It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Afghanistan: The War for Girls

page: 5
15
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   
reply to post by Bunker or Bust
 


And the Taliban created a place for these Muslim radicals to congregate, and hatch their plans to terrorize the world. Should we fail to wipe out the Taliban, and they succeed in re-taking Afghanistan, then once again it will be a refuge for terrorists.

Is this what you want?




posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 07:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Mikeyy
WOW, that is pretty selfish of you, I knew thats how you people saw things.


A few questions:

I'm I wrong? Who is "You people?"


What happens to the people of Afghanistan is the question, but you obviously don't give a damn.


I think 8 years is enough. Will it be a fight? Sure, but it would be anytime we left. I probably would have been smarter to crush their wills before we started trying to squeeze blood from a political stone over there.


You are up in arms because American Bombs kill women and children, but when Obama pulls out, and the Taliban Storms in, Kills the government, and continues its Crimes against humanity, that, according to your kind, the Taliban are ALLOWED to commit because it is their beliefs.


You seem to have labeled me, although not defined what exactly I am. I'm almost positive you have it wrong.

You act as if the Taliban huge well organized military with loads of high tech weaponry that no normal citizenry could hope to even slow. If the people want them to stay gone, they will stay gone.


You see, Suddenly my Warmonger ass is the humanitarian, and YOU are the oppressor. You my friend, doomed those people, not I.


I oppress no one, nor do I advocate it. We went in there to punish and destroy those who attacked us, no be their pals and force them to abandon cultural and religious idiocy in a short period of time to make them a dark-skinned USA.

It would be one thing if we wanted to do things properly, but we don't and won't.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 08:06 AM
link   
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 



I oppress no one, nor do I advocate it.


But you do support those who seek to oppress everyone.


We went in there to punish and destroy those who attacked us, no be their pals and force them to abandon cultural and religious idiocy in a short period of time to make them a dark-skinned USA.


What kind of ludicrous nonsense is this? We are not the Spanish Conquistadors. We aren't asking them to change their religion, start wearing cowboy boots and worshiping Elvis or something.

Our goal in Afghanistan is to establish a government with enough stability to resist being taken over by Islamic radicals and turned back into a international host for extremist to hatch plans and train people to terrorize the world.

How hard is this to understand?

Seriously dude, seek out de-programming. You are talking nonsense.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 08:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
But you do support those who seek to oppress everyone.


This is an example of infantile reasoning, displayed often and wrong as many times as it's used.

It's similar to you saying that because I disagree with prostitution being illegal, that I support everyone getting AIDS. Being against one perceived side does not suggest, imply, or express support for another.


What kind of ludicrous nonsense is this? We are not the Spanish Conquistadors. We aren't asking them to change their religion, start wearing cowboy boots and worshiping Elvis or something.


I'd say we are, as that's what's necessary to actually have any change take hold. They must cull the radicals from their own ranks or it won't get done.

I support punishment for attacks, not occupation. You'd be hard pressed to create something that took the western world hundreds of years to evolve to in that environment.


Our goal in Afghanistan is to establish a government with enough stability to resist being taken over by Islamic radicals and turned back into a international host for extremist to hatch plans and train people to terrorize the world.


Obviously, but will it work and is it worth it?


How hard is this to understand?


It's not hard to understand, it's hard to do in that region of the world.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 09:38 AM
link   
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 


Somehow you think your penchant for gross exaggeration passes for intelligence.

Making excuses for terrorist is supporting terrorists. Your gross exaggeration can not hide this clear point.

If they could cull the radicals from their own ranks, we wouldn't have had to go there in the first place.

Will occupation work? Not as quickly as microwave popcorn, as you seem to desire.

It has worked before, and it can be made to work again, but it does take sustained effort.

Is it worth it? Seriously, you have to ask this?

Is it worth it to put rapists in jail? After all, it is so expensive!



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 10:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Bunker or Bust
 


Bin Laden is a Yemeni with a Saudi mother. He is a perfect examples as to why this gigantic love of ink borders on paper to define bondaries that don't matter is so ridiculous.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 10:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b
Somehow you think your penchant for gross exaggeration passes for intelligence.


That's the pot calling the kettle black now isn't it? I'm just playing your game friend.


Making excuses for terrorist is supporting terrorists. Your gross exaggeration can not hide this clear point.


List the "excuses" I've made for terrorists.


If they could cull the radicals from their own ranks, we wouldn't have had to go there in the first place.


They can, and with enough pressure they will do it themselves. Saying they can't is both a cop out and rather insulting to them. If only a small percentage of them are extreme radicals, I'd say the numbers just don't support your side of things.


Will occupation work? Not as quickly as microwave popcorn, as you seem to desire.


I don't desire it at all really. I support total war and total war only. The Vietnam style Limited War model is garbage, has yet to really work well in any major conflict, and doesn't get the job done.


It has worked before, and it can be made to work again, but it does take sustained effort.

Is it worth it? Seriously, you have to ask this?


Two points:

1) Yes it has worked before, but the conditions are very different. I think you'd have a hard time making a comparison between post-ww2 germany or japan with afghanistan both in terms of the approach to the war and the approach to the rebuilding.

2) I ask if it's worth it, but perhaps I should have been more specific.

Is it worth the cost by conducting the "war" (which should have been over long ago) in this manner?



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by blueorder
not my business, not my country- China doesn't permit another party other than the communist party, countless African nations indulge in barbarity that would make Afghanistan look quite advanced


You nailed it there!

US should also declare war on more than half of africa where thousands and millions of women get raped and abused constantly.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 12:17 PM
link   
Yes, that's very funny.

Brutality is not a cultural trait. People just pretend it is to get away with it - or not doing something about it.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 12:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aeons
Yes, that's very funny.

Brutality is not a cultural trait. People just pretend it is to get away with it - or not doing something about it.


I disagree, in part. I would submit that brutality can be, but isn't limited to, a cultural trait. It depends on the culture.

Culture, especially religious culture, can be very hard to change. Not only because it is potentially risky and dangerous, but also because it could (and probably would) greatly alter daily life.

I would say fear is a bigger motivating factor than indifference.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 01:42 PM
link   
www.worldpublicopinion.org...

Seems like afghan people support western forces. I am not surprised, after what they had to endure with taliban.
We cannot leave them alone in their struggle.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 


NO, you continue to play your own game of distortion and denial.

List of excuses you have made for terrorists:


I oppress no one, nor do I advocate it. We went in there to punish and destroy those who attacked us, no be their pals and force them to abandon cultural and religious idiocy in a short period of time to make them a dark-skinned USA.

The question, is why are they doing it.

The fact remains that terrorism isn't something that suddenly appeared. Muslims being savages isn't anything new either. Horrible human rights conditions is the norm for the vast majority of human history.

Empire is what you suggest. A global government/police force is what you suggest we man, run, fund, and take the heat for in complete disregard for anyone but what we think is the right way to do things.

That's debatable. Did we attack Russia when they were in there, or did we facilitate those who did? Either way, their ability to hurt us is still rather small.

It's not possible to wipe out an enemy unless you kill every man woman and child.

Then again, I think it'd be a good idea (under your model) to eliminate Islam entirely. They have a different system of morality, so they must be exterminated yes?

How deep, exactly, was the cause for this war? Not very.


Everyone of these statements make the same case, we should leave the Taliban alone to do what they want. We shouldn't try to make them into us, why are they doing it (as if they have a legitimate reason), terrorism is their culture, you advocate empire in complete disregard for anyone, they can't really hurt us (poor babes we shouldn't be picking on them), we would have to kill their women and children, they have a different system of morality, they didn't harm us badly enough to justify this war.

Those are the excuse you offer in support of the Taliban.

The Vietnam style confrontation did not work, but nation rebuilding has. Not only was it successful in Germany and Japan, but S Korea as well. That is a 75% success rate, which is pretty good considering the difficulty. I thought these invasions in the Middle East were a bad idea because I didn't think we could succeed, but we have succeed fairly well so far, so there is no logical reason for pulling out now.

Iraq is starting to look like it can stand on its own, despite considerable effort by foreign invaders to destabilize Iraq's new government. It is a long ways from being a solid democracy, but it has potential. I think given the opportunity, a Middle East Nation can succeed at democracy with help from the west.

In reality, radical Islam most likely fears a democracy in the Middle East more than anything, because it shows that the people of the Middle East do not have to live in fear of the radicals.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 09:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

List of excuses you have made for terrorists:


I oppress no one, nor do I advocate it. We went in there to punish and destroy those who attacked us, no be their pals and force them to abandon cultural and religious idiocy in a short period of time to make them a dark-skinned USA.


Yes, this is not a statement about them, but about the US and how we should be conducting foreign policy.

So, wrong on this one.


The question, is why are they doing it.


This is not an excuse, it's a question, one which you failed to answer.


The fact remains that terrorism isn't something that suddenly appeared. Muslims being savages isn't anything new either. Horrible human rights conditions is the norm for the vast majority of human history.


I'd say this is condemnation. I'm surprised you picked basic history as some kind of excuse.


Empire is what you suggest. A global government/police force is what you suggest we man, run, fund, and take the heat for in complete disregard for anyone but what we think is the right way to do things.


Again, speaking about the US role in the world does not infer anything about any other group. Really poor job so far.


That's debatable. Did we attack Russia when they were in there, or did we facilitate those who did? Either way, their ability to hurt us is still rather small.


A valid point you missed. Terrorism, globally, has not achieved any major success and it will continue to fail.

Find them, kill them or put them on trial. If another nation attacks us, incinerate them. Nothing more is really needed, and your advocating global war on countless nations, people, and beliefs won't make things better.


It's not possible to wipe out an enemy unless you kill every man woman and child.


This is true and not possibly considered an excuse by even the most casual of observers.


Then again, I think it'd be a good idea (under your model) to eliminate Islam entirely. They have a different system of morality, so they must be exterminated yes?


Seems like what you are trying to say. Please remember, you are the one advocating global conquest.


How deep, exactly, was the cause for this war? Not very.


You said it was deep and far reaching. I'm saying it was pretty simple.

1) They are religious nuts.
2) They disagree with us.
3) They feel they have some issue with our intrusive nature
4) They don't like us killing them


Everyone of these statements make the same case, we should leave the Taliban alone to do what they want. We shouldn't try to make them into us, why are they doing it (as if they have a legitimate reason), terrorism is their culture, you advocate empire in complete disregard for anyone, they can't really hurt us (poor babes we shouldn't be picking on them), we would have to kill their women and children, they have a different system of morality, they didn't harm us badly enough to justify this war.

Those are the excuse you offer in support of the Taliban.


Let's clear this up, since you seem to be confused between me telling you that your line of thinking is grossly over the line and out of step with America's foundation and the average man on the street

and

me suggesting we should leave the poor Taliban alone.

The former is true and the latter is your desire to shift away from your untenable position by applying ridiculous things to me.


The Vietnam style confrontation did not work, but nation rebuilding has. Not only was it successful in Germany and Japan, but S Korea as well. That is a 75% success rate, which is pretty good considering the difficulty.


No, we are using the same tactics in these wars as in Vietnam generally, but we've added nation building.

In Germany and Japan, we finished the fighting first.


I thought these invasions in the Middle East were a bad idea because I didn't think we could succeed, but we have succeed fairly well so far, so there is no logical reason for pulling out now.


I did too, and still do. There are more than one way to do things. Ceasing the war as it stands now does not mean you have to drop the ball entirely.


Iraq is starting to look like it can stand on its own, despite considerable effort by foreign invaders to destabilize Iraq's new government. It is a long ways from being a solid democracy, but it has potential. I think given the opportunity, a Middle East Nation can succeed at democracy with help from the west.


Perhaps, I don't think we'll be out of there for a long time, and even then terrorists can still come from there to attack us. That's the thing about terrorism, it works and it's generally low profile and low cost.


In reality, radical Islam most likely fears a democracy in the Middle East more than anything, because it shows that the people of the Middle East do not have to live in fear of the radicals.


Somehow I doubt that. Religion is something that supersedes worldly concerns.

They sure haven't cared much for French law, or British law, or even American law. John Adams cautioned us not to go looking for foreign dragons to slay, and it's wise advise.

My foreign policy ideas would work, as intended. At the end of the day, the American government's job is to protect American lives.

period.



posted on Jan, 13 2010 @ 10:36 PM
link   
When the foreign dragon breathes fire upon you, it behooves you to find a way to make sure that it doesn't.

Too many to kill all the dragons. Too spread out to find the all. Too expensive to fight them all the time. Too stupid to feel pain. Too bored to not enjoy another go anyways. Screwing up their nests only leads to temporary alleviation, and then their dragonettes grow up knowing your smell.

Tame the dragon. It is the only long term solution you have.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 01:56 AM
link   
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 


You are so predicable is pathetic.


I oppress no one, nor do I advocate it. We went in there to punish and destroy those who attacked us, no be their pals and force them to abandon cultural and religious idiocy in a short period of time to make them a dark-skinned USA.



Yes, this is not a statement about them, but about the US and how we should be conducting foreign policy.


We are trying to force them to abandon culture? No, we are trying to force them to stop committing atrocities, You are attempting to justify their atrocities as culture, which is defending the acts of the Taliban in a very freakish way.


The question, is why are they doing it.


This is not an excuse, it's a question, one which you failed to answer.


There is no legitimate answer. Why ask the question except to claim there must be some justification for committing their atrocities, in order for you to pretend you have some unrevealed reason to support these atrocities.

You are in fact suggesting that we should leave the poor Taliban alone by claiming that their actions are a matter of culture, and our actions are out of pure selfishness.

Terrorism only works when we listen to people like you who want to demonize those seeking to end atrocities while attempting to justify those atrocities by claiming they are justified by cultural beliefs.

When you stop trying to pretend that said atrocities are justified by culture, and stop trying to demonize those people trying to end those atrocities, then you will be on the road to realizing why what we are doing in Afghanistan is right.

Until then you come off as a fool without a moral compass.

edit to correct a sentence within a few moments of posting.


[edit on 14-1-2010 by poet1b]



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 02:49 AM
link   
reply to post by poet1b
 


To foreign eyes the American culture might be seen as oppressive towards others and that shocking things happen. It's about differences and perspective, you have yours and fail to look at anything from any other angle.

Not many places in the world have metal detectors and security at schools you know.. And you "send" your children to an environment which requires that?!? See how it works?



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:51 AM
link   

Originally posted by poet1b

You are so predicable is pathetic.


I was about to say the same thing about you.

Anyway, I grow tired of you trying to extrapolate meaning from things that don't mean what you say.

You have spent this entire time, rather than addressing the main point of contention between us, and spent it trying to manipulate my words. Failing, but still trying.

You have some very trollish tactics, but I'll leave you with some clarity.

Your ideas should never gain any traction, and if they do it will be a sad day for America. My foreign policy ideas work as intended, however your intentions greatly exceed the bounds of the job of the federal government.

The government has no authority to police the world.

I disagree with current foreign policy. It's wasteful and this invasion method is not necessary to protect America. You fall into the thinking (very left vs right at that) that there is only 2 ideas (it seems). Fight the war on terror as we are now or cower in a corner.

Neither is a good idea. I could care less about the Taliban or why they did anything. I never have. I vote to demolish those who attack us or those who assist in it. Nothing more.

It's punishment and retribution, not rehabilitation.

As to culture, it's a matter of reading some history to know that Muslims have been carrying out this sort of bloodshed among themselves, to others, and for every reason under the sun. That is not an excuse but a fact.

One that must be dealt with rationally rather than going to the extreme and saying we should invade every nation that has a less than democratic government.

There, done. Unless you'd like to have a formal debate so others can arbitrate, I'm done with this.

Enjoy,
KJ



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 07:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Bunker or Bust
reply to post by poet1b
 


To foreign eyes the American culture might be seen as oppressive towards others and that shocking things happen. It's about differences and perspective, you have yours and fail to look at anything from any other angle.

Not many places in the world have metal detectors and security at schools you know.. And you "send" your children to an environment which requires that?!? See how it works?


I would disagree that it's complete relativism. I would agree in terms of symbols, like the American flag or a swastika.

Very few cultures would judge our culture to be oppressive domestically, and if they did they would be more liberal than ours and generally lack the moral weight to really do anything.

There is a defined difference between culture and policy. I wouldn't apply the Bush policy to our American culture. Historically, it contradicts the majority or our cultural beliefs in terms of politics although that impression could be given.

I understand your point, but I think it's slightly off. There is wiggle room to be sure, but it's not completely subjective.

I also think the greater point is about authority, responsibility, and right.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 10:46 AM
link   
reply to post by Bunker or Bust
 


Sorry, but no, I have a much broader perspective than realize. I live in Silicon valley, one of the most diverse areas on the planet. I talk to people from all areas of the planet.

Most people, and that is a big majority, think the actions of Islamic radicals is wrong.

Most people think something should be done to stop terrorism.

If you bothered to broaden your perspectives, you would be surprised how many people, even from the Middle East, support U.S. military action in these nations that host terrorist groups. I would say a majority, a clear majority, of people support military intervention in countries that sponsor terrorism.

Metal detectors only exist is a few schools in the U.S., typically where there is a great deal of gang activity. We don't have any local schools with metal detectors that I know of.



posted on Jan, 14 2010 @ 12:03 PM
link   
reply to post by KrazyJethro
 


Actually, my ideas are essentially how U.S. foreign policy is currently being ran. All I am doing is pointing out how the U.S. is justified in its actions, and how and why it is working.

Your foreign policy concepts are completely unrealistic and poorly thought out. Exactly how are we supposed to demolish those who attack us? Are we supposed to go in and wipe out the entire population of a nation that attacks us with terrorist methods? Yeah, that would be really smart, no doubt that would gain us allies.

If you honestly read anything about the history of Islam than you would realize that your outdated concepts on foreign policy will never work in combating the type of offensive that Islam practices. We need to fight fire with fire, which means restricting their religious practices in any arenas where they are used in an attempt to dominate our cultural identity. This does not mean we have to change their culture, only that we have the right to defend our own.

Nobody here is talking about invading every country that has a less than democratic government. That was essentially the policy of the Reagan admin., in their effort to ramp up the cold war. That is an extremely expensive foreign policy, that is the main reason we have such a huge government debt and an unrealistically oversized U.S. military.

The reason we failed in Vietnam is because they pursued a policy which you advocate of total destruction. The people of the U.S. simply will not allow such our soldiers to become worse than the enemy, and all that does is increase the numbers of our enemy, by making everyone our enemy.

The reason we are succeeding in Afghanistan is because we are making the effort to distinguish between those who are not our enemies, and those who are. The way things seem to be playing out, is that when we make an effort to make allies among the people where we are fighting, we have far greater chances of success in rooting out the radicals.

The key to success is to find out what works, and what does not, and to learn from your mistakes and successes. Essentially, application of the scientific process.

Whether or not you want to recognize it, people are concerned about what is right and what is wrong, and much of the debate is mainly concerned with right and wrong concepts.

People want to claim that there is some cultural justification for the actions of the Taliban, and that is simply nonsense, and any examination of this claim clearly proves this.

When you look at this concept from the perspective of right and wrong, from a moral perspective, this is a war for girls. The main purpose of radical Islam is to control the girls, so they can control them as women, and subjugate them.

In the cultural side of this war, we should never stop reminding people that the way radical Islam treats women is horrendous, and unacceptable.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join