Twilight of the Psychopaths

King Mob wrote: »

I didn't say I supported the invasion, I'm just showing that the Taliban are not exactly patriotic freedom fighters.
If the war there actually produces a more stable country with more freedoms all the better, but right now it's the very definition of a cluster****.

Fair enough, but still such ignorance remains in other countries, i know its a comparison of weak proportions, but its the same basic principle that deems women less worth than men.

Cluster**** indeed.:mad:

Nick_oliveri wrote: »

Fair enough, but still such ignorance remains in other countries, i know its a comparison of weak proportions, but its the same basic principle that deems women less worth than men.

Cluster**** indeed.:mad:

I most definitely agree. Hopefully some education about equality will take root in some of the more closed countries, and hopefully women will be treated as equals everywhere. But hey, I'm an optimist.

But invading the countries because they do not recognize women's rights ain't a great idea.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

maybe not now, since the decadent westerners have poisoned the minds f the people with notions of 'Freedom'

So every Afghani person approved of the horrible stuff the Taliban was doing? Actual human rights are a threat to their culture?
What exactly are you saying?

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OK Apartheid was a system in place in america up til about 50 years ago, they have Gitmo where torture is allowed, they do extraordinary Rendition.

that suggst to me a culture where human life is given very little value

Well given Bush's abysmal approval rating it would suggest that the bad stuff governments do is not necessarily the will of the people and says absolutely nothing about their culture.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OK you dont want to change the culture, but you do want to oust the Fundies, the same fundamentalists that it was perfectly reasonable to have over for dinner a year earlier.

Yea because business is business to certain governments. Doesn't mean I think is the right thing to do, just means it happens.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Bollox, absolute Bollxology, Oh wait I forgot Afghanistan has one of the largest MilitaryIndustrial complexes in the world

Oh wait I forgot you dismiss any evidence that contradicts your worldview.
And that the media is part of the NWO.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Relationship_with_Osama_bin_Laden

http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9902/13/afghan.binladen.02/index.html

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Seriously who are the terrorists in Afghanistan,

the peasent farmer defending his home with an AK47 left over from when they kicked the **** out of teh Soviets.

or the invading American mercenary hell bent on destroying their way of life and everything that they hold dear

The ones who the Taliban supply and make attacks at home and aboard.
Oh and the ones the Taliban hid and protected for extradiction, famous guy, has a beard, Osama something.

But tell me where exactly is the patriotism in destroying your own country's history, or banning things like kite flying?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Prohibitions_on_culture

Where's the patriotism in treating your women like property?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_treatment_of_women

Or massacres?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban#Ethnic_massacres_and_persecution
These are not the actions of patriots but actions of religious zealots trying to impose their beliefs and laws through voilence and horrible abuses of human rights.

And I did mention that I didn't think the Americans where squeaky clean either right?
Or are you just trying to make another strawman?

Mahatma coat wrote: »

and exactly what did the Talibanfinance the Terrorists with? if you Follow the money it leads back to Saudi Arabia

Money? Old Soviet weapons? Diplomatic protection? http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/meast/9902/13/afghan.binladen.02/index.html

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Money ? --- From The Saudis

Or from opium production?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taliban_insurgency#Financial_support

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OLD Soviet Weapons ? yeah like the Talliban didnt buy a ****load of guns off the Americans when they were still friendly to them.

Yea they could sell those as well. I don't remember saying the Americans didn't have deals with the in recent history. In fact I'm sure I mentioned they did.

Mahatma coat wrote: »

Diplomatic Protection, yeah I think I'll go and get me some diplomatic Protection From Kim Jong Il 11

Did you actually read the link I provided?
Where it said the Taliban gave diplomatic protection to Osama bin Laden?

Still waiting for you to explain how denying peoples right is an act of a patriot.

Diogenes wrote: »

Mahatma this is the universal declaration of human rights as adopted by the UN, while yes I can see that the Bush administration has breached many of these, the Taliban have breached far more.

Ok, im going to Guantanamo this thread up!

On 10 June 2006, three detainees were found dead, who, according to the Pentagon, "killed themselves in an apparent suicide act".Prison commander Rear Admiral Harry Harris claimed this was not an act of desperation, despite prisoners' pleas to the contrary, but rather "an act of asymmetric warfare committed against us"

On 19 May 2002, a U.N. panel said that holding detainees indefinitely at Guantánamo violated the world's ban on torture and that the United States should close the detention center

The UN doing its job there, a joke.
Detention centres that hold innocent prisoners and "collateral damage" of the two "wars" breed hatred, religious and non religious insurguncy and we will see more and more. This is indefinate, and as soon as Barrack comes in with his new policies hes going to realize that he'll have to do a lot more to quell these manufactured "terrorists".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abdallah_Salih_al-Ajmi

As of August 2003, at least 29 inmates of Camp Delta had attempted suicide in protest. The U.S. officials would not say why they had not previously reported the incident. After this event the Pentagon reclassified suicides as "manipulative self-injurious behaviors" because it is alleged by camp physicians that detainees do not genuinely wish to end their lives

Supporters of the detention argue that trial review of detentions has never been afforded to prisoners of war, and that it is reasonable for enemy combatants to be detained until the cessation of hostilities.

"Indefinately" is what they are saying there. War on Drugs/War on Terror.

One of the justifications offered for the continued detention of Mesut Sen, during his Administrative Review Board hearing, was:
"Emerging as a leader, the detainee has been leading the detainees around him in prayer. The detainees listen to him speak and follow his actions during prayer."

Diogenes wrote:

You mean like the freedom to drink alcohol, go to school, work, travel by yourself, fly kites, listen to music, practice different religions, oh no wait the Taliban proscribed all of the above on pain of death.

There is not much difference, both have broken international law and have murdered, detained and tortured inncocent people for a grudge. Not all GITMO detainees are inncocent mind you. But in a climate of lies how are to know whos telling the thruth.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp

Not really, Barack and his Administration can close what they want. The damage is done. I do not want you to defend anything. The question i posed was whos breeding them. Jihad is just one of the options that they can turn to when they have been tortured, detained or have their families killed etc. There is also insurgency and other options. The hatred is extended and multiplied.

Really it can just get worse. Excuse my grammar and spelling.

Diogenes wrote: »

And now the damage isn't ? it's going to be undone. Thatcher did horrendous things to irish republicans Blair managed to heal these wounds.

How do you propose to undo the damage dealt to innocent people who were caged up and tortured even minutley for years?

Or apologise to the people who lost children, parents etc? Is there a list of the people that collaterral damage affected? What to do? Send a letter of condolance?

I know i HAARP on about these two things but they are not to be ignored and they are a real manufactured threat that (IMO) are not realistically fixable. (even by Obama....)

And what about those taliban who weren't detained punished or had their families killed. I mean the Taliban were in existence before the US arrived, and fought the soviets in the 80s, and continued existing throughout the 90s when no one was attacking them.

They matter too. Its the new generation or coming one that will matter more.
Theres being upset at the GWB administration which im sure we can all proudly admit to, and theres also a general hatred towards western peoples and western influence and ways.

Never let logic, reality or the facts on the ground alter your worldview nick.

It is logical that if you cage a man up or **** up his family that he (or some will) want revenge. People ignore this. And the existing insurgents will get more recruits or easily manipulate them.

yes. yes it is. But blaming one side for this cycle is narrow minded.

I can see how you would have assumed i was blaming one side. I am not.

Yes it can, can you imagine what would happen to the women who took positions of power once the taliban got back in power?

They probably wouldn't last long. Hell look at Benazir Bhutto.

The only hadith relating to female political leadership is Sahih Bukhari 5:59:709, in which Muhammad is recorded as saying that people with a female ruler will never be successful

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam
Lawd, im goin Wiki crazy these days.

Edit: i just had to laugh at this one:

The status of women's testimony in Islam is disputed. Some jurists have held that certain types of testimony by women will not be accepted. In other cases, the testimony of two women can equal that of one man ( although Quran says 2 women and 2 male are needed but if a male cannot find another male he may carry this testimony out himself

Mahatma coat wrote: »

OK if you thinks its ok to oust the Talliban from power and install yer own puppet regieme, then you are obliged to invade China, Saudi Arabia, North Korea, Zimbabewe......... basicly all the places that are screwed up acording to this enlightened world view, you cant just pick and choose the soft targets.

No one is saying that ousting the Taliban was the best thing to do. Only that it happened.
What we're saying is that it is disingenuous to call such an oppressive regime like the Taliban patriotic or to call them freedom fighters.

But tell me aren't Zimbabwe, Saudi Arabia, North Korea and China all abusing human rights badly? Or is it ok be cause it's their culture.

What? I answered your question. Its obvious that im drawing comparisions between sexist regimes.

I thought we were talking about sexism. Shiit i must be in the wrong thread.