Afghanistan all over again - or why you shouldn't play with guns

I really had a hard time on chosing my topic today. The news, the papers, conversations with family and friends all spin around Lybia, Syria, Japan, Sweden's engagement in Lybia, .... and in the middle of all that, a member of the Swedish parliament tells us that refugees hiding in sweden (even children) should not get any help: no school, no care, nothing.

Well, I could discuss SD's Åkesson (right wing party leader), but I just feel that my time and my thoughts are too precious to waste on his statements.

Then we have Syria. In the morning there was just one headline, no explaining text, in one of the Swedish biggest papers: Syrian government will resign today. No more, no less. So, media has not received any information on Srian status in the last couple of days, but they know that the Syrian President will kick his administration? Tonight, the Swedish people had for the very first time the possibility to read about the pro-syrian demonstrations, but (!) with a hint that those demonstrations were kind of fake. Why did not anyone question the earlier protests against the Syrian regime? Why did not anyone check if there were only Syrians protesting or if there were other forces in action? Well, I leave this question to the Swedish and International media to answer but assume that I will have to wait for eternity for a reply.

Last, but not least, the Swedish decision to send own planes to Lybia to help Nato in their effords to help the Lybian rebellions. USA's Obama Barack even talks about putting weapon into the rebellions hands to help them against Ghaddafis violence. Is it just me or is this like a dejà vu? Could someone please remind the American president, Nato, FN and everyone else who believes in this strange idea, that this could give the rest of the world a real hangover. Think: Afghanistan. Talibans getting weapon to fight against the Sovjet. And what happened then? Did not the US point out Talibans as the worst enemy in their fight against terror?

Ok, just let us think: we give away guns into rebellions' hands, we give them all Nato power to fight Ghaddafi and his supporters (and YES, those are people too!), we support all of the anti-Ghaddafi movement. But do we know who we support? Do we know if those rebellions actually will be better to their people than Ghaddafi has been? What will happen, once Ghaddafi (or al Assad in Syria, or King Abdullah of Jordan, etc) are gone? Another Iraqi fiasko? Or will we see a government supported by West that will see to West's best interests i.e. cheaper oil and gas? Is all of this a fight for peace and human rights or is it a way to secure nature's assets to our own advantage? Will the FN, Nato, Sweden be able to secure human rights in those countries after a powershift? Or will they leave the countries to fall apart as Afghanistan and Iraq?

And one last question: if all nations follow Nato-lead into a military engagement, which country will then be able to do the talk? Which country will be able to stand aside to act as neutral part to be able to help those countries on a democratic, non-military path towards freedom, democray and peace? The Swedish government has from today resigned from this post! What a pity!