Acclaimed AP photographer Anja Niedringhaus killed in Afghanistan

To Photogeek:
it was 1991 when they forced him to leave Kuwait, at the same time Iraqi people raised against saddam and controlled all cities except Baghdad, when he surrendered at the famous (Safwan Tent) agreement, he had only one requirement, he asked USA to save him from Iraqi people, and they did, they put orange colored flags on Saddam troops, and USA ordered air forces to destroy all other troops that was against him, and they let him to rule Iraq another 12 yrs until 2003, during that time Saddam became a good man, and stopped doing crimes, it looked like he was trying to compensate to all bad things he did in the past, only then western countries decided to remove him and destroy Iraq as a land and culture and history and give it as a gift to Iran, now Iraq is completely ruled by Iran, their worst enemy in the media, and their best friend in secret, so telling me that USA helped Iraqi people to get rid of Saddam because he was a decorator is just a jock, search more thanks.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

To Photogeek:
Sorry, but you are mixing many things together, in 60s saddam was a homeless criminal, his job was killing for money, in 1962 CIA hired him to kill the precedent Abdulkarim Qasim, he killed his guard and the president got injured, so he run away to Syria,Lebanon and then Egypt,from there he studded high school and university with the help of CIA and Jamal Abdulnasir, until they put him as a president of Iraq in 1979,he was the first president to open USA embassy in Iraq, before that there was no relation between them,in his first week in power he started a war with Iran that continued for 8yrs, USA was selling weapon to both, Iran and Iraq (search for Irangate) and during that period he did all kinds of crime, USA never had a problem with him when he gassed Kurds, or berried 185000 of them alive in 1988, when he invaded Kuwait and they forced them to get out of Kuwait and he surrendered in Safwan Tent agreement he asked for one thing form USA, will follow

Apr 6, 2014permalink

Lanidrac

RIP, Anja.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

To Paul Farace:
So as long as you are so smart, can you answer a few simple questions? first what is the best friend of USA in the middle east? I think it is easy, number one is Israel, number 2 is Saudi Arabia, and then what is the worse country on this planet regarding human rights? especially women rights? Saudi Arabia treating women as animal, all people are properties of the king, if you say one sentence on Facebook not against them, just a little bit different than what the king sees, you go at least 10 yrs behind the walls, and my question is : what is the logic behind supporting all dictators against their nations?do you know that king just heard something called internet, but he was not able to understand exactly what it is for,is that how the civilized world trying (unsuccessfully) to bring this backward culture, living in the 10th century, into something approaching the modern world?

Apr 6, 2014permalink

To Paul Farace:
You are one of those victims, and I feel sorry for you as I feel sorry for Anja, brain washing cannot be healed through logic or conversation, it is a permanent damage, still I remind you with some facts, 1st :what is wrong with 10th century? I mean our 10th century not yours, our capital city Baghdad was a capital of the world , we had the first university in the world (Mustansria, and still ) the biggest book library, best free hospitals, patients where treated with most respect, best food and care, and they where receiving a gift before they leave, can you see that even in your dreams in 22th century? that is your biggest problem, western (civilized) people, you see everything through you view, when you are ashamed of your 10th century (and you should), every one else on this planet has to be ashamed also , or you send them Nato to teach them as you suggest, and I don't know what they have to teach? do you know? I have a question for you, will follow..

Apr 6, 2014permalink

photogeek

No one had any problems with Iraq until Saddam started attacking Kuwait, gassing curds, and feeding his political opponents to the dogs while they were still alive. Sure, in many ways Middle East is the cradle of modern civilisation, but you can't fall back on that illustrious history and ignore the atrocities that your dictators commit against their own people, and the general lack of progress in your societies for the past couple of hundred years.

Still, I wish the US didn't invade Iraq. Taking Saddam out was the right thing to do, but I wish there was a cheaper way to do so, both in terms of lives, and tax money expenditure.

Apr 6, 2014*permalink

"Taking Saddam out was the right thing to do"

really ! how ?

Apr 6, 2014permalink

@ alkaabi

Some people were pounding their fists on the dinner table before the Iraq war, explaining to anyone who would listen that Saddam had WMD, was a menace to international society, etc.

Then came the reality of the Iraq War, the fact that there were no WMD, that we clearly went there for oil, that hundreds of thousands of civilians were killed, raped, etc. The way that some people process that reality is to say, "Taking out Saddam was the right thing to do," rather than look in the mirror.

Incidentally, from a purely selfish U.S.-interest point of view, taking out Saddam was clearly the WRONG thing to do, as he provided a balance to Shiite-dominated Iran in the region. Many people pointed this out before the war, and in fact that was the reason that Saddam was NOT taken out in 1991, by Bush I. I bet many posters who say "taking out Saddam was the right thing to do" are too young to remember the events of 1991.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

photohounds

" He who forgets his history is condemned to repeat it. "
The siege of Vienna, The Gates of Vienna, the Barbary Pirates all repeating today.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

@photohounds

Right, because naturally when talk turns to Empires, you think of the Ottoman Empire, and not England, Spain, the U.S., etc. That's a pretty balanced point of view you have.

I'm sure there are many people all over the world saying, "God save us from the Ottoman Empire!" who are happy to have the U.S. invade for that reason.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

sh10453

So many innocent lives have been lost, so many widows, so many orphans, so many destroyed homes, ...

The more killing, and the more destruction, the more profits for our (civilized) Western weapons manufacturers, and the more ego satisfaction to our corrupt politicians.

Photojournalism in war zones is an extremely dangerous business, but it brings to us the sad and ugly face of war.

What a sad ending for this woman!!

May all of those who innocently lost their lives be resting in peace.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

b craw

Some of the current rhetoric might be exagerrated but Eisenhower's prophesy of a military-industial-congressional complex can be argued now as contemporary reality. Most estimates put arms exports by U.S. companies at about $9 billion per year - this a marked increase from years preceding the Obama administration. Large defense contractors such as Raytheon and Boeing project that profits from weapon system exports will exceed 1/3 of total profits in the next few years. Although the US is the largest exporter of arms by a sizable margin, they are not alone; Russia, Germany, France, and China are also large exporters. I don't know just how appropriate this dialog is in reference to this article, but educating ourselves as to the realities of the global arms industry is an important thing if populations are going to have discussions of issues extant.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

peevee1

Exports are tiny business compared to how much they get from US government. I mean, 9 billion, really? Lockheed Martin alone gets 45 billion a year from our government (more than defense budget of almost any country), total spending on "defense" and "national security" contractors is over $1 TRILLION per year. We could COMPLETELY eliminate income tax if we would nationalize them and not them lobby for more and more useless spending (on more and more wars).

Apr 6, 2014permalink

I guess what's surprising to me about the U.S. being the #1 exporter of arms in the world, as well as having the largest defense budget, is that some people either don't know that, or, if they do know, don't see a profit motive!

I mean, take a look at the kind of little things that the U.S. gets worked up about from time to time. Things like the international price of bananas, etc., occasionally produce statements (economic threats) from high-ranking government officials, yet some posters would have us believe that there is no profit motive in billions and billions and billions of dollars in arms sales, extremely powerful arms lobbies in Washington, and the like.

These companies and the government want to try arms out in the real world, for the same reason that plane manufacturers need to test planes outside of a wind tunnel. Of course there are some people who believe that we are promoting democracy (!) in Afghanistan, but, I mean, c'mon. Do the math.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

xlynx9

Both sides really need some visionary leaders who can see above this primitive tit-for-tat attitude and begin to focus on giving and generating good will.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

RStyga

@ Paul Farace
Sh10453 might be oversimplifying but there is a valid point made here, and you have to be blind or brainwashed to summarily dismiss it with such naive arguments. I didn't have to check your profile to know you are American, and not of the "worthy" kind... No wonder the US has principally the same foreign policy for such a long time. There are substantial -in number- voters behind it sustaining it, no matter how outrageous it is.

Apr 6, 2014*permalink

"Paul Farace (13 hours ago)

What an F'd up view of reality you have!!! How about seeing it as the civilized world trying (unsuccessfully) to bring this backward culture, living in the 10th century, into something approaching the modern world. They helped train the Jihadi terrorists that attacked us on 9-11 and elsewhere in the world and we responded by killing the G-D Taliban and idyiots like you see it as a business booster... you're sick!"

No jihadi terrorists attacked America on 911, it was a false flag job.

Anyone who refuses to see the US Foriegn policy agenda as being anything other than a Mass murder for profit racket needs to stop blindly believing the US Govt propaganda

Apr 6, 2014permalink

Do you want to help stop those tragedies?very simple, the first profitable industry of USA is making weapons, how do we sell weapons? wars, if there is no war?we make one, how? blow up 1 2 of our buildings, and that will be good for next 20 yrs to sell our weapons, and USA people?how do they accept that?that is the easiest part,start our huge brain washing machine,media, we can make them hate anyone to death, or love anyone to death with no logical reason,and hide all evidences, great lets start,call 911, done, the result, millions of victims overseas, millions of orphans, millions of destroyed sad families, millions of brain washed zombies in USA and other western (civilized) nations, and the best part, trillions of $ for those poor weapon makers in USA and France and England, how to stop this evil game? find a better job for those weapon guys, and stop watch TV, how do you market weapon? and stop teaching us, victims how to be a better people and receive your bombs with smile.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

I agree.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

b craw

While I might agree to a degree with your point, suggesting grossly exagerrated figures does not serve your argument. Annual revenue from arms exports globally is hovering around the $30 billion mark, of which the U.S. accounts for about 1/3 of those exports. "Trillions" is way off the mark.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

Coliban

..... wrong post

Apr 6, 2014*permalink

I couldn't put it in a better form, thank you.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

@bobbarber. You don't see the point. Point is... If there would be NO NATO there wouldn't be attack on journalist. The point is, NATO occupying his country. NATO is first reason for his attack. His attack is consequence to NATO aggression.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

GEAH

A whole lot of people looking for a political website got lost and ended up here.

If you can't discuss her photography, stay off the keyboard.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Her photography took place in a war zone. Did you miss that part of the article?

Apr 5, 2014permalink

A lot of people chose to turn a blind eye to the fact the we killed way more innocent people than the rest of the world combined! Our pets means a lot more to us than numerous innocent people including kids, women, young and old, being murdered and slaughtered abroad in weddings and even in funerals. Our kids were also shot by police walking with toys in their hands in the street! I am deeply saddened!

Apr 7, 2014permalink

a..

Apr 7, 2014*permalink

Al Cris

I come to this magnificent photography site again because my conscience leaves me no other choice! For many years we've seen the death of photographers and or journalists who give the best of their lives so the world may open the eyes. This random killing, of people in the line of duty no matter what is a very serious strike. The 21st century should bring the best of civilization. I apologize for my words. Today is a sad day for me. I also remember what happened to Giles Duley.
RIP

Apr 5, 2014permalink

As long as mass murder is profitable to the elite, there will be mass murder.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

whensly

Niedringhaus was a GREAT photojournalist . Problem is with working in war-zones is it gets addictive. It's like an extreme sport (but no game) the rush you get, once you leave you have to go back, it's an addiction. Flirting with danger and death makes you feel so alive.

There are always so many high-reward images in war-zones and stories and the adrenaline rush of it all. They forget that it's a death dance.

Very very sad but not surprised.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

I agree, sorry for the lost.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

We have made hundreds of attacks on targets in sovereign country Pakistan since 2004 using drones (unmanned aerial vehicles) controlled by the CIA. Based on extensive research, the Bureau of Investigative Journalism found that between 391 – 780 civilians were killed out of a total of between 1,658 and 2,597 and that 160 children are reported among the deaths. The Bureau also revealed that since President Obama took office at least 50 civilians were killed in follow-up strikes when they had gone to help victims and more than 20 civilians have also been attacked in deliberate strikes on funerals and mourners, tactics that have been condemned by legal experts

In December 2007, the Iraqi government reported that there were five million orphans in Iraq — almost half of the country's children. This horrible crime was committed by us based on a totally biased so called evidence.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Yes, but that doesn't justify this death.

I don't like the hypocrisy either, that this death matters enough for an article, and nobody cares about the other deaths that you wrote about, but it still doesn't make this death right.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

"nobody cares about the other deaths" wow, I am speechless!

Apr 7, 2014permalink

Ulfric M Douglas

Our telly news showed a bloodspattered Nikon on the seat of a shot-up car.
Disgusting journalism.

Great way to go though! Better that : doing what she loved than fading away in withered old age ...

Apr 5, 2014permalink

LarryK

Being murdered?

Apr 5, 2014permalink

And the most important fact is MISSING as usually. This killer pronounced, that he was killing as a revenge of NATO bombing his village.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

Right, so he chose not to kill NATO troops, but instead killed a couple of female journalists who were there to report on elections - the beginnings of a process that will potentially relieve Afghanistan of the horrors visited upon it by both Taliban and Western forces.

NATO did not turn that policeman into a misogynist murderer.

Apr 5, 2014*permalink

Smokymtnhiker

A coward killed an unarmed woman, a non combatant photographer. What a worthless piece of human waste he was.

His remains should be fed to the hogs.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

@BartyLobethal You don't see the point. Point is... If there would be NO NATO there wouldn't be attack on journalist. The point is, NATO occupying his country. NATO is first reason for his attack. His attack is consequence to NATO aggression.

Apr 6, 2014*permalink

(unknown member)

@mumintroll - the point is that he didn't attack NATO troops, he attacked a pair of unarmed journalists. He is a coward.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

javidog

Reading all the comments on this post clearly explains why the Taliban, NATO and war exist. Pure and simple ignorance with dangerous results.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

tarsus

The update says the killer was a member of the Taliban dressed as a police officer.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

and that makes you feel good ?

Apr 6, 2014permalink

papa natas

"...Well, people die every day..."
Daryl Van Horne, The Witches of Eastwick

Apr 5, 2014permalink

RStyga

“Μη κρίνετε κατ’ όψιν, αλλά την δικαίαν κρίσιν κρίνατε”. ΙC ΧC

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Pallke

Forbid weapons!
Forbid religion!

RIP Anja

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Smokymtnhiker

The only reason pacifists like you are able to sleep peacefully in your bed at night is because rough armed men stand ready to protect you.

If you think governments will ever relinquish arms, you are delusional.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

Coliban

I´m so sad.

Anja Niedringshaus was a german photographer, i try to translate and would like to share some quotes with you, she gave in one of her last interviews for a german magazine.

About Afghans:
"I see their (warm) characters, which doesn't exists (in the west) anymore. How often i slept on the ground in houses from normal afghan families. They share all their belongings and they even don´t know me!"

About war:
"We (in the west) believe that we can bring peace with militia and weapons. But with that you achieve nothing. I became the greatest pacifist, since i work (as a war photographer). You don´t solve problems with tanks."

About dead:
"Dead is coming to me when colleagues are dying. Then i ask, if is it worth it. But no one of my (now dead friends) would say: Stop your work. As long as I do not get tired and about what I see every day, do not feel normal, I will continue."
...

Anja, RIP... and remember her legacy

(forgive my bad english)

Apr 5, 2014permalink

JFMoore

Thank you for this.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Paul Farace

typical European leftist response... you don't solve problems with tanks??? How about how the Allies ended the nightmare of Nazi butchery in WWII with Sherman Tanks??? How about how NATO tanks defended you Europeans from the horrors of Soviet oppression during the Cold War??

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Coliban

Hello Paul,

this attitude is not "left" in germany or europe. People who think, that this is a "left" position should calibrate their political stance, maybe is turns out, that their own position is so far right winged that they recognize all other objective positions as "left".

And with WWII: it would never had come to WWII when the nations, which shifted all to WWI would have though only some second and would be able to disarm all that crazy military who were responsible for this wars and would had retreated from their own national and right wing positions.

Besides that: WWII where mainly fought by Russians (despite the fact that stalin was an cruel dictator), which paid the highest price with far over 10.000.000(!!) killed soldiers and a devastated land. (USA: 300.000, even UK more than 350.000, but EVERY killed soldier is one soldier too much).

Kindly regards

Apr 6, 2014*permalink

onlooker

> And with WWII: it would never had come to WWII when the nations, which shifted all to WWI would have though only some second and would be able to disarm

Ok, so since we all know how it really happened, let's set hypothetical and academic theories aside , and kindly respond to Paul and tell him how exactly II WW would have been solved without tanks.

Apr 6, 2014permalink

Russell Chapman

A tragic loss. But by traveling in a convoy during election time she made herself a huge target. I have experience photographing the conflict in Syria. It is really best to draw as little attention as possible to yourself when there is a threat and in Afghanistan the threat is particularly high at the moment. My thoughts are with her family.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

h2k

Impossible for me to read these comments here. Let's return to pixel peeping and K3 review requests.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Mike_V

RIP

Apr 5, 2014permalink

ozgoldman

What a tragedy. You do take your life in your hands if you go to Afghanistan these days. Sadly she has paid the ultimate price. May she rest in peace.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Clyde Thomas

Rest in peace Anja. Thank you for your contributions to this world.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

reginalddwight

It takes a special person to do Anja's line of work. Though she has perished from the earth, her legacy will live on forever.

My deepest sympathies to her family, friends, and colleagues.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Edlolim

Elections-Journalists-Women, Wow this is a powerful "Trio" to an Afghanistan 'mind' to digest.
They insist to behave as a cruel and primitive people.

Anja: RIP -

Condolences to family and friends.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

It's a tragedy that such a great photographer has been killed in the line of duty--but it's not the Afghan people who killed her, and they are not 'cruel and primitive'. Only some of them. Unfortunately such people exist in all cultures and countries. That's why people like Anja Niedringhaus are so important--to remind us that there is both good and evil in the world.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Antony John

How about "Schools, Guns, Children" as another 'trio'?
There are a lot of people 'with issues' in all societies in all countries.
Too much senseless violence on this planet in all walks of life.

Condolences to those close to Anja and the photographic community at large.

Apr 5, 2014*permalink

Frank_BR

The zealots can kill the rooster heralding the dawn of a new day, but they will be unable to prevent the sun rises. Hopefully the election next Sunday helps Afghanistan to move away from backwardness and barbarism.

RIP Anja.

Apr 5, 2014*permalink

TheDevil

Very sad news.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

white shadow

A senseless killing of a dedicated, brave and brilliant photographer, more so because she is a woman. Not many women would want to suffer all the danger and inconveniences of a war zone.

What is more sad is that she was killed by an Afghan police officer who is suppose to protect the election workers. Afghanistan is indeed a wild country and one do not know who the enemies are.

Lets hope the murderer be caught.

RIP Anja. You would be greatly missed by those who appreciate your work.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

"more so because she is a woman"

????? Woman's life worth more than a man's is it?

Apr 5, 2014permalink

bronxbombers4

very sad

Apr 4, 2014permalink

DACOOK

RIP Anja.

Photography site peoples ..... Photography site!

Apr 4, 2014permalink

Benarm

I wonder if she captured NATO war crimes there...

Apr 4, 2014permalink

DangitDale

Unfortunately, she got a first hand account of the TALIBAN war crimes there...smartass.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

meykez

don't know if this is a serious question. german wikipedia via translator:

Anja Niedringhaus never could be put off if official agencies wanted to limit access to information. So it was in September 2009, the first person who took pictures of the destroyed tankers during an air raid in Kunduz after the ISAF rocket attack. The tank trucks had been bombed at the command of German Colonel Georg Klein and were at the time denied the armed forces as of yet, that had been killed in the air raid also more than 90 villagers.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Anyone capturing US/NATO war crimes runs the risk of being a victim of "friendly fire". I think she would have known what to capture and what not to capture.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Perry Carmichael

Damn. RIP

Apr 4, 2014permalink

mrmut

Viewing war photos during exhibitions often makes me wander how in the world a photographer got out of that alive AND take a picture.

I am not sure if we should mourn war photographers, given that they accepted their faith in advance; mourning them seems a bit disrespectful. It makes much more sense just to appreciate photographer's work.

Apart from that, Afghanistan was not a very smart move for a woman photographer. Her presence there was insulting to locals on many levels (regardless of how that can be perceived by westerners - it is Afghans' country).

Apr 4, 2014*permalink

spatz

I agree with your sentiment expressed in the first two paragraphs, but not with the last one. Certainly, Afghanistan is a dangerous place, and especially so for women. However, if the mere presence of a woman can be deemed "insulting" (I presume that by "locals", you mean the males), it is even more admirable if someone like Anja Niedringhaus has the courage to go.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

(unknown member)

If her presence there was "insulting to locals on many levels" simply because of her gender, then our time and effort there was a violent, bloody waste.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

mrmut

It is important not to impose own values to other people, especially to those of other ethnicity / nation. Afghanistan is a very poor country that has seen a succession of occupations by powerful states during the last two hundred or so years. Each of those imposed their set of values, and each time there was many civilian casualties. Moralizing this situation from a cozy room and in front of a computer connected to internet, seems like a Monthy Pyton sketch.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Just a Photographer

Take a look at the documentary 'War Photographer' of James Nachtwey and you'll see first hand how a war photographer works.

Very impressive

Apr 5, 2014permalink

mrmut

Just as an update - took a look at the documentary, but it didn't impress me. OTOH I personally met an talked extensively with some of the actual war photographers, all in all, it seemed to me that they all carry deep wounds that make them do what they do.

Jun 6, 2014permalink

peacefrog33756

I was saddened to hear this. RIP, Anja. Your work lives on.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

Felts

I have to say I wasn't aware of her work, but having had a look at her website it was my loss, and now it is the loss of many more around the world. RIP
http://www.anjaniedringhaus.com

Apr 4, 2014permalink

Stu 5

Anja Niedringhaus in her own words: "For me, covering conflict and war is the essence of journalism. My assignment, regardless of the era, is about people—civilians and soldiers. The legacy of any photographer is her or his ability to capture the moment, to record history. For me it is about showing the struggle and survival of the individual."

Apr 4, 2014permalink

AbrasiveReducer

People risk their lives to show we should never engage in war unless absolutely unavoidable. Yet we keep electing tough talking nitwits who have never been in combat but have no problem sending others.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

RedFox88

Dude, it's an all volunteer army. Nobody is picking people off the streets to go into battle. They know what they are agreeing to when they sign their contract with the military. So easy to criticize. Making big decisions is tough and takes a big man to do so.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Yes they choose to sell their selves out to the Politicians and go and murder people in foreign lands so the Elite can profit.Being a mercnary is shameful profession

Apr 5, 2014permalink

Gesture

RIP. A special soul.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

behyer

I wonder if they were targeted because they were with the election workers, or because they were journalists, or because they were women who were working.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

Edlolim

Elections-Journalists-Women, wow this is a powerful "Trio" to an Afghanistan 'mind' to digest.
They insist to behave as a cruel and primitive people.

Anja: RIP

Apr 5, 2014*permalink

munro harrap

In case you wombles do not know, photographer is the no 1 most dangerous profession. The percentage killed relative to the total number makes it so.It is an occupational hazard, and everyone who goes unarmed into a war to record it knows this. No ideology is involved, no politics are needed to cloak mass murder, but unfortunately her generation were inspired by a few in mine who fancied what they did made a difference.

Recording conflicts we in the West started ourselves was a futile irony that just never occurred to them strongly enough to keep them at home safe with their terrified stressed families and friends.

How many more?

Apr 4, 2014permalink

Eric Hensel

"In case you wombles do not know,...."
Just a head's up son, never insult your audience in the first sentence.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

thinkfat

Not sure why I should feel insulted by being called a "Womble"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Wombles

Apr 4, 2014permalink

zapatista

Munro, someone special died. Try not being a preachy and pretentious douche.

Apr 4, 2014permalink

23joecool

I agree with the war hazards and the irony WEST was the attacker. What I don't understand is that your rational view of war/death I share raised so many to attack and ridicule your comment.
The whole so called west "civilized" world needs to change its attitude to what death means and how you choose to go about it. Go listen to alan watts.

Even worse, leaving Afghanistan in a mess. Watch VICE documentary - what it looks like winning

Apr 4, 2014*permalink

DangitDale

23joecool - ok, so since the Afghans don't care about death, by leaving it in a mess, we've actually done them a favor?

Apr 5, 2014permalink

"conflicts we in the West started"? Afghanistan? Really? The terrorists who killed 3,000 innocents on 9/11 was the start, I'm quite sure.

Apr 5, 2014permalink

To Malikknows: A couple of things here. The problems in Afghanistan go back centuries before the attack on the World Trade Centre, and in many ways while it was not 'the west' that directly caused that particular attack, we have to carry much of the blame because of the way we have acted over the last few centuries. But the Afghan people had nothing to do with 9/11. While the Taliban had assisted Al Qaeda, it was not the Taliban that hijacked the planes and the people who flew them were Saudi nationals. The US trained many of the Al Qaeda and Taliban fighters originally, too (when they thought that they they could be 'useful' to the west), so the mess is the result of many people's interventions. It would be nice if things were black and white, but the truth behind such issues are always a murky grey.

Apr 6, 2014*permalink

This is not helpful, and not even true. Very PC view of history where moral responsibility is amorphous, not definable or assignable. Sorry, but the truth of the matter is quite clear and not at all grey. I'm quite sure the Taliban are Afghanis. I'm quite sure they allowed terrorist training camps with full knowledge of what they would be used for. I'm quite sure the Taliban are Islamic fundamentalists who cooperated with like-minded fundamentalists, and are doing so today. And I'm quite sure they would slit your throat if given the chance.

May 27, 2014permalink

Most of the Taliban may be Afghans, but very few of the Afghans are Taliban. And while Al Qaeda may well have trained the terrorists, the people who flew the planes were Saudi nationals. Why did the US not invade Saudi Arabia? And what part did Iraq play in the attacks that caused Bush so much disgust that he felt compelled to invade them? None that I can see.

Alliances in that part of the world are always shifting, and while it may be hard to accept the US government must bear some of the responsibility for training and arming the Taliban in the first place. The US, Britain and Europe have long had their fingers in the middle east--it goes back millennia--and most nations have had or still have imperialist intentions of some sort. The US is no different--it's just that they use the media to help them to justify what they do in the name of 'freedom'.

It may be true that Islamic fundamentalists want to do away with me but most Islamic people are not fundamentalists.

May 27, 2014permalink

Wow, PC you indeed are. A few inconvenient facts for you: The US didn't invade Saudi Arabia because its government cooperated with the US, unlike the Taliban. It is that simple. And I see you couldn't resist including Iraq, which has no relevance to Afghanistan whatsoever but is a meme for those prone to anti-Western propaganda who just can't help themselves.

I find it funny that Westerners like to lecture me about my own culture and my own religion and even my own history. Funny that. My question is: why all the self-hate? Can't you make an argument for Australia and its allies? Do you really believe the West is morally equivalent to the Taliban? Oh, by the way, it would be truly hard for the US to have "had its fingers in the ME...[for] millennia" as those nations have not existed that long. But that kind of hyperbole just shows your bias.

May 27, 2014permalink

The situation in the Middle East is complex, and the problem with your understanding of that situation is evident by your statement, 'It is that simple'. NOTHING about the history of the conflict in the middle east is 'that simple' and thinking it does shows a lack of understanding of history. Many of the current problems are the result of hundreds of years of religious and political conflict.

'The West' cannot be equated with 'the Taliban'. 'The west' is a shorthand way to describe an amorphous and disparate grouping of different countries and a billion people; the other is group of religious fundamentalists. The Taliban could be better compared to a group like neo-nazis, a tiny group with their own agenda WITHIN a larger society.

Should you not also find it funny that you like to lecture 'westerners' about their history? Accepting the fact that both 'sides' have behaved badly for centuries is not being PC. To be honest I have no time for either side in this conflict.

May 28, 2014permalink

You had time to make an idiotic, off-topic PC response to my post. You truly should find time to get your facts straight before inserting yourself into an issue of which you obviously have no knowledge or insight. People who cannot assign moral responsibility for a discrete events like 9/11 really should take their own advice and avoid "complex" topics.

May 28, 2014permalink