|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
 Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:10 am Post subject: |
 |
|
BB warbled:
| Quote: |
| I think if the Soviets had had their way with it, it would be a hell of lot more developed now, for one thing. |
Gee, sure sounds like an endorsement to me.  But as a Leftist I suppose you're used to parsing your own words and obfuscating.
| Quote: |
| As for the young lads who are sent off to fight for the ideals of awful people like yourself, I have nothing but sympathy for them. |
You clearly know nothing about the typical American soldier. We have a volunteer service and most join intending to uphold the same ideals as their commanders in the field. No need to have sympathy for them, as they don't regret service to their country. But they might pity someone of your ilk who doesn't have an inkling what duty, honor, and country signifies. And you presume far too much in believing they return with deep regrets even when maimed. I guess you haven't heard the countless stories of wounded vets wanting to return to their units, have you? Or the countless stories of parents and other families members who, while grieving their losses, are proud of what their children set out to do? No, you're more inclined to believe that all the returning vets are bitter and all their parents like Cindy Sheehan.
As for "calling for wars," people "like me" for the most part abhor them and want to avoid them if possible. We Americans didn't ask for terrorism to be brought to our shores. Lay the blame where it belongs: at the doorsteps of the Taliban insurgents, who have no interest in your heartfelt concerns or the futures of Afghan women.
Really, BB, you're beginning to sound histrionic and emotionally unstable. Take a valium and then, as Vanna White would say, "Buy a vowel and get a clue."
So go ahead and persist with the ad hominem attacks as you can't very well mount a good argument or likely much of anything else for that matter.
I'm 52, which hardly makes me an "old fogey" unless, of course, you're one of those types who engages in ageism. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Do you really believe that every Afghani accepts this extreme form of Islam? Do you believe that Islamic practices and beliefs were uniform among urban and rural Afghans alike? You are quite wrong. These guys (often financed with American tax dollars) have forced their way of life on all of Afghanistan with their bombs and guns (paid for by you), and their beatings and rapes. Before these warlords had their way, women in Kabul were often seen walking around in miniskirts. It is only in the last 30 years that Afghanistan became so radicalized. |
Before these warlords had their way....their was life under the Taliban. If, as you argue, it was better under the Soviets, then that just supports our arguments about Islam. The less people have to believe in that whacked out god of theirs, the better. Also could you name a Muslim country that has all these women walking around in mini-skirts? I'd sure like to go there. I'm in Egypt now and I don't see any of that..Oh yes once, but it was German tourist. Maybe Malaysia and Thailand are mini-skirt paradises, but only in the areas where you don't have people telling girls they have to follow Allah's commands.
Anyway you are missing the entire point...Afghanistan is FULL of religious retards who want to follow and Implement Sharia law. They may not all be uniform in their understanding of Sharia, but they do want it and that can't be good for women anyway you slice it.
The fact that you can continue to defend a religion that allows men to marry women of other religions, but does not allow women to marry non-muslims is beyond me. Hint: There is no defence of this. Muhammed was a crazy nutter who heard God inside his head and made up a bunch of laws that we shouldn't have to listen to.
Last edited by postfundie on Wed Apr 22, 2009 11:57 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 9:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
I suppose before the Americans were supporting the radical elements, Afghanistan was on her way to being the center of a muslim enlightenment. Hands up those who know anything about pre-islamic (present day) Afghanistan? Or who have actually examined what islam looked like in that part of the world before Occidental expansion. Or does muslim history start where white-guilt starts?
I can tell that big bird has been given the hard-sell to convert. I've often tricked muslims into thinking I'd like to "revert" and let them get a touch more honest and start spitting their shit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
I suppose before the Americans were supporting the radical elements, Afghanistan was on her way to being the center of a muslim enlightenment. Hands up those who know anything about pre-islamic (present day) Afghanistan? Or who have actually examined what islam looked like in that part of the world before Occidental expansion. Or does muslim history start where white-guilt starts?
. |
Mises. mises. mises. Have you learned nothing from your time here? Have you learned nothing from the astute sages of Dave's?
Here it is, distilled into point form:
If America is involved, in any way, shape or form, it is bad. In fact even when America is NOT involved, America is to blame. Everything that goes wrong in every little corner of the world is America's fault. Even those conflicts that date back before America became a country. Afghanistan? America's fault. Iraq? America's fault. Israel and the terrorists (I mean Hamas)? America's fault. The sack of Constantinople? America's fault. The fall of Troy? America's fault.
2. If something is not America's fault, it is George Bush's fault.
3. If something is neither America's fault or Bush's fault, it is the Republicans/neocons's fault.
Hope that clarifies things for you.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 22, 2009 7:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| After the Soviets left, all this was swept aside |
Right, so as soon as the foreign power left Islamists were able to fill the void and return Afghanistan to Islamic conservatism. Why were they able to do this so easily? Because outside the tiny urban and Western educated elite, there was very little support for the secular reforms you speak of. For if there were, surely there would have been a backlash against such a movement.
I do not support the previous short-sighted US intervention in Afghanistan, but to say that the US undermined a vibrant liberal Muslim democracy in the making is patently absurd. Nations such as Afghanistan enact conservative Islamic laws, because there is widespread support for such laws. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 5:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
The principle idea of Jainism is:
"Do not injure, abuse, oppress, enslave, insult, torment, torture, or kill any creature or living being."
That, taken to the extreme creates individuals wearing masks all day to be sure not to inhale and accidentally kill a bug. Imagine a Middle East where Jainism was dominant. Totally different game.
Now, take this heap of hate to the extreme:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/Quran/int/long.html
That creates exactly the behaviours we see in muslims. Frankly, I see obedient muslims and even the mythical "moderate" as suffering from an extreme mental disorder. Growing up in a muslim household is surely child abuse and will warp even the most bright kid.
Let us not be naive. The muslim world is in such disarray because it is the muslim world. Prior to Occidental expansion, when islam was violently expanding into India etc (50 million dead there?) islam was not on any path to liberalism. In fact, those little islands of "liberal" islam were quickly wiped out (for example, the actual moderate sects in Spain, who were wiped out by radicals from North Africa --- quite relevant to today, no?).
So here is what I say. Leave them alone. No (zero, zilch, nadda) migration from muslim lands to the west. Resettle muslims in the west back to the muslim world. No lecturing on human rights, no invading etc. Frankly, they will take care of themselves. If contained, they'll turn their violence on eachother. We can sit back and watch. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Given that, I wonder at how you can possibly say things like "I'm not convinced that ridding them of the Soviets was necessarily such a great thing in the end?" |
During my time in Mongolia, I was suprised to hear how much the MOngolians praised the Russians. I rather expected the opposite, but they spoke of them with good feeling, and praised them for building roads and schools etc. I'd imagined they'd been greatly resented. |
Because of your colonialist assumptions?
Yeah, I thought so.
You know who else the Mongols like? Americans. Visa on arrival. Hells yeah. We love you too, Mongolia. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Thu Apr 23, 2009 9:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mises wrote: |
| Big_Bird wrote: |
| mises wrote: |
| No, it doesn't. It makes it more likely you are, than if you are from a post-Christian European culture. |
Do you have good empirical evidence of this? There are an awful lot of western men beating up on their wives.
I would say it is now more easy to get away with it in non-Western cultures. But I'm not sure you can prove that you are more likely to be an abuser, if you are in a non-Western setting. Those womyn that you so despise, have fought hard to make our society one that does not accept any level of violence toward women. They've made good inroads, but we are not completely there yet. Men still act on their compulsions, despite our laws, and certainly, if you are a smart Western abuser, and choose the right victims, you can go on abusing for a long long time. And many western societies have still to put in place adequate means of proper and comprehensive assistance to victims hoping to leave abusive relationships. Comparing ourselves so favourably against other societies does nothing to advance our own. |
| Quote: |
The Oslo Police have over the past three years investigated 41 cases of aggravated sexual assault, which resulted in rape. All of them were carried out by non-western immigrants to Norway.
The police now urge that more efforts be put into preventive measures among men with immigrant background.
The police have investigated all reported cases of aggravated sexual assault over the past three years, and have gained a clear imprssion of the offenders:
Most of the rapists have a Kurdish or African background, NRK reports. The cases of aggravated sexual assults all have one thing in common, namely the use of gross violence. |
http://www.norwaypost.no/content/view/21900/1/
All. |
And B:
| Quote: |
| Non-Muslims aren�t the only targets of Muslim violence. A mountain of evidence suggests that the rates of domestic abuse in these enclaves are astronomical. In Germany, reports Der Spiegel, �a disproportionately high percentage of women who flee to women�s shelters are Muslim�; in 2006, 56 percent of the women at Norwegian shelters were of foreign origin; Deborah Scroggins wrote in The Nation in 2005 that �Muslims make up only 5.5 percent of the Dutch population, but they account for more than half the women in battered women�s shelters.� Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-Dutch advocate for democracy and women�s rights, would no doubt say far more than half: when she was working with women in Dutch shelters, she writes, �there were hardly any white women� in them, �only women from Morocco, from Turkey, from Afghanistan�Muslim countries�alongside some Hindu women from Surinam.� When she and filmmaker Theo van Gogh tried to highlight the mistreatment of women under Islam in the 2004 film Submission: Part I, he was killed by a young Muslim extremist. |
http://www.city-journal.org/2009/19_2_pim-fortuyn.html |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
postfundie
Joined: 28 May 2004
|
| Posted: Sat May 09, 2009 4:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bump |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 02, 2009 8:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
Good idea. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Sun Sep 13, 2009 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What is your logic? Are you telling me that men only marry small girls because of the Koran? Do you realise that child brides have always been found worldwide throughout history, Islam or no Islam? You think a man could only think of f***ing a small girl because he'd read the Koran?
What about these Aussie men holidaying in Thailand? Are they preying on hapless young girls because of the Koran? Most of these guys will be white Anglo-saxons http://au.news.yahoo.com/a/-/mp/6028616/child-sex-tourism-study-blames-aussies/
Poverty is the leading factor when it comes to child marriages, not religion.
Child marriage: What we know.
| Quote: |
Who is affected?
More than 100 million girls in the developing world will be married during the next 10 years.
Although the definition of child marriage includes boys, most children married under the age of 18 years are girls.
While the practice has decreased globally over the last 30 years, it remains common in rural areas and among the poorest of the poor.
In Southern Asia, 48%�nearly 10 million�of girls are married before the age of 18.
In Africa, 42% of girls were married before turning 18.
In Latin America and the Caribbean, 29% of girls are married by age 18. |
As you may see below, countries where child marriage is prevalent are not necessarily muslim:
| Quote: |
Child Marriage Around the World
Percentage of girls marrying before the age of 18
1 Niger 76.6
2 Chad 71.5
3 Bangladesh 68.7
4 Mali 65.4
5 Guinea 64.5
6 Central African Republic 57.0
7 Nepal 56.1
8 Mozambique 55.9
9 Uganda 54.1
10 Burkina Faso 51.9
11 India 50.0
12 Ethiopia 49.1
13 Liberia 48.4
13 Yemen 48.4
15 Cameroon 47.2
16 Eritrea 47.0
17 Malawi 46.9
18 Nicaragua 43.3
18 Nigeria 43.3
20 Zambia 42.1 |
But back to the OP, SS, how have the allied forces tackled child marriage in Afghanistan? Have they made things better? I wish it were so. And if you have any sources that suggest it is so, I would be happy to see them. Rather, the evidence I've come across is that things are the same as ever, possibly worse under some Warlords. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 12:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's an interesting commentary that relates to this thread topic:
The morality of the war on terror has now descended into viagra handouts
| Quote: |
Bribing leaders in the Afghan hinterland to take sides in the clash of civilisations is no easy task. The CIA used to offer local chiefs money for information, but then they would spend it so ostentatiously they effectively blew their own cover. Operatives used to give weapons before it turned out that the arms were being sold on and used against them.
But one day they decided that if they were going to rally the fence-sitters to the enlightenment cause they should strike below the belt. During a conversation with a chief in his 60s who had four younger wives, a CIA official pulled out a bag of Viagra. "Take one of these," he said. "You'll love it."
It was the beginning of a beautiful relationship. When the officer returned later in the week the once wary chief was all smiles and actionable intelligence. All he wanted in return was some little blue pills. "He came up to us beaming," the official told the Washington Post. "He said: 'You are a great man.' And after that we could do whatever we wanted in his area."
Another retired officer told the Post. "You didn't hand it out to younger guys, but it could be a silver bullet to make connections to the older ones." For elderly polygamous patriarchs, he explained, it could "put them back in an authoritative position".
But the line between authoritative and tyrannical in these matters in this part of the world is horrifically blurred. Recent legislation in Afghanistan, approved by the man the west put in power, in effect legalises rape in marriage. Other elements of the law make it illegal for a woman to leave home, seek work and education, or visit the doctor without her husband's permission � and she cannot refuse to "make herself up" or to "dress up" if her husband demands it. Under these circumstances handing out Viagra is a bit like bombing obscure targets from thousands of feet. The likelihood that anything good will come from it is highly remote.
It's a far cry from the days shortly before the war when Laura Bush took over her husband's weekly radio address to back the use of B-52s in the name of sex equality, and Cherie Booth railed against the Taliban from behind a burka. "For women to make a contribution they need opportunities, self-esteem and esteem in the eyes of their society," she argued. How you get from there to viagra and domestic despotism has been the warped story of the last eight years.
The grotesque contradictions between the political morality that underpins the bombing of Afghanistan and the realities of the occupation are stunning. This, lest we forget, was the respectable war. The just response. The war of necessity. The single most popular response to 9/11 � supported by 94% of Americans and 74% of Britons.
Today substantial majorities in both countries oppose it, and almost two-thirds of Americans think it is going badly � while more than half of Britons believe troops should never have been sent. It's not difficult to see why.
Just before the invasion Tony Blair delivered a series of rhetorical jabs at the charges of his critics, from the podium of the Labour party conference: "'Don't kill innocent people.' We are not the ones who waged war on the innocent. We seek the guilty. 'Look for a diplomatic solution.' There is no diplomacy with Bin Laden or the Taliban regime."
He made it sound not like war but a humanitarian mission with some strong-arm detective work thrown in.
But they have not found the guilty. And the innocent keep dying. Following the Nato air strike in Kunduz 10 days ago, bereaved civilians formed a line so that they might receive a charred corpse to call their own. "A man comes and says 'I lost my brother and cousin', so we gave him two bodies," said Omar Khan. "Another says I lost five relatives, so we gave him five bodies to take home and bury. When we had run out of bodies we started giving them limbs, legs, arms, torsos." Only five families left empty-handed.
Meanwhile, both the US and British military now concede that there can be no final settlement without involving the Taliban. In order to one day declare victory, the allies have to change the terms of what victory would mean almost every other day.
Failure in Afghanistan does not just represent a particular setback in a single war but the final unravelling of a grand narrative � the war on terror. These hostilities against an abstract noun were used not only to fight abroad but also to repress at home. In Britain the war on terror has not only curtailed our civil liberties but poisoned our racial discourse. Militarily, strategically, politically and diplomatically it has been an abject failure on its own terms. As a means of combating Islamism, facilitating democracy in the Middle East, integrating Muslims into the west and fighting terrorism it has proved not only ineffective but counterproductive. True, they have executed Saddam Hussein and toppled the Taliban (for now). But that is precious little to show for eight years of blood and treasure on this scale.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sergio Stefanuto
Joined: 14 May 2009
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 1:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Big_Bird wrote: |
Do you realise that child brides have always been found worldwide throughout history, Islam or no Islam? You think a man could only think of f***ing a small girl because he'd read the Koran? |
Well, if non-Muslim men sleep with young girls, it cannot possibly be Islam that motivates Muslim men to do the same, eh?
And, even if the blame for Muslim pedophilia can be laid at Islam's door, this phenomena can only be criticized within the context of a wider polemic on human nature, or poverty, or something, eh?
Utterly puerile
| Big Bird wrote: |
| Poverty is the leading factor when it comes to child marriages, not religion. |
Islam is to poverty what chickens are to laying eggs.
Oh, hang on. There are many poor non-Muslims, so Islam cannot possibly be responsible for any poverty! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Big_Bird
Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
| Posted: Mon Sep 14, 2009 5:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No, you are utterly puerile. You are suggesting that it is only Islam that is the cause of these 'crazy ideas.' Child brides were once very common in Manchester too...long before the muslims arrived there. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
