It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Afghanistan plans national electronic ID cards

page: 2
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 03:26 PM
link   
The US is already testing a system known as RFID. Its use was suggested in the near future.




posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 05:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by Rosha
 


Oh my, I see you havn't been there.

Unlike 75% of the people on the forums, I have.

Its nowhere near as bad as you paint it.

You would be surprised by how many people have Toyotas and cellphones, even outside the cities.


My sister was on a mission there for a ngo before two of them were killed and they had to leave.....and she described it far less politely than I have here.....that was less than 12 months ago...and she saw the guts of it..not the bling...I trust her reportage fare more than anyone elses.

Besides that, a car or cell phone is not evidence of a working citizenry...clean hosptials/health care , a stable edcation system etc.etc etc.....what you saw I fear is just evidence of brokerage..pay offs by the occupying military and local but externally funded insurgents to shut people up with 'shiney things' and keep them pacified and easily controlled.

You saw what you, or what they wanted you to see.

Rosha.



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 09:19 PM
link   
reply to post by Rosha
 


Don't get me wrong Afghanistan wasn't on the level of Iraq, which was and is much more developed.

On the other hand, Afghanistan isn't anything like Somalia.

I didn't see any starving people or lack of food. The worse thing I saw infrastructure wise was the lack of pavement and traffic laws. There arn't any major power grids like we have in the states. Many people have generators. Oddly a number of people have satellite internet and television.

Better yet here are some examples:

These first pictures are from Herat Province.
Most of these are of Shindand or not too too far from it.






Next up is Nangahar Province, literally on the opposite side of the country.
This is Jalalabad.




Lastly is Parwan Province.
Here we are quite someways away from Bagram Airfield.


Many of these places had elementary and high schools. For some reason though, the Taliban like to blow the girl's schools up usually with the girls still in them. Higher education like colleges and universities are close to nil.

Medicine wise, they need more vaccinations and antibiotics.

Its not a complete wasteland and is better off than many countries in Africa, but they still need help.




edit on 13/12/10 by MikeboydUS because: !



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 09:27 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Why do they need help?

There's a social theory called positivism, and it's what the powers that be enforce and portray as reality. Apparently if you are aren't civilized or up to date with modern society, then you are primitive (according to the theory) and must be assimilated.

But this is wrong. Who are we in the West to tell Afghanistan that it isn't developed enough, so therefore we must continue to build their country for them while killing their people (Taliban and civilians are Afghans, afterall).

People who try to justify our roles in Afghanistan are ignoring the facts of why Afghanistan was invaded in the first place. Officially it has dick all to do with the Afghan people, the US lead a coalition army just to hunt down one man and his merry group of bandits. THEN it turned into some humanitarian reconstruction mission for the media, after most of Afghan infrastructure was bombed by coalition forces.

WE are the problem there. The reason why they might not have as good as infrastructure as you like, is because of our intervention there. Now we must stay because we are the solution? This is extremely messed up logic.
edit on 13-12-2010 by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 13 2010 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


So you don't think they need vaccines and antibiotics?

Primitive? They have the internet and cellphones.

Did I say anything about the US military being the help? No.
I said Afghanistan needed help. NGOs are better off being the help.


THEN it turned into some humanitarian reconstruction mission for the media, after most of Afghan infrastructure was bombed by coalition forces.


They barely had any infrastructure left, thanks to Communists and the USSR. The Taliban didn't give a crap about these people or infrastructure. There wasn't any peace before we showed up. There has been nothing but war over there since the 1970s.

NATO isn't the problem. The problem is humanity.
Muslim, Communist, Capitalist it doesn't matter, selfish humans twist and corrupt ideologies and beliefs for power. What happened there has happened elsewhere. It will continue to happen and it will not stop. The best thing that can be done is let the philanthropists and humanitarians do their work to minimize and contain it.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS

They barely had any infrastructure left, thanks to Communists and the USSR.


That's not true. Communist rule over Afghanistan proved to lead it in a very progressive direction. But in the end, it was only just a strategic territory for the Soviets and Americans, and the Americans would rather see it in anarchy than under Soviet guidance.

But everything else you say is agreeable. When it comes to reshaping Afghanistan, it is completely in the hands of coalition members. The Canadian example is that after we sent in our task force in 2001, we sent in our contractors to help build roads and other necessities while our forces were tasked with guarding them. But this is really what it's all about in Afghanistan, the very fact that it is underdeveloped compared to the West means that it is one big investment opportunity, which is why Western firms are the ones leading infrastructure work and our armies protect our workers, which are really just there to exploit the work that Afghans could be doing themselves.

And think about it, it's mostly the West that is paying for most of these "improvements" and they are paying their own contractors to do it for the most part (the paid contractors from the region mostly seem to be private armies). It's like the West is laundering money or something. And what does the West gain? They are forcing their influences upon the Afghan people. I'm not saying the Afghan people really care, but this is typical Western empirical strategy.

At least this is how I see it. We don't give a damn about Afghans, just the ability to exploit them. At least the Soviets cared.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:08 AM
link   
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


The Soviets cared?

The Soviets cared about the Afghans?!

I have to love human nature. Factionalism shines so much light on the actions of Others that it utterly blinds one to the actions of their own side.



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 06:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by Dimitri Dzengalshlevi
 


The Soviets cared?

The Soviets cared about the Afghans?!

I have to love human nature. Factionalism shines so much light on the actions of Others that it utterly blinds one to the actions of their own side.


As I try to make it clear, I am Canadian. I am not Soviet. What I know of the Soviet occupation I have studied for myself, and I have also met many people who know about the Soviet occupation without the bias of Western media.

In fact, the Soviets, in all their proxy countries, assumed their control by inducing progression in terms of industry, culture, society, etc (albeit on the Soviet model, as the Soviets believed in the goal of having a multicultural empire with Russians at the top). They wanted to prove to people in the third world that the Soviet way was the right way through soft power and positive tactics.

The Americans, on the other hand, always focused on coercion and brutality. If a country was proving to be a good example of nationalism/socialism/communism, it usually lead to war or covert ops (like Vietnam). Popular nationalist leaders tend to be assassinated by the CIA, and leadership of American proxy nations are replace with brutal dictators capable of suppressing any resistance while complying with American interests.

I'm not saying that the Soviets did not resort to brutality sometimes, but brutality was not their strategy. It was always the case with the Americans, and specifically the CIA, however.

So believe what you will. Before the communists took over Afghanistan, it was a feudal state run by drug farmers and warlords, with a central aristocratic government that only controlled Kabul. The communists tried to unify Afghanistan, which pissed off the warlords. The US saw an opportunity and took it by supplying the warlords with training, organization, cash and weapons, all to fight against communist influence. The Soviets occupied Afghanistan in an effort to back up the communist government that could not protect itself against the well-supplied warlords.

The warlords proved to be too much resistance, and the Soviets lost the will to fight after ten years of bloodshed. They left and the communist government collapsed while the warlords grew in power once again, all thanks to the CIA and ISI. Then the warlord factions, formed during the Soviet occupation (Northern Alliance, Taliban) fought for control of the Afghan government, and the Taliban won. The Taliban assumed centralized control of Afghanistan, and also happened to be Pakistan's proxy.

While they were indeed warlords and not politicians, they at least controlled Afghanistan after the power vacuum produced by American efforts to end the communist government. The Americans still assumed they were an asset, since the Americans created the Taliban, but the Taliban refused to bend to them in a classic case of blowback. Then the Americans invaded, and still supported Karzai's Northern Alliance militancy (who still backed the Americans up).

My point here is that the progression in Afghanistan now is American progression. Back in the late 70s and 80s, it was Soviet progression. Which progression is better: Soviet agrarian and social reform based on classless ideology, or American globalist invasion and empirical exploitation of Afghanistan's resources?



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 03:43 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeboydUS
 


Help? Yes I agree..but help mind..not occupation or theft of its natural resources.

How exactly does the implementation not to mention expense of biometric id cards help provide medicine, secure sewage systems and education/hosptials/safe buildings/community growth?
The reality is it doesnt and will only ease in a new US corperate agenda when the time comes..aid a new government dictatorship internaly, increase roadside piracy and see a trade in body parts spring up quicker than you can blink.

In most recent polls, over 60% of Afghanistans citizens want US troops out...shouldnt we, who pride ourselves on democratic rule, who are suposedly there under the banner of that purpose, be respecting the wishes of the majority? Isnt what they want a priority of you are really 'helping' *them* and not yourself ?

www.rediff.com...

Or should the US disclose... before it is outed..the real reasons it is in Afghanistan and so disclose the real intentions behind its choice to use biometric poplation control devices on an exhausted effectivly politically powerless people with no power base or representation from which to challenge them?
What is an ID card but a force of control and imposition upon will to a man or family that spends 9mths of the year in the mountains?

Whats next..have card you eat - no card you dont?

Your a terrorist if you say no to having one?

See how it works?


Thank you for sending in pictures of the areas you saw, though I fail to see their relevence to the point at hand.



Rosha



posted on Dec, 14 2010 @ 10:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Rosha
 


Occupation wise we will be out of there within a few years. Their military is building up well so far.

The NID will assist them with their war with the Taliban. The faster the Taliban is pushed out of an area, the faster that Provincial Reconstruction Teams can build roads, bridges, clinics, schools, expand the power grid, etc.

The NID could be abused theoretically like you said in denying aid, voting, vaccines etc. Realistically, where ever aid is given or voting is done, there will be most likely a NID processing station. So those who don't have one can get one or a get a new one. I'm sure the UN and humanitarian NGOs will assist with the processing and make sure everyone gets either a chance to vote or aid.

At the same time the Taliban could use the NID as another excuse to kill children. Then you have people who don't want the NID, because the Taliban come to your house and kill you.

The Taliban are like a memetic virus, well fundamentalism in general is really. Until we can win the information war, it is going to be difficult in eradicating them. The only other option is too brutal and inhumane, which would be to do what Syria's Assad did in Hama. We don't do that. Hence why the need for the NID program, surveillance drones, and checkpoints.



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 04:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by Rosha
 


Occupation wise we will be out of there within a few years. Their military is building up well so far.

The NID will assist them with their war with the Taliban. The faster the Taliban is pushed out of an area, the faster that Provincial Reconstruction Teams can build roads, bridges, clinics, schools, expand the power grid, etc.

The NID could be abused theoretically like you said in denying aid, voting, vaccines etc. Realistically, where ever aid is given or voting is done, there will be most likely a NID processing station. So those who don't have one can get one or a get a new one. I'm sure the UN and humanitarian NGOs will assist with the processing and make sure everyone gets either a chance to vote or aid.

At the same time the Taliban could use the NID as another excuse to kill children. Then you have people who don't want the NID, because the Taliban come to your house and kill you.

The Taliban are like a memetic virus, well fundamentalism in general is really. Until we can win the information war, it is going to be difficult in eradicating them. The only other option is too brutal and inhumane, which would be to do what Syria's Assad did in Hama. We don't do that. Hence why the need for the NID program, surveillance drones, and checkpoints.




The Taliban as you know, are ultimately a US trained Mujahideen. The US trained their leaders to fight the Soviets..and now everyone reaps what those actions have sown. It is right America cleans up its mess. The people of Afghanistan, caught in crossfire of decades of war, have done nothing to deserve it...and should not have to continue to pay the price for actions they are not responsible for.

International support by multinational ngo's and groups who can provide a history of no internal political or financial agenda's like MSF etc, groups who not only provide an apolitical service to the people but also train locals to take over their missions yes..these groups have a place in nations like Afghanistan.
This kind of support is already being given sans the need for ID cards in several nations around the world...successfully! Why is Afghanistan special that it alone requires them?

ID cards that compel citizens to provide personal biometric infomation to a data base they have no say on and no control over, are not neccesary to restoration or reconstruction. The only reason it would be is if the US plans to stay and " develop" Afghanistans resources for them...like it has built its largest ever base in Iraq. :/ They said they'd be out of there soon too..the existance of the military base says differently.

If the people themselves choose to develop what they have and ask for external help with that task..yes..lets all help but lets not have another Nigeria and Shell Oil fiasco..which is where I do see this headed. Too, if they choose NOT to develop their natural resoprces into an economy, then that right of theirs should be upheld as well and support should stil be given.
Have the people, themselves decided they wish this card? Or have they been told they will have it regardless?
If there is no choice..there is no democracy...and the entire US mission is an idealistic fabrication.





edit on 17-12-2010 by Rosha because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 08:57 AM
link   
reply to post by Rosha
 


The Taliban are actually an ISI trained group that emerged in Pakistan after the Soviets left.

The Mujahideen we trained became the government of Afghanistan and later the Northern Alliance when Kabul fell to the Taliban.

The NID will allow them to have a voice. Right now we can't tell the Pashtuns from Pakistan or Pashtuns from Afghanistan apart. The NID is specifically for Afghan citizens. Once the system is inplace they will be able to know who is or isn't a citizen and the citizens will have influence in the government. Make no mistake though, the Afghan Islamic Republic isn't a pure democracy nor is the United States for that matter.
edit on 17/12/10 by MikeboydUS because: !



posted on Dec, 17 2010 @ 06:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by MikeboydUS
reply to post by Rosha
 


The Taliban are actually an ISI trained group that emerged in Pakistan after the Soviets left.

The Mujahideen we trained became the government of Afghanistan and later the Northern Alliance when Kabul fell to the Taliban.

The NID will allow them to have a voice. Right now we can't tell the Pashtuns from Pakistan or Pashtuns from Afghanistan apart. The NID is specifically for Afghan citizens. Once the system is inplace they will be able to know who is or isn't a citizen and the citizens will have influence in the government. Make no mistake though, the Afghan Islamic Republic isn't a pure democracy nor is the United States for that matter.
edit on 17/12/10 by MikeboydUS because: !




So you're saying its not the US's fault for the rise of the Taliban ..rather it was/is the Brittish?
Given nothing emerges from nothing..what was the catalyst for their rise exactly?
Brits being founders of the ISI after all, are they not somehow to be held accountable as well?

It remains (to me) that the Taliban are a 'result', they didnt just spontaneously errupt...they are a consequence of parent nations ( UK US USSR AND CHINA) dabbling in the affairs of developing nations without insight, without history, without civillian accountability or oversight....and what can I say..Mujahideen is Mujahideen - Islamic warriors/jihad fighters - regardless of their locality, the politic and who the string pullers are.

The people of Afghansitan already have a voice..they are not slaves that they need to be 'given one'....there are just too few who are willing or able to hear that voice above the noise of political and coporate interests.

In that light, I really dont feel the NID card is *for* anyone outside those political and corporate interests....and I supose only time will tell.


Rosha.



new topics




 
8
<< 1   >>

log in

join