>Now tell me what the scandal is then? That our government fell over one party withdrawing their ministers, because they had an axe to grind with another minister? There was no fraud involved, no personal gains. It was a political move that is part of the political game.

Very well, I'll concede this point. Regardless of how the European press frames it.
>

>Your government has done that in the past, so that would not suprise me.
It shows the total ignorance of knowing what the options are. I don't say I disagree with the bombing of afghanistan to get osama bin laden. However the naivity to think that you can just get in to force democracy and is far beyond me.

Wrong and wrong. We have a tradition of helping former enemies rebuild (provided we win, of course). We are also trying to fix the root causes of what went wrong in Afghanistan. You can call it naive if you want, but the Taliban would have sprung back up again, as viscous as before (if not worse).

>Thats incredible naive. Many of the afghanis DON'T WANT PEACE. they DON'T WANT DEMOCRACY.

There are some that don't, same in Iraq. But there are many, many more that want nothing more than to live their lives out in peace. If we had propped one of the locals up as a new dictator, how long do you think he would have lasted? How else would you suggest a new government be formed, after we've removed the old one from the board?

To suggest that these people don't want peace, and don't deserve a chance to figure out how to govern themselves, is amazingly discriminatory.

>The success of the afghani operation highly depends on the balance between those who want peace and those who do not. And american soldiers that rape, kill and torture citizens/hostages, searching houses in the middle of the night does not win the sympathy of the citizens. Therefor you have to get a different approach.

That's an entirely different discussion.