Jezebel 
Enter your username and password.
New York, 9:16 PM
Tue Dec 15
67 posts in the last 24 hours
Tip your editors:
Editor-in-Chief:
Anna Holmes
| Twitter
Deputy Editor:
Dodai Stewart
| Twitter
Senior Contributing Editor:
Tracie Egan
| Twitter
Contributing Editors:
Anna North
| Twitter
Sadie Stein
| Twitter
Reporter:
Irin Carmon
| Twitter
Editorial Assistant:
Margaret Hartmann
| Twitter
Contributors:
Rich Juzwiak
Email | Twitter
Latoya Peterson
Email
Jenna Sauers
Lizzie Skurnick
Interns:
Katy Kelleher
Twitter
Weekends/Commenter Moderator:
Hortense
| Twitter
Original material is licensed under a Creative Commons License permitting non-commercial sharing with attribution.
12/03/09
Then after WWII, everybody was like, We can't just leave them alone in the rubble. We have to make sure no more Nazis get delusions of grandeur, and we have to help them rebuild--literally and economically--the country so there's no more misery/poverty/anger that will cause another war. And so there was the rebuilding of Germany. I can't remember if there was a rebuilding of Japan (since it was European history). Now Germany is all set and not trying to start wars. Neither is Japan.
Can someone explain why it was a good idea to rebuild Germany but not Afghanistan? Are these situations at all alike in anything but my wikipedia-like remembrances of high school history?
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
First of all, Afghanistan is nearly in civil war at this point. In Western Europe post WW2, the Nazis were resoundly conquered. As they were a state-run army, once the leaders died/surrendered, the general rank-and-file soldiers didn't keep fighting on their own. That's not the case in Afghanistan. There wasn't any insurgency or Nazi forces in Western Europe after WW2 ended. There also wasn't any local sympathy for Nazis, which makes it easier for rebel forces to survive. There is some of that for the Taliban in Afghanistan.
Secondly, Afghanistan is massively lacking in infrastructure - both human and physical - moreso than almost any other country in the world. Its one thing to rebuild schools and roads and factories that were destroyed in Austria so that schoolteachers and factory workers can return to them, its quite another to build a school or a road where there's never been one before, and where an entire generation is largely illiterate. Its easy to restore civilization to conditions within the same decade, its much harder to create it after everyone who remembers a stable, prosperous Afghanistan (which existed until 1973!) is either dead or has fled the country.
Also the Marshall Plan was incredibly expensive.
I'm NOT saying the US shouldn't pump hundreds of millions of dollars into Afghanistan in terms of infrastructure and economic development. We totally should. Its just that we won't.
ETA: Oh also! We were resoundingly treated in Europe as liberators. Everyone outside of Germany (and possibly inside as well?) was more than happy to see us. While that might have initially been the case in Afghanistan, it definitely no longer is true.
12/03/09
12/03/09
But what we're talking about is the textbook definition of nationbuilding. Which isn't happening.
12/04/09
12/03/09
That said, I think Greenwald's point is great. But I do hope we can manage to leave a standing government in that country that views all people are equals. Though that's clearly too much to expect when our own legislators fail at that, right?
12/03/09
12/03/09
However, things are just as bad (and maybe worse, but who's comparing?) for women in other parts of the world, and we've got no interest in affecting change in those places, so you've probably got it right.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
If that is truly why President Obama did not pull out the "we're the good guys, getting rid of evil" card in the speech, because he does not believe the human rights and women's rights horrors are not fixable through military means, then I have to applaud him, because it's so easy to try to justify it that way.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
In response to Greenwald: I'm sorry, but a lot of liberals have been against using military tactics precisely because they believe they hurt women. And it was feminists who were pointing out that many women in Afghanistan didn't want us bombing things on their behalf, in response to the Bush administration pretending they cared about women's rights.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
The substitution of international NGOs for actual grassroots voices in discussing people's needs, wants and political visions is all too sadly common, as is the idea of the all-knowing NGO that "knows better" than directly affected communities about what those communities need or want.
12/03/09
Don't get me wrong, I truly do worry for women in Afghanistan and believe they do need to fight for their rights. I also believe Americans can support them in their struggle, but not militarily. Every gain any group has made, in the US at least, has come from that group pushing and fighting, nothing is ever handed to a disadvantaged group by those in power until they see a disadvantage in continuing with existing policy. So while I do believe that we can support Afghan women, the fight is ultimately theirs and they must lead. I believe that any effort led by Americans would automatically lose any credibility in the eyes of the Afghan people. Not to mention that the whole thing smacks of the "white man's burden" when we try to impose our values on foreign cultures.
12/03/09
12/03/09
12/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
I don't agree with the other restrictions either, but I can somewhat see where they are coming from.
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
Revolutionary thinking, huh? I guess it sounds better than that the wimmins wer gettin' too equal. #somalia
11/03/09
11/03/09
[www.reuters.com]
"The organisations closed by al Shabaab are the Halgan Businesswomen's Organisation, the Sed Huro Human Rights Organisation and Farhan Woman for Peace, he said."
There's also a story from Oct in which Somali insurgents* have been publicly whipping women for wearing bras. Depressingly, but not surprisingly, a couple outlets made that story into a joke and then never mentioned it again.
*How are these dickheads "insurgents" if they have the authority to impose laws and close down organizations? They're sounding a lot like the Taliban in the 1990s.
I want to do something, but I don't know what would help. Anybody have any ideas? #somalia
11/03/09
As far as what you can do, there's VERY little aid getting to Somalia these days. [www.foreignpolicy.com]
It looks like World Food Programme's still there, so donate to them if you can.
The organization I work for supports several independent media houses in Somalia, so if you happen to want information on that, (and your heart broken on a semi-annual basis), you can get direct information here: [www.nusoj.org]
But I don't think there's any way to donate directly to that group. #somalia
11/03/09
11/03/09
If there's anything there like RAWA, or an org that can get aid directly to the women there, somebody please let me know. #somalia
11/03/09
11/03/09
In terms of women's groups, there's a well-respected organization called "Save Somali Women and Children" - www.sswcsom.org - that is doing amazing work, but I don't know about ways to donate to them. #somalia
11/03/09
[en.wikipedia.org]
It's a fucked up place, mainly due to being run by various violent factions, but I actually seem to recall someone trying this recently and people being like, "uh, I can't watch soccer? Pass." Also, dancing, music, and poetry are part & parcel of this culture.
I'm more curious as to whether the "Islamic" fundamentalist factions are trying to assert their power because there is currently a massive power struggle over who exactly gets to hold that white British couple hostage.
11/03/09
11/03/09
Then again, I could be wrong since my family was from the northern part of the country which was somewhat more quiet and they all seemed to have gotten this info third hand.
11/03/09
11/03/09
Also, this point cannot be stated enough: Somalia is a clan oriented society in which governs the manner in which the vast majority of people conduct their dealings, and the various, changing groups that wield power are violent, driven by resources/greed, and lack even a passing relationship with Islam, Sharia or Wahabism (which truthfully is what this article is referring to). Could there be Wabaism oppressing people there? Of course. In terms of the myriad of fucked up things in that society, it's just another janked piece of the puzzle. #somalia
11/03/09
EDIT [edition.cnn.com]
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
11/04/09
11/03/09
11/03/09
Being that the only people who ever say this to me are white males, that tends to shut them up pretty quickly. #somalia
11/03/09
I love when people say they don't want ANY government. Usually these are middle-class to well-off Americans. I can understand less government, but no government?
I suggest someone drop their butts in a country where there is no working/central government and see how they like it. #somalia
11/03/09
11/03/09
Libertarians claim they don't want any government interference at all. (What most of the jackasses that claim to be libertarian in the US mean is that they do want all of the benefits, like schools and roads and fire departments, but they don't want to pay taxes.) #somalia
11/03/09
11/03/09