A Tuesday in Afghanistan

1. On Tuesday, the Taliban capture an Afghan soldier and an Afghan interpreter in Zabul province.
2. The Taliban behead both prisoners.
3. Shortly afterward, Afghan forces capture four Taliban fighters.
4. Namatullah Tokhi, an army commander in the province, explains to Reuters what happened next. "[The Taliban] cut of their [prisoners'] heads with a knife, so when our forces arrested four Taliban, we cut off their heads too."

Comments

[Ken Shultz]

An eye for an eye leaves the whole world decapitated.

[D Anghelone]

We tend to overcomplicate things. These folk are just so in touch with the essence of life.

[Andrew Lynch]

D Anghelone, you may be right. Over here, after the first pair of decaps, there'd have been an enormous, time-and-money sucking investigation involving dozens of bureaucrats and consultants, untold hours of broadcast punditry that would make you want to cut off your own head, heaps of empty rhetoric, repeated over and over and over again until you fell asleep from its metronomic qualities, enough opinion-page indignation to fuel a dirigible, furious assertions rooted in speculation and political advantage, only soon thereafter followed by retractions, denials, projection, displacement, and evasion, an extra dash of empty spin and derision from un-allies and enemies, and, quite possibly, a multi-billion-dollar military response, or, at the very least, a bunch of punitive resolutions that damage only the poor little children the Taliban are simply trying to protect from [insert illogical cause here].

[Lisa Simpson]

Andrew, you'd be great in any of those soporific positions you mention. I'm asleep right now!

[steve]

How long until we are all numb to the decapitations and are reduced to responding to the latest top knot-liberation with: "was that the South Korean or the Brit that had his head removed on Tuesday?".

[Joe L.]

One of my favourite professors was a Jewish guy named Silberstein, who was an 11B in the Second World War. His comment was, "We knew that there were certain SS units that we did not take prisoner." It IS one of the reasons that armies and soldiers take prisoners is in the expectation that YOU in turn will take prisoners.

When one side or group begins to forego that, their opponets tend to forego it as well. It may not be legal but it might be just and it might be moral... I don't know. I simply know that it IS.

As examples one has the 2nd SS Panzer in France and the Imperial Japanese Armed Forces in the Second World War. Not many were taken prisoner, mostly because they didn't "bother" with prisoners themselves.

It is one of the nasty parts of that brutal act we call War.

[Andrew Lynch]

Lisa,

My point, exactly. Now, back to bed.

[Rick Barton]

Uh huh, this evidence that our government is NOT inculcating in the Afghanies good values, such as the rule of law and respect for the individual.

I see yet another "blow back" in the making.

[Ken Shultz]

Joe L.,

There are good examples to the contrary in American History. The Hessians didn't take prisoners during the American Revolution; at least, they didn't give quarter to any of Washington's troops when they were captured. When Washington crossed the Delaware and defeated the Hessians, he took more than a thousand prisoners, and Washington's men were delighted by the opportunity to return treatment in kind. But Washington ordered his men to treat the Hessian prisoners humanely, and he saw to it that his orders were followed. Once the war was over, hundreds of those Hessian prisoners chose to stay in America and become American citizens rather than return home. If any of them could have voted in a Presidential election, I bet they would have voted for Washington.

I attended a Muslim conference about a year ago, and there was an Imam there who had been educated in Iraq. One of the hardliners in the audience asked the Imam how an American Muslim could serve in the U.S. Military, either in Iraq or Afghanistan, and avoid the fires of hell. The Imam replied that a Muslim serviceman can justify fighting Muslims in either case because a serviceman fighting in either Afghanistan or Iraq is fighting for religious freedom. We can win these people over. Afghanistan will no longer be a threat to America when it?s free and democratic, but Afghanistan won't be free and democratic until the people there choose to become citizens of a free and democratic Afghanistan. To that end, executing prisoners is counterproductive.

[brooklyn dave]

Maybe I have a low opinion of Afghanis and their ability to take to democracy, but for the US to really believe that we can establish a stable regime in that country that is reasonably friendly toward the west is a pipe dream. The Taliban was just disrupted not destroyed by American forces. Yes, Osama is on the run somewhere, the symbiotic relationship between Al Qaeda and Taliban has been severed, and the situation in Afghanistan is something like it was before bin Laden came on the scene. Al Qaeda has visions of worldwide jihad whereas Taliban seems relatively satisfied with having domination on its own turf. Afghans will be Afghans and will continue to do what Afghans do best (leave that to your imagination) in those thar mountains.

[Cathy with a K]

Somehow the NRA is to blame for this.

[Gary Gunnels]

In many Muslim nations decapitation isn't a particularly uncommon practice, thus it doesn't strike as an unusual form of execution for Muslim nations. Indeed, it seems that many are more disgusted with the form of execution than with the execution itself; whereas, in my eyes, the form of execution doesn't matter so much.

[iconoclast]

"An eye for an eye leaves the whole world decapitated."

Not really. There would have to be one person left.

[zorel]

one reason to look forward to June 30th, when the Iraqi govt supposedly takes over the power. Let's wait and see how they deal with the 'insurgents'

[Ken Shultz]

"Maybe I have a low opinion of Afghanis and their ability to take to democracy..."

Maybe you do indeed.

If the people of Afghanistan are culturally incapable of living in a free and democratic society, then they're going to have to pay for their own guards. But they don't have much money over there, so I guess we'll have to put them to work before long. I don't think there are many mines in Afghanistan, but maybe we could take over the poppy fields and work the Afghanis there? A potentially gigantic market for opium is sitting right next door in China just waiting to be exploited!

Bringing civilization to the "dark" corners of the globe was the excuse the British used to justify their imperialism; but some of the posters in this thread would have us abandon even that excuse. So this is the reaction to Multiculturalism? Pax Britannica was nothing; it's Pax Romana or death to Muslims, and if you don't like it, go sit with the sissies? Take your fingers out of your ears, open your eyes and watch yourselves; you're frightening to everyone who loves freedom.

[dhex]

"Not really. There would have to be one person left."

not if they both decapitated each other AT THE SAME TIME!

makes ya think...

[Kraorh]

Come on, now Aghanis... nothing to lose our heads over.

(Apologies to all - but someone had to say it).

[John Doe]

To modify behavior a combination of rewards and punishments is more powerful than either alone.

Nathan Bedford Forrest was infamous for killing Union prisoners during the war. He also helped found the KKK. Overall though he murdered more whites than blacks. A more effective use of cruelty was that by General Sherman, who understood that cruelty is sometimes necessary to secure victory. The devastation from his March to the Sea may have ensured that there would be no guerilla fighting war after the war officially ended. Sherman and Grant also helped the National Rifle Association arm and train former slaves, which may also have helped keep the peace after the war.

[joe]

Vynie, Forest's use of the quote was prescriptive, not just descriptive. As was troublealert's.

[brooklyn dave]

Ken Shultz,
I still don't think that The Afghans will take to democracy like Popeye takes to spinach, but on the other hand I am not supporting Pax Romana, Pax Britannica, or Pax Americana....which is based on the allusion "how can not love us with all the good things we bring them". I really don't care about sounding PC or not, but by and large the people in Afghanistan are largely content doing things as they have been doing. Sure, I guess there were a sizeable portion that didn't appreciate the excesses of the Taliban, but for the most part it seemed like there was a fatalistic acceptance of the Taliban mostly because the people were too damned weary of the war against the Russians and the civil chaos that occurred afterward. I think the problem is more with the U.S. gov't than with Afghans in that it believes everyone will just adore our gift of democracy. I admit, I am no big fan of Islamic society, but to think we're going to change things with a wiggle of the nose (remember Bewitched?)oh boy! As far as putting the Afghans to work in the poppy field...I get the sarcasm...and I chuckled. Hey, let them grow their poppies. It's about the only thing they an grow over there and make some decent money. But we're in such a ttizy with the war on drugs, we can't allow it. (rather myopic of US. The Taliban didn't allow the growing of poppies, so the folks continued to live in squalor. Now if they could make some decent money, things would stabilize, people would be happier, they'd say screw this Taliban shit, and they'd all be happily strung out on dope and we could bring our forces home.
And just as an aside, imagine 1 billion Chinese strung out on dope as well. (how will they make all those lovely little tchotchkes that we love to clutter our homes with?

[Ken Shultz]

John Doe,

I don't know how you can cite the most well known guerilla movement after the Civil War in the same paragraph that you claim that there was no "guerilla fighting after the war", but that's exactly what you did. One of the biggest reasons that the guerilla war went on as long as it did, is because of the horrors that Sheridan and Sherman rained on civilians! Here we are, 140 years after the fact, still dealing with the aftermath of those horrors, and you're praising the use of military tactics against civilians as if it was a success?

I'm laughing at you.

[fyodor]

"Not really. There would have to be one person left."

Now there's some optimism for ya!!

[Vynnie]

Joe,

Prescriptive? Think for a moment. How would you paraphrase that? "When you fight a war ... you should kill people." Gee, I thought all I had to do was look stylish in these here combat boots ... .

If you've made the moral decision to go to war, you've condemned men to die. Women and children too. There's no second step of saying "oh, and while we're having our fun little war, we ought to grease some folks." The terrorist aspect to this war was well-predicted even before the first cluster-bomb fell, and should surprise nobody - nor should the fact that Afghans under Karzai still follow Afghan social mores rather than Western rules of warfare. Even decapitation isn't really that gruesome, as war casualties go - try getting burned alive by napalm, or maybe half-burned, buried, and left to bleed to death over a period of hours or days.

I think the shaky moral ground develops around the thought that there can be any separation between warfare and the most horrible of deaths. To draw any distinction between warfare and actual killing opens you up to belief in the fallacy of a "clean, limited engagement," which is the thinking behind so many of our country's half-baked, murderous little police actions.

General Forest's behavior in peacetime was reprehensible, making the man himself all too easy to impeach. But such ad hominem misses the substance of the quote entirely.

[Douglas Fletcher]

Apparently in Afghanistan they're operating under a different version of the equation than 'do unto others as you would have them do unto you...'

[Jim Malone]

You wanna know how you do it? Here's how, they pull a knife, you pull a gun. They send one of yours to the hospital, you send on of theirs to the morgue! That's the Afghanistan way, and that's how you get the Taliban! Now do you want to do that? Are you ready to do that?

[jc]

At least they aren't burning them at the stake.

[R C Dean]

Lets not forget - it was the Taliban who started this, and in so doing forfeited their claim on decent treatment if they are captured.

They were decapitating Afhgans regardless of how we treated them. Repeat until that penetrates the thick fog of "our side is always to blame."

Thus, decapitatng Taliban prisoners is a no-lose proposition for the Afghans - it might put a stop to the whole cycle of decapitation, but if it doesn't, well they aren't any worse off than they were before.

[norbizness]

President Bush, 6/19/03:

"We sent a clear message to the Taliban in Afghanistan: if you harbor and train terrorists, you will be held account. The Taliban is no more, and the people of Afghanistan are free, thanks to America and our friends and allies."

(http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/06/20030619-2.html)

Therefore, I am disinclined to believe all this talk about beheading what are obviously non-existent Taliban fighters.

[joe]

You raise a good point.

[joe]

'Gen. Bedford Forest-"War is fightin' and fightin's killin'"'

Of course, he went on to found the KKK. Maybe his observations on conflict morality aren't top shelf?

[rst]

unto others as you would have them do unto you...'

"Do unto others what has been done to you."

How long until we are all numb to the decapitations and are reduced to responding to the latest top knot-liberation with...

I am already numb to the decapitations. People are killed every day on our own streets for lesser causes. That it happened to a handful of people who knew the risks of working in that ass-backwards region of the planet certainly isn't going to push me over the edge.

Don't go to the Middle East unless you're prepared to face a hostile, anachronistic society still debating over whether it's time to extricate their heads from their alimentary canals.

[Cal Ulmann]

Heads will roll...

[kevron]

General Washington's wisdom was in knowing when to choose mercy over justice. The USA was also trying to win the good opinion of the rest of the world.

Bloody reprisal was often the rule in other theatres of the American Revolution, especially the Southern Campaign.

Kevin

[Vynnie]

Norbizness: Bush is only emulating his hero FDR, who told us the Nazis had been defeated. But aren't there still some around, even today?

Darn lying politicians ...

Joe: I don't think Gen. Forest was talking about morality, any more than I would be if I said that when you drop a tomato into a blender the tomato gets the crap torn out of it. That war and death go together is a fact of life.

We lost 500,000 Americans in WWII, 50,000 in Vietnam, 600 & counting in Iraq - why are we picking a few individual beheadings to get upset over? Even if you came into all three conflicts on the anti-war side, it seems the beheadings are the least of the things you would want to protest.

[troubalert]

Ok, one more time.

Gen. Bedford Forest-"War is fightin' and fightin's killin'"