(continued from previous page)
"Bin Laden is a political criminal with a plan."
"When you think Taliban, think Nazis. When you
think Bin Laden, think Hitler."
I couldn't disagree
more. The use of false analogies results in misdirection. Bin
Laden has shown himself to be a shrewd, intelligent, calculating and
resourceful opponent. He is wealthy, and has wealthy and powerful
contacts throughout the Moslem world and beyond. He heads a terrorist
organization which is loosely allied with others -- not a nation
state. Nor does he appear to have any aspirations of empire.
"And when you think 'the people of Afghanistan' think
'the Jews in the concentration camps.'"
Good heavens. I
don't recall seeing European Jews dancing in the streets when innocent
Germans were killed. I do recall seeing more than a few Afghans
(among others) asking for holy war, burning American flags, and saying that
America got what it deserved.
But "more than a few" must NOT be equated with "all". Sadly,
too many Americans make the same unthinking mistake made by Mr. Ansary when
they rush to equate "more than few" with "all".
"It's not only that the Afghan people had nothing to
do with this atrocity."
Bin Laden's Afghan
"soldiers" and harborers do not include Afghans?
"They were the first victims of the
perpetrators. They would exult if someone would come in there, take
out the Taliban and clear out the rat's nest of international thugs holed up
in their country."
They would? Then
who has been fighting and defeating the Northern Afghan resistance?
Who ENFORCES the will of the Taliban? Afghans. The author is
making the same mistake for which he has criticizes others: he is
over-generalizing. And by so doing he is misleading and obscuring,
Are there Afghans who oppose the Taliban and bin Laden?
Clearly. Are there large numbers of Afghans who support them?
Just as clearly, yes. Pretending otherwise obfuscates rather than
illuminates. And that can have grave consequences.