Maybe if you had started this thread off with excerpts from something like the Consortium report, people would have taken you a bit more serious. But I find your presentation still suspect. You basically seem to have an agenda and seek to pick facts out to support that agenda. On the whole you seem to be an apologist for the pro-war crowd and are trying hard to show that the end justifies the means. From the same consortium report I can manipulate the data to reflect a quite different picture:
"It is important to recognize this survey was limited to relatively safe areas of
Optimism is tempered by fears that peace is only partial or temporary. Without greater attention to security and provision of basic economic and social services, this window may soon close.
Only 23% of Gardez respondents and 53% of
"People expect the government will provide basic services in the future" says Lisa Laumann, of Save the Children Federation Inc. "but some raised frustrations that they had seen little impact so far." Without tangible reconstruction progress, people feared the country would descend into anarchy again.
87% plan to vote in upcoming elections and 73% believe it will bring positive change. However, in every location, less women were willing to vote. In Gardez, only 27% of women expected to vote.Â
This is not representative of the full report either which on the whole shows progress and cautious optimism in secure and safe areas and great trepidation in the rest of the country. But it is important to note that the entire survey was conducted in secure areas only and even the less optimistic results come from areas considered ÂsecureÂ, as the foot notes indicate:
ÂTwo key facts are likely to have informed respondentsÂ high levels of confidence about security:
Â To protect respondents, NGO staff and programmes, the survey was carried out in secure areas only. Many areas of the country were already Âoff limitsÂ for many NGOs.
Â People defined security differently. Sometimes they meant a lack of fighting at that point in time, sometimes they referred to their immediate vicinity onlyÂ
So out of 31 provinces you had 8 areas where people were questioned. Not entirely representative of the country is it?
Another excerpt from the report:
Women generally felt the same level of security walking
around their village/town as men, possibly as the
boundaries of public space women are allowed to travel
in are extremely restricted. Group discussions revealed
this may also be linked to perspectives on the Taliban.
Women recognised that security was good in an abstract
sense under the Taliban, but personally felt insecure
and restricted at that time, and therefore much safer
For those of you who are interested in forming your own opinion about the survey check it out at: www.care.ca/press/pr/afghan/SpeakingoutOverview-final.pdf
Created By: Gary Nihsen