Quote:
Originally Posted by Flash Walken
I'm not trying to insinuate that Afghanistan was some kind of South Asian Egypt. My argument is that, like most societies, as they become increasingly exposed to other cultures through education and trade, they become more moderate and (generally) less tribalistic. it shouldn't be a surprise then, that that progress is reversed after the country is reverted back to the stone age for two generations.
That there is less basic infrastructure in most of the country now than there was 30 years ago is a fundamental reason the country appears to be reverting back to it's tribal communalism roots as the landscape of the country becomes ever more fractured by warring parties.
Flooding a third world country with weapons, cash and increased demand for drug production isn't going to help things tremendously.
|
Once again I think you're purposely romanticizing the situation in Afghanistan prior to the 1970s to prove a point. Here's a graph of life expectancy in Afghanistan since 1960. It continually goes up:
http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/afgh...tancy-at-birth
At the start of the 1960s it was 30 years old, and has steadily and consistently risen to almost 50 now.
I'm sorry but a proggresive country with a well developed infrastructure does not have a life expectancy of 30 years old. Since the NATO invasion of Afghanistan, they have reached unpresidented rates of education enrolment, women in the work force, life expectancy, etc...
At harsh as it may sound, things are better in Afghanistan now than they have ever been. The idea that Afghanistan was a flourishing and progressive nation prior to Western intervention simply isn't true.