Afghan Leader imposes Taliban laws

Discussion in 'Current Affairs' started by finknottle, Apr 20, 2009.

Welcome to the Navy Net aka Rum Ration

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial RN website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. Why should our troops put their lives on the line for the repressive government of Afghanistan? Here we see an example of the Middle Ages mind set and total misrepresentation of the Koran being used to subjugate women. If this is what Mohammed Karzai stands for we should pull out all our troops unless he repeals this Taliban style law.

    The Independent:

    Afghanistan's President, Hamid Karzai, has signed a law which "legalises" rape, women's groups and the United Nations warn. Critics claim the president helped rush the bill through parliament in a bid to appease Islamic fundamentalists ahead of elections in August.

    In a massive blow for women's rights, the new Shia Family Law negates the need for sexual consent between married couples, tacitly approves child marriage and restricts a woman's right to leave the home, according to UN papers seen by The Independent.

    "It is one of the worst bills passed by the parliament this century," fumed Shinkai Karokhail, a woman MP who campaigned against the legislation. "It is totally against women's rights. This law makes women more vulnerable."
  2. Got to agree with you Finky, the Afghanis seem quite happy living in the middle ages and I sincerely believe that even if we stayed there another fourty years and bring them kicking and screaming into the 21st century, the moment Westerners pull out they will immediately revert back to their stone-age tribal attitudes and way of life.
  3. Taliban laws have been operating already, for some time in parts of Afghanistan and in Kahbul. Like in Iraq, gays are being killed with little or no condemnation from the international community. It is therefore rather churlish to complain now when their victims are again, women. The precident has already been established. Moreover it is difficult to see how the USA can criticise the imposition of this particular brand of Islam having spend the past 20 years imposing the Christian Right's political agenda on their own citizens and those of other countries.

    The only moral argument that until recently, have been advanced, is the West's promotion of its own beliefs in universal human rights. Last year the CofE changed this and lobbied the British Parliament hard, to replace the Christian idea of universalism first propounded by Walter Grotius, with legal particularism in domestic human rights legislation. Having conceeded universalism, there is no putting the particularist genie back into the proverbial bottle. Hard line Muslim states have spent many years lobbying in the UN for human rights particularism, arguing that the notion of universal human rights is a Christian imposition. Now that the CofE has undermined the West's own argument it cannot object to Karzai adopting a particularist, conservative Islamic interpretation of what the concept of human rights infers.
  4. Indeed but my point is why should our Armed Forces who are at the very sharp end lose their lives propping up an administration that has no respect for the rights of a large section of its people?

    Being a devout atheist religion does not come into the equation, I look upon it as applying the basic human rights to our fellow human beings. Karzai is no better than your average politician as he appears to be attempting to win the votes of the hard line Shias at the expense of women by imposing this draconian law.

    Off topic I know but Apart from the redoubtable Dennis Skinner I have yet to find a politician that I could trust further than I can spit.
  5. Dennis Skinner, that says it all really. You are indeed mad beyond all help.
  6. On the contrary the last time that I was discharged the good Doctor told me that I was as sane as the next man :) and I have the paperwork to prove it.
  7. I hate saying this; but Anthony Wedgewood-Benn has always been pretty honourable. His politics often scared or annoyed the hell out of me, though!
  8. Probably not going to like my opinion, but what the hey, I believe IMHO, they should stay the course, it is working contrary to certain media types, and why is everyone in such a rush.This is going to take time, Cyprus has taken ages and it's still not resolved officially...;)

    These "laws" are built into their psyche from generation to generation, it's not going to change overnight, but what will change overnight if we all pull out is a return to the time before we went in there, and if you think that was a bed of roses, take off the blinkers...

    I don't agree with people who only do or want the job half done, if you don't want to finish the job, then we shouldn't have made the attempt, but like it or not, we are there now...and we should at least make a damn good attempt at getting it to 99.9% before we walk away and declare job done.

    No one ever thought China would change, but little by little the great wall is crumbling around them, the new age will catch up to them, a lot of Afghani's are not even Taliban, but are afraid of change and so will try to hang onto what they know and believe, I don't imagine they give a rats ass about our politics in the west, or our morals, so when we tread on theirs we should be mindful that to change their way of thinking has to be handled delicately and not like how the previous US administration wanted to do it...get more flies with honey then you do with vinegar...start with the Government and security, after time, more moderates will be in positions to change the laws, but if we leave, the Government will be taken over by Mullah's and Clerics and you only have to look at Iran to see how that works...
  9. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    As I understand it, although we went into Iraq to replace a cruel dictatorship with a jury-rig semblance of democracy, our interest in Afghanistan is not to stop the Afgs being nasty but to stop the place harbouring Al-Q and also to shut down the other major threat to our society which is heroin. As long as we achieve those two things what the Afgs do to each other is not our part of ship, revolting and deplorable though their behaviour in that cesspit of mediaeval ignorance is and always has been.
  10. Just a minor point; my understanding of our reason for putting our fingers in the Iraq mangle was to remove non existent weapons of mass destruction that could be launched at our “interests†with minimum warning. The “aim†of removing a distasteful regime suddenly became the excuse after the WMD lie was exposed.

    As regards Afghanistan, I believe we put our fingers in that mangle to remove Al-Q and the terr training camps (alleged to have snotted the New Yorkers in 2001), as mentioned by Seaweed. In the course of doing that, though, we wrecked the Country and, as Colin Powell said, you break it, you own it. We didn’t go there to destroy the opium poppies and we have resisted US attempts to enforce that as a policy. We didn’t go there to give them democracy, wanted or not. We didn’t go there to enforce modern western values on their medieval Eastern ones.

    As many of you have been taught, you can’t have split objectives. Once the primary objective has been achieved the secondary objective should be to restore the civil infrastructure (the one we broke). There should have been no tertiary objective, such as making them fair, Western and sustainably democratic while we’re in town.
  11. I see Pakistan as the main problem and as long as Taliban fighters can flit back and forth across the border the situation cannot be resolved. I have no doubt that dialogue will be going on between the western negotiators and the more moderate sections within the Taliban in an attempt to persuade them to change from within. This could eventually mean giving them positions in government. Now that the imbecile Bush has departed the scene there must be hope that the situation can be resolved which will put an end to the drip- drip of British fatalities and those of our allies.
  12. I'm 200% behind our Forces but I think this is a war to far.They prefer to live the way they do,the Talliban may be a more austere way of Islam but you won't hear many males complain about it.
    Wives are treated as cattle,rape? their fault,executions for gays or infidelity?no!they don't want change.Businessmen,shopkeepers,etc want change but they are in the minority.
    We don't belong there,we can't win, just hold in certain areas and when we are gone it will revert back.
    It's the Tallliban law creeping in this country I'm bothered about,now schools have to shut for Moslem religious days.In my eyes,it ain't on.
    Come here,live here,obey the laws made here.Seems the correct way to me.
    I respect all religions but don't try to force them on anyone.
    My brother had a stroke and whilst in hospital was tormented for a week by the next patient trying to convert him to Islam.Complaints were ignored.
    I would not have been as tolerant as he was.

    Don't like the way we live?ship out. End Of.
  13. I've said all along the initial target shouldn't have been Afghanistan as it's a cesspool, the target we should have hit was Pakistan (but they have nukes supposedly), that's where most of these baddies hide out, and if you have been following the news lately, Pakistan is on the brink of civil war...they keep making deals with the Taliban, who turn around and break them, case in point in just today's news, they are not just happy to have control of SWAT, they now are moving into another territory...once you start negotiating with terrorists, you have lost the advantage, they will take everyone for everything they can get... :wink:
  14. quote....Democracy may be an ideal to strive for but it does not follow the world is ripe for it

    Let's consider the insurgents (wherever) and the drugs, as WMD. These are elements and as such need to be dealt with as they are threatening our peace

    There is a tendency to recoil with righteous indignation at the mention of corruption in theatre. Just consider our own 'political stalwarts - in - residence', at home.....bad PR
  15. I vaguely recall seeing a photgraph from the early seventys of tho Afghani women walking down a road in Kabul dressed in Western clothes (NO, not cowboy boots et al!). Thr blurb underneath was saying that Afghanistan was a modern Western looking outlook.

    Alzheimers stops me from quoting where I read this unfortunately. But it just showed me how how quickly countries can change.
  16. I think you will find that the Brits are past masters when it comes to negotiating with terrorists; historically it has proved to be the only way to bring this type of conflict to an end.
  17. Hmm; Bobby Mugabe springs to mind!
  18. Seaweed

    Seaweed War Hero Book Reviewer

    No Fink, it's only taught terrorists that if they murder enough people we will come crawling, as in NI.
  19. Exactly, this is why you never negotiate with terrorists, it's sucks but you have to be firm with them, once they figure you out they own you, and others sees this as a weakness and try to exploit it themselves. If you make it hard for them they will reconsider their actions.. :wink:
  20. Negotiating is not a sign of weakness.

    These fanatics don't give a shite whether they live or die and I do wonder just what your strategy would be to ultimately defeat them?

    Would you rather it dragged on for the next 30 years with the increased loss of British lives that would surely follow?

Share This Page