In The True Test of Our Compassion, Steven C. Day writes, "Unfortunately, while harming the Taliban and the terrorists is proving difficult, harming the children of Afghanistan has been all too easy."

Should the United States do more to help Afghanistan and its refugees? Reply to this post to discuss.

I'd rather we'd not attack Afghanistan at all, but if Bush decides he wants to play king-maker (quite literally -- monarchy seems to be the only other feasible replacement), he best go all the way. If we take out the Taliban, we need a Marshall Plan to lift the country into a level of prosperity, not simply to prevent people from starving.

Besides the humanitarian motive, which Mr. Day outlines, two practical motives come to mind. First, it will create an undeniable sense of respect for us in the Muslim world. Being compassionate is always the best myth-breaker. Second, it is the only way to prevent fundamentalism from simply reappearing a couple of years later.

As long as the Taliban are in control our ability to be compassionate is limited.They have not been kind to aid workers and their treatment of women is barbaric.In the ideal world they would be driven from power without any civilian loss of life.While this may be impossible,we have a moral obligation to both protect civilian life and do everything possible to improve their welfare including humanitarian aid and supporting democratisation.