Kuro5hin.org: technology and culture, from the trenches
create account | help/FAQ | contact | links | search | IRC | site news
[ Everything | Diaries | Technology | Science | Culture | Politics | Media | News | Internet | Op-Ed | Fiction | Meta | MLP ]
We need your support: buy an ad | premium membership

Massoud is no more

By Betcour in News
Sun Sep 16, 2001 at 12:57:19 PM EST
Tags: News (all tags)

The death of the longest and most active Taliban enemy, Ahmad Shah Massoud, has been confirmed today. For years he and his troups have been fighting fundamentalist Talibans without any support from western-countries.

He was killed by a bomb hidden in the camera of two fake journalists who pretended to interview him. Ben Laden is suspected to have orchestrated this suicide bombing as well.

While most of us will be trying to understand why this assassination happened just the day before the attack on the WTC, his death should also remind to all of us that, if we had only listened to what Massoud had been saying for years, thousand of peoples would be right now busy at work in the twin towers of Manhattan.

Ahmad Shah Massoud was a civil engineer who had been educated into the French school in Kaboul. He had been for almost 25 years at the forefront of the fight against the Soviet occupation, and he was also the leader of the last resistance group against the Talibans. Massoud was the only UN recognised leader of Afghanistan, and was fighting to restore freedom and democracy in his country - the same values we all cherish so much.

He and his troups were alone in fighting the dangerous insanity of the Talibans. In many interviews he gave to the western medias, he repeatly warned us how Talibans were a danger not only to Afghanistan but also to the world, how their fundamentalism was a threat to democracy and freedom. No western country ever gave him any help, the world kept watching without any reaction as the Talibans, supported by Pakistan, took over the country.

Now that the world turns its eyes over Afghanistan and the Talibans, let's not forget the one who fought them without any cruise missiles or stealth bombers, without any desire for vengeance but just the wish to finally end the madness that had taken over his country. Let's not forget that he was also right all along, but we just didn't want to listen...


Voxel dot net
o Managed Hosting
o VoxCAST Content Delivery
o Raw Infrastructure


Related Links
o has been confirmed today
o Also by Betcour

Display: Sort:
Massoud is no more | 16 comments (9 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
shit! there goes my plan (3.00 / 3) (#1)
by sayke on Sat Sep 15, 2001 at 05:44:53 PM EST

i was hoping that the US population's desire for revenge could be translated into a careful (heh) overthrow of the taliban, followed by the installation of ahmad shah massoud as, well, puppet leader of afganistan, or something. at the very least, it would probably be better for all concerned then continued taliban rule.

hrm. anyone know of any other generals/warlords in the area that the US might be able to use as taliban replacement devices? abdul rashid dostum (an ethnic uzbek) might still be around, but i'm not sure. he was active in 1993-94, i gather (from reading this).

sayke, v2.3.1 /* i am the middle finger of the invisible hand */

this is why the middle east hates us. (4.83 / 6) (#7)
by rebelcool on Sat Sep 15, 2001 at 09:07:07 PM EST

We support one bad regime over another.

While its possible this one would've been better than the taliban (i dont think you get worse than them...but knock on wood.), it still doesnt do the afghan people justice to give money and weapons to one slightly-less corrupt regime over another.

In developing countries, there is a cycle of revolutions. Slightly less corrupt regimes fight and replace one another, until eventually, after many decades, there is a stable and peaceful government. By giving money and weapons to a regime, we upset the balance of revolutions by giving them an edge so they will maintain their power indefinately, or at least, for a very long time.

One thing to remember, the Taliban were somewhat installed by america and pakistan. We supported them over the communist leadership there. During the communist times women could still go to school and work, and beautiful works of art still existed in afghanistan.

COG. Build your own community. Free, easy, powerful. Demo site
[ Parent ]

thank you :) (3.50 / 2) (#11)
by _Quinn on Sun Sep 16, 2001 at 01:19:06 PM EST

Just the point I was going to make. If democracy is so wonderful, why doesn't the US try to install it instead of a friendly dictator? (See also: South America.)

Reality Maintenance Group, Silver City Construction Co., Ltd.
[ Parent ]
The Road Less Traveled (4.66 / 3) (#12)
by AzTex on Sun Sep 16, 2001 at 03:16:42 PM EST

Why doesn't the US try to install democracy instead of a dictator?  Good question.

Maybe because freedom and democracy are hard.  While corruption and tyranny are easy.

More seriously...  How could a legitimate government ever be installed anyway?  I cannot believe that any goverment that really believed in democracy would not want to me installed!

** AzTex **
Knowledge is Power.  -- Frances Bacon

[ Parent ]
East Timor? (4.80 / 5) (#13)
by winthrop on Sun Sep 16, 2001 at 04:16:36 PM EST

More seriously... How could a legitimate government ever be installed anyway?

I'm only going on BBC reports, but it seems the UN did a pretty good job of installing a legitimate government in East Timor. They installed a temporary bootstrapping government of UN officials which conducted a spectacular election (>99% turnout in some places!) under temporary laws. The new government has 90 days to ratify and adopt a constitution.

By all accounts, it seems to be a fair, free, and legitimate government. BBC Link

[ Parent ]

Taliban and the Mujahedin (4.75 / 4) (#14)
by free779 on Sun Sep 16, 2001 at 10:40:02 PM EST

Once the communist government fell, a coalition government formed of the various mujahedin factions was formed. This quickly degenerated into a free-for-all of what little resources Afghanistan had.

The rise of the Taliban was due in no small part to the disgust Afghan traders had with the warlords and the lawless environment they created.

Resistance was limited and fractured, while the Taliban remained a cohesive whole. By the time the warlords united under Masood, the Taliban controlled most of Afghanistan.

The US never trained the Taliban directly, since they emerged as a real force only after the withdrawal of Soviet forces. Some of the mujahedin we trained and armed during the war did join the Taliban (and more so as the warlords were defeated), but we never proffered direct aid the Taliban as an organization.

I also don't believe the Taliban are anti-American, per se. They are attempting to create a closed, fundamentalist state, and consider American culture a deadly influence to the society they want to keep. Their fundamentalism is more of an internal nature than an external nature, although surrounding nations are naturally concerned that the Taliban will try to spread their Islamic revolution. They are bitter about American support of the opposition and the sanctions on the Taliban, but they have also shown signs that they are will to work with the US when necessary, and won't require deviating from their strict religous beliefs. For example, the Taliban drastically cracked down on the opium trade when Iran and America requested it (and monies received from the US didn't make up for the profits derived from the opium trade).

So why do they harbor bin Laden? bin Laden supported the mujahedin during the Soviet occupation, and was one of the early supporters of the Taliban when they began their jihad. They owe him a lot, and if that means facing off against the most powerful nation in the world, so be it. It's not that they hate the US (well, they do, but not enough to do anything about it), it's just that they owe bin Laden more than they owe the US.

[ Parent ]

I've one (none / 0) (#8)
by MSBob on Sat Sep 15, 2001 at 09:23:34 PM EST

Shamil Basayev.

Just kidding o'kay?

I don't mind paying taxes, they buy me civilization.

[ Parent ]
Unfortunate but (3.60 / 5) (#2)
by uweber on Sat Sep 15, 2001 at 05:45:07 PM EST

Although in view of this week's events this is certanly bad news, this man's biography is not that diferent from bin Laden's. He has for years fought the same fight the Taliban have. While I think that his faction is by no means as mad as the Taliban we probably wouldn't have liked his vision as well.

Interesting that this story is being ignored (none / 0) (#15)
by yuri on Tue Sep 18, 2001 at 03:25:34 AM EST

Given that one of the possible goals of the US intervention in Afganistan will be to remove the Taliban. So, who will take the reigns of leadership? Not that I know shit about Massood but the common story is that he would have been a viable leader. It will be very interesting to see how this plays out. Will one of Massouds tribe stand up, be recognized and take the helm? Will the Taliban continue? Who knows. One thing I am sure of is that many Afgans will die whether by civil war or US/Allies intervention. Given the initial response of the Taliban to the events of last week, they have sealed their fate---the west will not support them in the long (or short) run as they cannot be trusted to fight terrorism. They have failed the litmus test and will not last.

Massoud is no more | 16 comments (9 topical, 7 editorial, 0 hidden)
Display: Sort:


All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective companies. The Rest 2000 - Present Kuro5hin.org Inc.
See our legalese page for copyright policies. Please also read our Privacy Policy.
Kuro5hin.org is powered by Free Software, including Apache, Perl, and Linux, The Scoop Engine that runs this site is freely available, under the terms of the GPL.
Need some help? Email help@kuro5hin.org.
My heart's the long stairs.

Powered by Scoop create account | help/FAQ | mission | links | search | IRC | YOU choose the stories!