something like this, their newfound 'freedom' is not valued.

You must earn freedom to truly appreciate it.

Freedom so "Earned" will be valued and not traded off for 'trinkets' and 'binkies'.



And, another thing...




And, another thing...

I suspect that the fact we did not earn our present freedoms, is the reason so much of our country and the 30 Million or so illegal aliens occupying our Country, do not value freedom, and look to the Royalty in D.C. to give us party favors and trinkets, along with cake and circuses.

All the while strangling every freedom our forefathers fought to the death to obtain.


"Que paso? Jus gimme dat whelfore check. I do be votin fo yo."



Lastly...



And finally, let us fix our own country before we traipse around the World, righting every wrong.

We owe our allegiance to the U. S. of A.

One little note. Afghanistan has never been conquered by invading Armies of the best and strongest militaries in the world.

The Mongol hordes came the closest, and all they did was become part of the populace.

Other invaders also assimilated but never conquered.



I dissent
We fight in Afghanistan because our leadership, both Republican and Democrat, is too historically and geographically challenged to keep us from falling down various geopolitical rabbit holes.

Our response to 9-11 should have been to quietly rebuild intelligence capabilities until a wet operation on Osama Bin Laden and Mullah Omar would have been feasible or until those thugs got cocky, got on a plane, and then could have been diverted to Diego Garcia or somewhere else where the US could have nabbed them.

As it is, we've gotten ourselves into a position where supplying our troops depends on the good will of a country where teenaged Christian girls are routinely kidnapped, forcibly converted to Islam, and married off to their abductors and where 85% of the people sympathize with our enemies.

War to expand the state
We took the wrong approach to the 9-11 terrorist attacks. We should have gone after the individuals involved using letters of marque and reprisal as the contitution authorizes. The wars have enriched those involved in the military industrial complex, and strengthened the state at the expense of its citizens. We should not use force regarding the internal affairs of other countries, as we should not use force against our neighbors.

By Mr. Gerson's reasoning, we should invade Saudia Arabia to free women there, we should invade China to free the Tibetans, etc.

What we should do is provide a good example and let citizens of other countries work it out for themselves. They will eventually learn, as the Iranian citizens have, that oppressive government are worth struggling against. As we should oppose our government exceeding its rightful boundaries.


Afghani Women
It is well recognized women are the nuturers of society and if we are to effect change, we need to strengthen their position in society. Islam is a problem because no line is drawn between tradition and religion. The suppression of women by any religion is simply wrong.
As for our involvement in this; we can all live mundane lives with nothing to offer but going our way everyday without any thought to our world and environment and then pass on, without thought of generatios to come and what they will face. Most of us do this. We don't want to do anything aside from our own enjoyment of life considering no responsibility to anyone else. Thank God we have people that help others. Those who work with the elderly and infirmed. Those who work with the mentally disabled assisting families and those who life has thrown a brick at. It is a momentous task to give everyone on this earth a fair opportunity to enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness and praise God we have some who strive to help others achieve this.

Jerry
"and if we are to effect change, we need to strengthen their position in society."

What Neo-Con school did you get your 'social engineering' degree at?

Iraqi Surge Success and Afghani Women
In Iraq before the "Surge" we would go out and defeat extremists of AQI or Sunni extremists (JAM) then return back to base and allow them to simply move back in. For them to move back in however required the acquiescence of the local populations.

A large part of the Surge "Strategy" however was engaging the local Sunni and Shia "sheiks" and tribal leaders, showing them the benefits of continued support of coalition forces and the extra troops provided those we won over physical security. It took this working with government, working with the populace, and extra military personnel to achieve success.

I think the point of Mr Gerson is not that we go to War to enhance women lib, but that if we could get 50+% of the population on our side and helping us, and get that 50% a larger role it enhances our ability to win.

Its not the reason for war but like he says it can be an aid to achieving the politacl stability there needed for us to get out of there.

Why we Fight

When you set politics aside, its all a no brainer.

IRAQ

I support the removing Saddam becuse he committed crimes against Humanity.

Saddam attacked his neighbors.
Saddam was funding terrorism.
Saddam was providing medical care to terrorist.
Saddam used Weapons of mass destruction.
Saddam was trying to shoot down American Jets
Saddam attempted to assinate an American President.

AFGANISTAN

I support removing the Taliban.
Taliban attacked the people in Afganistan.
Taliban provided medical care to terrorist.
Taliban was allowing Al Quaeda to test Bio Weapons.
Taliban was allowing Al Quaeda to plan attacks on U.S.

Yogoslavia/Kosovo

I didn't support U.S. removing Milosovic.

Yogoslavia was an internal Civil War.
U.S. had no clear interest.
No threat to the United States.
Milosovic never fired at U.S. Aircraft.
Milosovic never threatened any of his neighbors.
Milosovic never attacked any of his neighbors.
Milosovic never used Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Liberals supported removing Milosovic.

Liberals opposed military force in Iraq & Afganistan. Liberals favor using Lawyers and Courtrooms.


Every man/women for themselves
When a disaster strikes, American money and labor rush to help all over the planet, but I ask you who came to help us from our foreign allies when Katrina struck? No One! We handled it. When the ladies fought for voting rights what country came to help them? no one! they handled it.
And that's my attitude toward Afgan women. Freedom means more if you have to fight for yourselves and victory will be sweeter.
I am really getting tired of doing all the giving. It's every man/woman for themselves especially now that We are in the crisis we find ourselves in.

Where's the Outrage?
So where is the outrage for Monkeyman Obama sending thousands of more troops to Afghanistan to be killed on the battlefield? Why is it more horrific for them to be killed in Iraq? Oh, yes, I forgot....it was Bush's war.
Obama can send thousands to their death and liberals still can't find anything negative to say about their messiah. They still think he's going to pay their mortgage and fill their gas tank. The jokes on them 'cause it ain't gonna happen.

THE OBAMA DOCTRINE FOR WORLD DISORDER
The Obama Doctrine in foreign policy can be succinctly summed up by the following formula: A+A+A+A=the strategic decline of the United States and coming world turmoil. What do the Four "A's in this formula signify? Click my name and read my piece "The Obama Doctrine For The New World (Dis)Order.

UI #11
You forgot one under IRAQ:
Saddam fired upon a United States Warship; hitting it and killing 37 US Sailors and Marines.


The USS Stark incident
--
Dash42 writes:

"Saddam fired upon a United States Warship; hitting it and killing 37 US Sailors and Marines."

The incident was one in which an Iraqi fighter fired two Exocet air-to-surface missiles (ASMs) at the USS Stark (FFG-31) on 17 May 1987, for reasons that remain - to the best of my knowledge - unexplained to this day.

Not that the U.S. Navy had elements in the Persian Gulf at that time to support the Islamic Republic of Iran. If anything, American foreign policy during the Iran-Iraq War concentrated chiefly upon getting oil tankers through the Gulf and onto the world market, with stronger disapproval of Iran (for mining the waters of the Gulf and threatening to block the Straits of Hormuz) than of Saddam Hussein's Arab Socialist Ba'ath Party regime in Baghdad.

Bear in mind the fact that we'd had our own little dust-up with the mullahs of Iran from '79 through '81. Later in 1987, U.S. naval elements engaged Iranian assets in a number of attacks, and on 3 July the USS Vincennes (CG-49) shot down Iran Air Flight 655 with the loss of all 290 souls aboard. Mistook its transponder for that of an Iranian F-14.

That Iraqi attack on the USS Stark was almost assuredly inadvertent. Saddam and his Tikriti Mafia were benefiting from the presence of U.S. warships in the Gulf, and the pilot of that Iraqi Mirage just screwed up, mistaking an American frigate for an Iranian ship.

What the hell do you expect from a camel jockey piloting a jet fighter?

If such stupidity were to be interpreted as an act of war, what happened with the Vincennes on 3 July should have put us in a state of war with Iran.

Did it? Nope.

Im not so sure
Are you sure this has nothing to do with the proposed oil pipelines that are to run through Afghanistan once the population there is pacified/dead? Are you sure its about women's rights in Afghanistan? Because I would gladly send my teenage son to die on behalf of Unocal. But I'd never sacrifice him for women's rights in Afghanistan. Oil yes! Overthrowing centuries of male domination, NO! Hell, once Chevron, BP and the boys take over Afghanistan, who really cares about the women? Let them take care of their own rights! If you think about it, all they have to do is cross their legs for a few weeks, and they will get all the rights they want!

Cross their legs? Paul!
I hope you're joking about this. I agree that we're not fighting their to assist women's rights, but it's a good bonus if it's improving. And, crossing ones legs obviously doesn't do a thing. They are tortured there. I'd love to hear you say that about your daughters.

On another point. Imagine all the good that could've happened there by now had GW & Cheney decided to actually capture Bin Laden and not lie their way into Iraq. The billions of dollars, the hundreds of thousands of lives lost in Iraq. What a shame it all is.

Anywho...I'm out. I've spent too much of my weekend reading conservative garbage already. I'm heading out to give money to a homeless guy who should be pulling himself up by his bootstraps (that should frustrate a few conservatives).

GRACIE 935
Where have you been???

The outrage was in sending ANYONE to Iraq in the first place, when they should have been going to Afghanistan. You remember Afghanistan, don't ya? Home of Bin Laden - the actual ones responsible for 911. Or did you miss that significant point somewhere along the line?

And, this is not news. Obama said many times during the campaign that as he drew down troops in Iraq (where we don't belong), he would amp up efforts in Afgh. Perhaps had GW not airlifted a bunch of Bin Laden's relatives out of the USA directly after 911 when all air travel was supposedly grounded and actually captured Bin Laden, we'd be further along by now.

No conservative can admit that GW and gang have destroyed our image in the world. No one has been snowed by their tactics - no one. Remember the tons of protests around the world he ignored before going into Iraq? Obama is the one who can help heal things a bit. No one takes issue with our being in Afgh, because they know that's where the war should've been waged in the first place.

You just make US citizens look more stupid when you talk like this. Anywho...have a wonderful day!

Ain't you ever heard of sarcasm?
@balanced in AZ: My comments are completely sarcastic. I do not want my sons or daughters to go anywhere near Afghanistan for any reason at all. The USA has zero business being over there. The Afghan's mineral rights and right-of-ways for infrastructure (pipelines et al.) belong to the Afghan people. Their culture, including its "abuse" of women (which is grossly exaggerated in the western media) is also THEIR problem. Why should I have to sacrifice my money and/or the lives of my kids so that a bunch of oilmen can have their way with Afghanistan? For that matter, why should my kids or their fiscal futures perish to solve intractable cultural issues over there? Let me state this clearly: I am AGAINST American do-good imperialism.
But let's suppose our motives are pure as driven snow. The methodology, bombing villages with UAVs, is stupid beyond belief. Does anyone think an Afghan tribesman is going to give up his centuries old belief system after we just blew his family to smithereens?Would you give up your Christianity if the Russians killed your kinfolk? I didn't think so.

Sergeant First Class John C. Beale
This was posted by Rep. Steve Davis (R) and it surely demostrates that there are people who love this land and appreciate our soldiers.

Killed in action the week before, the body of Sergeant First Class John C. Beale was returned to Falcon Field in Peachtree City, Georgia, just south of Atlanta, on June 11, 2009 . The Henry County Police Department escorted the procession to the funeral home in McDonough, Georgia. A simple notice in local papers indicated the road route to be taken and the approximate time.

Nowadays one can be led to believe that America no longer respects honor and no longer honors sacrifice outside the military. Be it known that there are many places in this land where people still recognize the courage and impact of total self-sacrifice.

The link below is a short travelogue of that day's remarkable and painful journey. But only watch this if you wish to have some of your faith in people restored.

Please share widely.

CLICK HERE TO WATCH
http://blip.tv/play/AYGJ5h6YgmE?
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.