I refer to XYZ's 'Disappointed with PM's stand on terrorism', (Oct 2). The writer expresses his disappointment with Dr Mahathir Mohamad for not sending troops to Afghanistan to fight against this 'crime against humanity' and 'radical Islam'.

But we must first determine whether the war against Afghanistan is justified. Unless it is proven that the Taliban government assisted in the terror attacks, America cannot declare war with the country.

So far, America has only gathered evidence to show that Osama and his alliance are responsible for the terror attacks. Why then should the country and thousands of innocent Afghans pay for the crime of a few individuals?

If you follow the news, it is obvious that America is bent on a revenge. First, it tries to involve a country (which harbours terrorists) so that this war can be fought like a conventional war, against a country instead of an organisation.

Second, it refuses to show 'compelling evidence' to Taliban as it does not recognise its legitimacy. If America did not recognise Taliban, why did it bother to ask the government to hand over Osama in the first place?

Thus, in accordance with the law, the Taliban has every right to view the evidence. It has also said that it will hand over Osama if there is strong proof. If a war can be averted by showing these compelling evidence to the Taliban, why does America not do so?

One guess is that the government wants to appease to American's wishes of having a war. Given the weakness of America's case, a war will infuriate the Islam extremists even more and this will lead to more of such terror attacks.