The dripping sarcasm sets a serious, yet questioning tone to the audience about American soldiers’ true purpose lying within Afghanistan borders. The author starts off with the statement that reads, “Why we can’t leave Afghanistan – yeah sure, we’ve achieved nothing, trashed the country and possibly put ourselves in more danger and lost too many of our own in the process as well, but don’t be too selfish as to believe that we can just leave, oh no, we have to stay and protect the poor, pitiful Afghan women (and yes, that is the sound of sarcasm you year dripping off those words).” The sound of sarcasm creates an atmosphere in which the audience can question the true purpose why the precious lives of American troops are at risk in such terrible conditions. The author states, that “we’ve achieved nothing, trashed the country and possibly put ourselves in more danger”, which is arguably true into some extent. On the contrary, she states the fact that the presence of US military forces are not risking their lives and wasting their money to help poor pitiful Afghan women. The tone somehow points the flaws written in the Time magazine article, where the readers cannot detect and correlations between women rights and the war, hence convincing the public that this article is not keen about real issues at hand.
The author expresses her anger towards Time’s attempt to make an excuse of women as a reason for the soldiers in Afghanistan to stay through her diction and sentence style. After boldly stating that the American troops are not in Afghanistan for women issues, she asks the audience to “Imagine instead of contributing to the violence in Afghanistan that further harms women” we were to actually help and give sustainable support and humanitarian aids to the Afghanistan people. She asks us to “Imagine if we had taken the billions of ‘reconstruction’ funds that are unaccounted for in Iraq” and gave that money to organizations that passionately tries to get involved in rebuilding and strengthening the development of both countries. The word “imagine”, which is defined as “believe something unreal or untrue to exist or be so”, is frequently used when one thinks of a pleasant future or a happy outcome. Hence, by using this word in her argument in attempt to convince that the US government is spending money on the wrong reasons, she also subtly makes the readers think that her opinion on this argument will bring true happiness to all nations at hand. Also, at the end of the article, a strong statement is made saying, “Oh wait, then we couldn’t use the women excuse to continue and fund the military industrial complex. Enough already, women are not an excuse for militarism and war.” Her style of writing and use of dictions such as ‘oh wait’ and ‘enough already’ displays the author’s ire towards the Time magazine and their deceptive schemes. She somehow arranges a convincing, yet unsmiling tone again to the readers and attempts to shine the spotlight at the lies and excuses Time has made in their recent article. She also shows her care and interest of women’ rights by stating that “women are not an excuse for militarism and war”, which carries the idea into the audience that the Feminist Peace Network is a legit organizations which tries their best to maintain peace between feminisms and world issues. She also subtly illustrates the audience that they are not an “excuse”, hence saying that Time is treating women as if they are scapegoats to worlds’ issues.
The Feminist Peace Network creates a chain of flaws and illogical statements from the Time Magazine’s article of What Happens If We Leave Afghanistan by depicting the aftermath of the war at this present day, and also using resounding style of dictions, language, and other literary devices. The author explores what the real reason is behind the war in Afghanistan, and tackles the realistic views and purposes of the soldiers within that country. The true purpose of the soldiers staying in Afghanistan with their heads on the line, actually does vary among others; whether it is women rights, money, or moral ethics, everyone’s priorities are dissimilar. Nonetheless, as stated from the article, women should not be the excuse, reason, purpose or a scapegoat for militarism and war; they should be nothing but strong individuals just like others.
by
yaewhan (student)
