Withdraw from Afganisthan

Salvelinus

Jakkass wrote: »

Of what relevance is Islamic sexual ethics to this subject?

Not the ethics so much, more like the attitude towards women of hard liners.
Just remember reading this article.
http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=640

philologos

Salvelinus wrote: »

Not the ethics so much, more like the attitude towards women of hard liners.
Just remember reading this article.
http://www.johannhari.com/archive/article.php?id=640

These views have nothing to do with suicide bombing whatsoever. As for attitudes like these towards women, they happen irrespective of whether someone is "sexually repressed". I don't think suicide bombs occur because someone chooses to abstain from sexual activity until marriage. Quite a peculiar view but I'll leave you to your own devices

Manic Moran

I took it as a reference to the 72 virgins. They weren't getting 'any' in this life, so roll on the next!

NTM

Sand

Buffy, would you mind sharing your opinion of the Madrid bombers with us?

Surely the people of Spain deserved it because Spain were one of the coalition alongside Britain, the US and Australia (which makes the Bali bombing uk as well I guess as it was a nightclub used by Aussie tourists), but the difference being of course those bombers didn't have the good manners to blow themselves up.

Are those bombers terrorist scum or brave young men, or does bravery only apply if they are killing Brits?

The guy is just rattling a stick inside a bucket. I wouldnt expect him to suddenly launch a reasoned, coherent and principled argument.

Of what relevance is Islamic sexual ethics to this subject

Globalisation, mass communication, education (particularly women), human rights and mass movements of people - all these pose a huge and direct challenge to extremists and their views. An educated woman?!?!? What if they suddenly started thinking for themselves?

When you consider that we (the west, which is a conceptual terms rather than a geographical term) consider human rights to be universal, that everyone has a right to education, to intellectual freedom, freedom of speech and sexual freedom then the idea that everyone can sit down and be friends and get along seems naive. The UN and most "globalised" people expect personal freedoms, whereas extremists reject utterly the concept of personal freedoms.

Hence if you think Afghan girls should be educated, if you think they should have their human rights respected and protected, if you think they should have the option to dress how they want to dress...then you are the enemy of the Taliban. And they are not your friends. Nor should you kid yourself that peace can made with the Taliban that doesnt involve "qualifying" the idea of universal human rights.

Given the huge cultural dominance of the west ( apparently US troops found posters of Britney Spears in Iraqi bunkers that they captured...) even if the US and NATO packed up and went home tommorrow, pulled all troops out the west would still be an enemy with its dangerous ideas spreading into the Islamic world and its advocation of human rights that went against their version of Islam. We would still be the enemy. We would still be a threat. Attacks would still be rationalised and carried out, even if by only a small group of hardcore fanatics.

When that is recognied, then it comes down to a question of whether the west is worth defending or not.

Salvelinus

Jakkass wrote: »

These views have nothing to do with suicide bombing whatsoever. As for attitudes like these towards women, they happen irrespective of whether someone is "sexually repressed". I don't think suicide bombs occur because someone chooses to abstain from sexual activity until marriage. Quite a peculiar view but I'll leave you to your own devices

Sand said it better than I could. Also as a society changes/modernises it is very recognisable in women, dress sense etc

philologos

I think it's absurd to think that there is a correlation between abstinence until marriage and likelihood to blow yourself up and lack of modernisation. It's a bit of a leap in terms of logic.

Sand

I think it's absurd to think that there is a correlation between abstinence until marriage and likelihood to blow yourself up and lack of modernisation. It's a bit of a leap in terms of logic.

I didnt see where someone said that to be honest. Were talking about guys who are unable to make eye contact with women outside their family, that just isnt normal...sexual repression is a fairly accurate term for that.

Nodin

Lads, the repression of women in that culture is far from confined to the Taleban.....its by and large the norm. They just happen to the extreme face of it. Unless some one can come up with a way to stabilise the country politically with a framework that has influence outside of kabul or the range of NATO patrols (other than bringing back the Taleban) thats not going to change any time soon, regardless of the military situation.

Salvelinus

Nodin wrote: »

Lads, the repression of women in that culture is far from confined to the Taleban.....its by and large the norm. They just happen to the extreme face of it. Unless some one can come up with a way to stabilise the country politically with a framework that has influence outside of kabul or the range of NATO patrols (other than bringing back the Taleban) thats not going to change any time soon, regardless of the military situation.

I brought the women issue into it regarding nonsense comments about "brave" susicide bombers. Your right about stabilising the country, the talibans forcing of some form of law and order is what led to their increase in popularity in the first place. The problem now is that the taliban will be more influcnced by outside forces where in the past (some top level members aside) alot of the taliban couldn't care less about the outside world.

irish_bob

Sand wrote: »

The guy is just rattling a stick inside a bucket. I wouldnt expect him to suddenly launch a reasoned, coherent and principled argument.



Globalisation, mass communication, education (particularly women), human rights and mass movements of people - all these pose a huge and direct challenge to extremists and their views. An educated woman?!?!? What if they suddenly started thinking for themselves?

When you consider that we (the west, which is a conceptual terms rather than a geographical term) consider human rights to be universal, that everyone has a right to education, to intellectual freedom, freedom of speech and sexual freedom then the idea that everyone can sit down and be friends and get along seems naive. The UN and most "globalised" people expect personal freedoms, whereas extremists reject utterly the concept of personal freedoms.

Hence if you think Afghan girls should be educated, if you think they should have their human rights respected and protected, if you think they should have the option to dress how they want to dress...then you are the enemy of the Taliban. And they are not your friends. Nor should you kid yourself that peace can made with the Taliban that doesnt involve "qualifying" the idea of universal human rights.

Given the huge cultural dominance of the west ( apparently US troops found posters of Britney Spears in Iraqi bunkers that they captured...) even if the US and NATO packed up and went home tommorrow, pulled all troops out the west would still be an enemy with its dangerous ideas spreading into the Islamic world and its advocation of human rights that went against their version of Islam. We would still be the enemy. We would still be a threat. Attacks would still be rationalised and carried out, even if by only a small group of hardcore fanatics.

When that is recognied, then it comes down to a question of whether the west is worth defending or not.

excellent post , if the usa and britian pull out of afghanistan , the islamists will not rest on thier laurells , they will take the fight to where the infidel lives , thier are over a billion muslims in the world , many who live in the west , if the taliban win in afghanistan , this will further embolden muslims who live in the west and who are sympathetic to the islamists , such is thier number , we in the west must win

irish_bob

Jakkass wrote: »

I think it's absurd to think that there is a correlation between abstinence until marriage and likelihood to blow yourself up and lack of modernisation. It's a bit of a leap in terms of logic.

the point is , islamist fanatics have a warped obsession with all things sex and especially female sexuality , all religous fanatics just like all serial killers are obsessed with sex

Sand

Lads, the repression of women in that culture is far from confined to the Taleban.....its by and large the norm. They just happen to the extreme face of it. Unless some one can come up with a way to stabilise the country politically with a framework that has influence outside of kabul or the range of NATO patrols (other than bringing back the Taleban) thats not going to change any time soon, regardless of the military situation.

Of course, but the Taleban (a very loose term at the best of times) are violently hostile to development, centralisation and education of women. Others might be hostile to education ( creationists in the US for example) but so long as they arent shooting people or throwing acid in the faces of schoolgirls, thats fine. The west is not a culture where everyone agrees - its built to provide a safe place for people with very different views to co-exist, something again the Taleban and friends despise. Culture changes, the Taleban and their idealogical ilk knows this, thats why theyre attacking school teachers and schools.

Stabilising the country means NATO prescence and patrols ( security being a required first step for everything else - send in aid or government workers without security and you just end up with bodies), building up infrastructure - basically roads, the development of basic civic society and gradually passing over role and responsibility to the national government and security forces. Theres no quick fix.

ChocolateSauce

I think that if there was ever a time to leave, not is not it. Leaving now, as Pakistan is on the brink of collapse, would just provide a golden opportunity for the Taliban to return to power, possibly even with an Islamist Pakistan to the south supporting them. I think "we" should triple or quadruple the number of troops there and dig in our heels for a long occupation. I certainly wouldn't feel comfortable leaving that country until we can be sure they won't legalise marital rape, to give just one example.

Buffy the bitch

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Buffy, would you mind sharing your opinion of the Madrid bombers with us?

No problem.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Surely the people of Spain deserved it because Spain were one of the coalition alongside Britain, the US and Australia (which makes the Bali bombing uk as well I guess as it was a nightclub used by Aussie tourists), but the difference being of course those bombers didn't have the good manners to blow themselves up.

I don't think they did deserve it to be honest, but wasn't an election coming up and one party said if they won they would pull out their troops and the party did win if I'm not mistaken.

Fratton Fred wrote: »

Are those bombers terrorist scum or brave young men, or does bravery only apply if they are killing Brits?

If you read my posts on 7/7 I know I was very harsh. I do condonm them attacks. No the bravery doesn't only apply to killing brits but let's look at the over all picture. If America want's to go to war then let them why are so many British soliders dying for nothing. The war has nothin to do with them and they paid the price for 7/7, and becasue many countries supporters America they were able to attack Iraq at the same time claiming they have nukes now we know they didn't so where is the justice? The poeple behind these wars should be brought to acount.

wes

irish_bob wrote: »

excellent post , if the usa and britian pull out of afghanistan , the islamists will not rest on thier laurells , they will take the fight to where the infidel lives , thier are over a billion muslims in the world , many who live in the west , if the taliban win in afghanistan , this will further embolden muslims who live in the west and who are sympathetic to the islamists , such is thier number , we in the west must win

The Taliban were happy enough in there own little back yard. They were never a existential threat to the West. What they did was harbor Osama Bin Laden (also not a existential threat), and they are hardly the only people in the world to harbor terrorists, even the US has done so in the past.

Yes, they can kill and maim people, but topple the US, or any other western country? They simply don't have the ability.

If the "Taliban", were to win in Afghanistan, the only danger they would present is harboring groups hostile to the US, assuming they were stupid enough to do so again.

Honestly, the Taliban are not much of a threat to the West, they are however a danger to the people of Afghanistan more than anything else.

Also, I think you will find support for Osama and the Taliban have much diminished support amongst Muslims, especially after both groups engaged in a great many terror attacks against Muslims as well, for example attacks Sufi shrines in Pakistan, which has directly lead to armed Anti-Taliban militia's in that country.

The worst thing done since 9/11, was the invasion of Iraq, which was a spectacular own goal by the US. Not only did it enable Al Qaeda to capitalize on the failure to find WMD's in Iraq, and the general illegitimacy of the war, with a increase in recruitment, the US also took the eye off the ball in Afghanistan and things slowly deteriorated there and gave the "Taliban" time to make a come back. US policy in the last few years, have been a spectacular example of incompetence imho.

irish_bob

Buffy the bitch wrote: »

No problem.



I don't think they did deserve it to be honest, but wasn't an election coming up and one party said if they won they would pull out their troops and the party did win if I'm not mistaken.



If you read my posts on 7/7 I know I was very harsh. I do condonm them attacks. No the bravery doesn't only apply to killing brits but let's look at the over all picture. If America want's to go to war then let them why are so many British soliders dying for nothing. The war has nothin to do with them and they paid the price for 7/7, and becasue many countries supporters America they were able to attack Iraq at the same time claiming they have nukes now we know they didn't so where is the justice? The poeple behind these wars should be brought to acount.

actually the war in afghanistan has more to do with the uk than america , it has more to do with europe than the usa , if afghanistan is lost , it will be europe who will suffer a hell of a lot more than the usa

worldrepublic

Kev_ps3 wrote: »

wow 7 troops.. we prob have more troops on the north pole

Irish people have no right to claim that Afghanistan, or Iraq (and Pakistan now -the possibility of running a pipe-line through Afgan/Pakistan to assist in the transport of oil from neighbouring regions etc.) is not our concern. We are consuming oil and other resources from vulnerable parts of the world, just like the rest of the western world. It is scandalous for persons who are lucky enough to have the time and resources to even be able to post on an internet forum, to say "nothing to do with me mate". Try being a civilian in a war zone, worrying about where the next cup of dirty water will come from, and then you can be dismissive of the "problems" of other peoples. And by the way, there are Irish citizens serving in the British Army!

There is also the little matter of acquiescence.

philologos

irish_bob wrote: »

the point is , islamist fanatics have a warped obsession with all things sex and especially female sexuality , all religous fanatics just like all serial killers are obsessed with sex

It depends on how one defines a "warped obsession". You are coming from this with a Western notion of what is "normal". Many could argue that Westerners have a warped obsession with sex altogether, pornography being a classic example of this.

The criticism can be equally applied.

However to suggest that what people think about sexual ethics is the cause of blowing yourself up on the London Underground is absurd.

worldrepublic wrote: »

Irish people have no right to claim that Afghanistan, or Iraq (and Pakistan now -the possibility of running a pipe-line through Afgan/Pakistan to assist in the transport of oil from neighbouring regions etc.) is not our concern. We are consuming oil and other resources from vulnerable parts of the world, just like the rest of the western world. It is scandalous for persons who are lucky enough to have the time and resources to even be able to post on an internet forum, to say "nothing to do with me mate". Try being a civilian in a war zone, worrying about where the next cup of dirty water will come from, and then you can be dismissive of the "problems" of other peoples. And by the way, there are Irish citizens serving in the British Army!

There is also the little matter of acquiescence.

Good post. Most of the oil we receive is consumed at a price, the problem is the finances aren't trickling down effectively into the local communities. This post kind of highlights that we all have a social responsibility towards eachother in the world. However, sometimes finding the place to help is difficult.

irish_bob

Jakkass wrote: »

It depends on how one defines a "warped obsession". You are coming from this with a Western notion of what is "normal". Many could argue that Westerners have a warped obsession with sex altogether, pornography being a classic example of this.

The criticism can be equally applied.

However to suggest that what people think about sexual ethics is the cause of blowing yourself up on the London Underground is absurd.



Good post. Most of the oil we receive is consumed at a price, the problem is the finances aren't trickling down effectively into the local communities. This post kind of highlights that we all have a social responsibility towards eachother in the world. However, sometimes finding the place to help is difficult.

you see im not one of those who buy into the all cultures are equal bull**** , i believe that islamists are wrong on just about everything and i have zero respect for anything they hold dear

philologos

irish_bob wrote: »

you see im not one of those who buy into the all cultures are equal bull**** , i believe that islamists are wrong on just about everything and i have zero respect for anything they hold dear

Neither am I. I don't feel the West is perfect either. However, to go as far as to say that the London bombers blew themselves up because they had different views on sexual ethics is just plain absurd.

worldrepublic

Jakkass wrote: »

Neither am I. I don't feel the West is perfect either. However, to go as far as to say that the London bombers blew themselves up because they had different views on sexual ethics is just plain absurd.

---

UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT!!!
UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT!!!
UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT!!!

---

1% OF THE WORLD POPULATION CONTROLS 40% OF THE WORLD'S WEALTH! And where might that 1% live? In the "evil and dark orient"? No? In the "enlightened" west, perhaps?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Islam. Islamic fundamentalism is wrong, just like Christian fundamentalism, or Atheistic fundamentalism (the so called Enlightenment).

Fratton Fred

worldrepublic wrote: »

Irish people have no right to claim that Afghanistan, or Iraq (and Pakistan now -the possibility of running a pipe-line through Afgan/Pakistan to assist in the transport of oil from neighbouring regions etc.) is not our concern. We are consuming oil and other resources from vulnerable parts of the world, just like the rest of the western world. It is scandalous for persons who are lucky enough to have the time and resources to even be able to post on an internet forum, to say "nothing to do with me mate". Try being a civilian in a war zone, worrying about where the next cup of dirty water will come from, and then you can be dismissive of the "problems" of other peoples. And by the way, there are Irish citizens serving in the British Army!

There is also the little matter of acquiescence.

are you still banging on about this bloody pipeline being the reason the UN sanctioned intervention in Afghanistan?

Bren Jacob

An army that is used by its political masters to add legitamacy (in political circles) to a war that the world will be feeling the effects of for generations because of the radicalizing effect it is having on young disaffected muslims world wide.
Lets also not forget that before British boots hit the ground in Helmand in 06 that the province was relatively peaceful.
Its only the arrival of first the British and now the US forces that have turned the province into a war zone and displaced a large proportion of the local population.
Yep Irish citizens that one can really empathize with for sure.......

worldrepublic wrote: »

And by the way, there are Irish citizens serving in the British Army!

Salvelinus

wes wrote: »

The Taliban were happy enough in there own little back yard. They were never a existential threat to the West. What they did was harbor Osama Bin Laden (also not a existential threat), and they are hardly the only people in the world to harbor terrorists, even the US has done so in the past.

Yes, they can kill and maim people, but topple the US, or any other western country? They simply don't have the ability.

If the "Taliban", were to win in Afghanistan, the only danger they would present is harboring groups hostile to the US, assuming they were stupid enough to do so again.

Honestly, the Taliban are not much of a threat to the West, they are however a danger to the people of Afghanistan more than anything else.

Also, I think you will find support for Osama and the Taliban have much diminished support amongst Muslims, especially after both groups engaged in a great many terror attacks against Muslims as well, for example attacks Sufi shrines in Pakistan, which has directly lead to armed Anti-Taliban militia's in that country.

The worst thing done since 9/11, was the invasion of Iraq, which was a spectacular own goal by the US. Not only did it enable Al Qaeda to capitalize on the failure to find WMD's in Iraq, and the general illegitimacy of the war, with a increase in recruitment, the US also took the eye off the ball in Afghanistan and things slowly deteriorated there and gave the "Taliban" time to make a come back. US policy in the last few years, have been a spectacular example of incompetence imho.

Didn't the Taliban almost hand Bin Laden over to Saudi Arabian intelligence at one point? It was only a few of the higher level members who courted with Al Qaeda. Jason Burke gives a good overview of the relationship in his first book.

Salvelinus

worldrepublic wrote: »

---

UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT!!!
UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT!!!
UNDERSTATEMENT ALERT!!!

---

1% OF THE WORLD POPULATION CONTROLS 40% OF THE WORLD'S WEALTH! And where might that 1% live? In the "evil and dark orient"? No? In the "enlightened" west, perhaps?

There is absolutely nothing wrong with Islam. Islamic fundamentalism is wrong, just like Christian fundamentalism, or Atheistic fundamentalism (the so called Enlightenment).

Bin Laden is form one of the richest Saudi families, why doesn't he spread the wealth.

wes

Salvelinus wrote: »

Didn't the Taliban almost hand Bin Laden over to Saudi Arabian intelligence at one point? It was only a few of the higher level members who courted with Al Qaeda. Jason Burke gives a good overview of the relationship in his first book.

Yeah, I think they nearly did that. Can't remember why they didn't go through with it in the end.

wes

Salvelinus wrote: »

Bin Laden is form one of the richest Saudi families, why doesn't he spread the wealth.

I assume his accounts were frozen .

Salvelinus

wes wrote: »

Yeah, I think they nearly did that. Can't remember why they didn't go through with it in the end.

From what i remember the taliban were "impressed" with the publicity with the increase in attacks, as they felt both strains of islam were similar.

Fratton Fred

Bren Jacob wrote: »

An army that is used by its political masters to add legitamacy (in political circles) to a war that the world will be feeling the effects of for generations because of the radicalizing effect it is having on young disaffected muslims world wide.
Lets also not forget that before British boots hit the ground in Helmand in 06 that the province was relatively peaceful.
Its only the arrival of first the British and now the US forces that have turned the province into a war zone and displaced a large proportion of the local population.
Yep Irish citizens that one can really empathize with for sure.......

Normandy was pretty peaceful before the allies invaded on D-Day, Poland was fairly peaceful before Lech Walenska started Solidarity, East Germany was fairly peaceful before a load of people decided to go and jump over a stupid wall.

why not try and read up a bit about Afghanistan and ISAF before posting again.

worldrepublic

Salvelinus wrote: »

Bin Laden is form one of the richest Saudi families, why doesn't he spread the wealth.

Because he's dead! Al Qaeda (or should i say, Al CIAda) is still garnering lots of attention though. Or are you one of these people who truly believes that we are STILL trying to find Osama?! The FBI have officially stated that they removed him from their most wanted list due to "lack of evidence".

Hmmm... maybe Osama is hiding in Pakistan though? Let's invade Pakistan! Whoopee!