Afghanistan

[Michel H]

Well, you have shown what you think about individual freedom.

It seems to me that only Afghans who have good reasons (for example business travel) should be allowed to leave their country, to prevent a catastrophic brain drain and economic collapse of Afghanistan.

 

[shuttlt]

No he didn't. In a lot of countries there are elections and political power passes peacefully from one government to the next.

It's like the League of Nations. Fair elections, rule of law.... all of it only work when there is nothing existential on the line. Pointing to countries who for many years hand over power from one dull regime to another and saying "therefore political power doesn't have to be backed by a gun", is like pointing to all the people who don't commit crimes and saying "therefore we don't need police".

For political power to be handed over fairly and peacefully, either relatively little has to be at stake for the sorts of people who could organize a coup/rig an election, or the cost of not handing over political power peacefully has to be very high.

 

[shuttlt]

I'm not sure your premise is right, because isn't building a middle class exactly what was attempted?

Sending their girls to school, being moderate on religion, playing cricket... aren't those kind of things the exact domain of the middle classes?

Problem is those middle classes aren't armed to the teeth, while the religious zealots are. An AK47 beats a textbook every time.

I was thinking about this the other day. How long a period of Taliban control would it take to turn us into a nation of Islamic fundamentalists that carried on throwing homosexuals off buildings even if the Taliban left? 20 years seem like far too little time. Why would we expect to be able to change them more quickly?

 

[Ziggurat]

It seems to me that only Afghans who have good reasons (for example business travel) should be allowed to leave their country, to prevent a catastrophic brain drain and economic collapse of Afghanistan.

 

[Michel H]

Of course. Why would I expect anything other than blaming the Jews for Islamic terrorism? Never mind that it’s historically ignorant and without any actual basis in fact. Al Qaeda didn’t really care about Israel.

You just have to read Osama bin Laden:

God knows it did not cross our minds to attack the Towers, but after the situation became unbearable—and we witnessed the injustice and tyranny of the American-Israeli alliance against our people in Palestine and Lebanon—I thought about it. And the events that affected me directly were that of 1982 and the events that followed—when America allowed the Israelis to invade Lebanon, helped by the US Sixth Fleet. As I watched the destroyed towers in Lebanon, it occurred to me punish the unjust the same way: to destroy towers in America so it could taste some of what we are tasting and to stop killing our children and women.

— Osama bin Laden, 2004

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osama_bin_Laden#September_11_attacks).

Israel was an afterthought. They cared more about Al Andalus. Think we should give that back to appease them?

No, I don't think so.

Here is some of the things Joe Biden (whose approval rating seems to be in free fall these days) should do or might do (in my opinion) to stop anti-American hatred, a tragic example of which we just witnessed in Afghanistan:
1) Give the Taliban about 60% of the funding that the previous (democratic) government was receiving, provided they explain all expenses in a detailed way. Give them more if they create an inclusive government (with other political parties).
2) Lift all economic sanctions which target entire countries or their de-facto governments (for example the Taliban, Iran, Venezuela, Russia ...). Allow also freedom of speech on social media for organizations like the Taliban.
3) Suspend the U.S. financial aid to Israel. Use this money perhaps to build nuclear power stations and stop climate change.

 

[Michel H]

I really don't think that U.S. foreign policy is a model of brilliant intelligence. And the recent events don't make me change my mind.

 

[Ziggurat]

You just have to read Osama bin Laden:

That's what he said post-9/11. Al Qaeda got a lot of flack in the middle east precisely because they had been largely ignoring Israel, and they tried to sound like they cared as a result. But they never really did. What really got the group off the ground was the US staging troops in Saudi Arabia in 1989 during the lead up to the first Gulf war.

And given that Al Qaeda didn't even really operate around Israel for most of its existence, why on earth would you expect Israel to be a priority for them? Conversely, if Israel was a priority, why would they spend so much time elsewhere, fighting other battles? It doesn't actually withstand scrutiny.

Here is some of the things Joe Biden (whose approval rating seems to be in free fall these days) should do or might do (in my opinion) to stop anti-American hatred, a tragic example of which we just witnessed in Afghanistan:
1) Give the Taliban about 60% of the funding that the previous (democratic) government was receiving, provided they explain all expenses in a detailed way. Give them more if they create an inclusive government (with other political parties).

Bwahahahaha!

No.

First off, there's no chance in hell they will form an inclusive government. They will form a fundamentalist Islamic government. That is axiomatically not inclusive.

Second, why the **** would you ever believe anything they said about how they spent the money you gave them?

2) Lift all economic sanctions which target entire countries or their de-facto governments (for example the Taliban, Iran, Venezuela, Russia ...). Allow also freedom of speech on social media for organizations like the Taliban.

Also, no. Why should we help our enemies?

3) Suspend the U.S. financial aid to Israel. Use this money perhaps to build nuclear power stations and stop climate change.

We give financial aid to lots of countries. Why is it only Israel that we need to stop giving money to?

Oh, that's right. Because of the Jews. You think the world will stop hating us if we just let them destroy the Jews. Feeding the crocodile so it eats you last never works.

 

[Ziggurat]

I really don't think that U.S. foreign policy is a model of brilliant intelligence. And the recent events don't make me change my mind.

Neither do I. Our foreign policy "experts" are largely incompetent idiots. And yet, you still manage to be worse somehow.

 

[Michel H]

That's what he said post-9/11. Al Qaeda got a lot of flack in the middle east precisely because they had been largely ignoring Israel, and they tried to sound like they cared as a result. But they never really did. What really got the group off the ground was the US staging troops in Saudi Arabia in 1989 during the lead up to the first Gulf war.

And given that Al Qaeda didn't even really operate around Israel for most of its existence, why on earth would you expect Israel to be a priority for them? Conversely, if Israel was a priority, why would they spend so much time elsewhere, fighting other battles? It doesn't actually withstand scrutiny.

It is true that bin Laden didn't like to see the U.S. military on Saudi soil but you don't really launch an attack of the scale of 9/11 just because the U.S. has deployed some troops to protect oil facilities, probably after a request by the Saudi government (and, anyway, with its agreement).

We give financial aid to lots of countries. Why is it only Israel that we need to stop giving money to?

Oh, that's right. Because of the Jews. You think the world will stop hating us if we just let them destroy the Jews. Feeding the crocodile so it eats you last never works.

Why is it only Israel that we need to stop giving money to?

Because a large global power like the U.S. should not support illegal occupations in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

Israel has become a powerful country, more accepted by the international community than 50 years ago, and is under no imminent threat of destruction.

I really don't think you can seriously address the threat of global terrorism without taking into account the Israel-Palestine conflict.

 

[Ziggurat]

It is true that bin Laden didn't like to see the U.S. military on Saudi soil but you don't really launch an attack of the scale of 9/11 just because the U.S. has deployed some troops to protect oil facilities, probably after a request by the Saudi government (and, anyway, with its agreement).

I don't launch an attack of that scale for that reason? You are correct, *I* do not. But bin Laden is not me, and his is not you. His motivations are alien to us. Why wouldn't he? Saudi Arabia is holy land. We are infidels. And in case you didn't notice, bin Laden rather hated the Saudi royals, precisely because they invited us in. You don't seem to actually take his religious beliefs seriously. He most certainly did take them seriously.

Because a large global power like the U.S. should not support illegal occupations in East Jerusalem and the West Bank.

I keep seeing people talk about what's illegal, but other than appealing to the UN (which is a farce), there's no source for this claim. And it's a double standard anyways. Far worse behavior by other countries is ignored or accepted as routine.

I really don't think you can seriously address the threat of global terrorism without taking into account the Israel-Palestine conflict.

Of course you don't think that. But you don't actually know anything. I'll let you in on a not-so-secret secret: most Arabs don't actually give a **** about the Palestinians, and many actually despise them. And Islamic terrorism is far more diverse than you give it credit for. Boko Harem doesn't give a **** about Israel. MILF doesn't give a **** about Israel. The bloody borders of the Islamic world aren't due to Israel.

 

[Michel H]

I don't launch an attack of that scale for that reason? You are correct, *I* do not. But bin Laden is not me, and his is not you. His motivations are alien to us. Why wouldn't he? Saudi Arabia is holy land. We are infidels. And in case you didn't notice, bin Laden rather hated the Saudi royals, precisely because they invited us in. You don't seem to actually take his religious beliefs seriously. He most certainly did take them seriously.



I keep seeing people talk about what's illegal, but other than appealing to the UN (which is a farce), there's no source for this claim. And it's a double standard anyways. Far worse behavior by other countries is ignored or accepted as routine.



Of course you don't think that. But you don't actually know anything. I'll let you in on a not-so-secret secret: most Arabs don't actually give a **** about the Palestinians, and many actually despise them. And Islamic terrorism is far more diverse than you give it credit for. Boko Harem doesn't give a **** about Israel. MILF doesn't give a **** about Israel. The bloody borders of the Islamic world aren't due to Israel.

I keep seeing people talk about what's illegal, but other than appealing to the UN (which is a farce)

No, the U.N. isn't just a farce or the joke, it is an important institution to maintain peace, security and dialogue among nations of the world:

Charter of the United Nations
...
As a charter and constituent treaty, its rules and obligations are binding on all members and supersede those of other treaties.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charter_of_the_United_Nations).

And Islamic terrorism is far more diverse than you give it credit for. Boko Harem doesn't give a **** about Israel. MILF doesn't give a **** about Israel. The bloody borders of the Islamic world aren't due to Israel.

The Israel/Palestine conflict is certainly not the only factor which motivates Islamic combatants.

Another problem is religion, especially the Muslim one, which seems to be particularly violent and intolerant (Sharia law and so on). In this respect, the U.S. could probably do more to fight superstition:

By convention, incoming presidents raise their right hand and place the left on a Bible while taking the oath of office.
...
"So help me God"
...
In practice, however, most presidents, at least during the last century, have opted to take the oath (rather than an affirmation), to use a Bible to do so, and also to close the oath with the customary phrase.

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_president_of_the_United_States#Use_of_Bibles).

 

[Ziggurat]

No, the U.N. isn't just a farce or the joke, it is an important institution to maintain peace, security and dialogue among nations of the world:

Yes, it is a farce. Just look at some of the countries which have sat on the human rights commission.

The Israel/Palestine conflict is certainly not the only factor which motivates Islamic combatants.

Except in Israel, it's not even a significant one.

Another problem is religion, especially the Muslim one, which seems to be particularly violent and intolerant (Sharia law and so on). In this respect, the U.S. could probably do more to fight superstition:

(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_office_of_the_president_of_the_United_States#Use_of_Bibles).

Oh, FFS. This is one of the stupidest attempts at moral equivalency I've ever seen, and they're all stupid. Do you think bin Laden gave a single **** about how the President takes his oath of office? Do you think a single person in the entire world will change their opinion about the validity of religion if religious references were removed from that oath?

This is a non-issue.

 

[Michel H]

Yes, it is a farce. Just look at some of the countries which have sat on the human rights commission.



Except in Israel, it's not even a significant one.



Oh, FFS. This is one of the stupidest attempts at moral equivalency I've ever seen, and they're all stupid. Do you think bin Laden gave a single **** about how the President takes his oath of office? Do you think a single person in the entire world will change their opinion about the validity of religion if religious references were removed from that oath?

Yes, of course I do. If the U.S. president made a very solemn statement to indicate that all references to religion should from now on be removed from the U.S. president's oath of office, because there is really no scientific evidence for a God, and because religious texts are filled with lies, this would certainly make headlines worldwide, and in a more interesting way that the latest Islamic terror attack, or the latest U.S. bombing.

And I think that this could save many lives (think about all the "Islamic combatants"), and liberate many people, because many people are kind of obsessed by their religion, especially in Muslim countries (Islam seeming a religion which is particularly retarded, and imposes many absurd constraints on people).

In a modern society, it is important to assign prestige to the things which really deserve respect (Science, for example). Religion is probably not one of these things, but this is probably still widely misunderstood in a supposedly advanced society like the States.

I remember this (very kind and nice) fellow who visited me sometimes when I was a student in the U.S. and gave me a Bible and said: "Jesus died for us, to save us ...". I am still not convinced by the logic of that argument ...

 

[Ziggurat]

Yes, of course I do.

There is no hope for you. You have terminal naivety.

I remember this (very kind and nice) fellow who visited me sometimes when I was a student in the U.S. and gave me a Bible and said: "Jesus died for us, to save us ...". I am still not convinced by the logic of that argument ...

Well of course you weren't convinced. Just like nobody is going to be convinced by how the President takes his oath of office. Only an idiot would be convinced, and only an even bigger idiot would think anyone else would be convinced.

 

[trustbutverify]

Frankly, I don't even think the Afghans should be allowed to leave their country in these circumstances.

The Taliban should explain to them:"No, you can't go now because your country needs your talents and knowledge. Don't worry, you will be respected, you won't be persecuted".

I think westerners who promote this laughable drivel should should be forcibly relocated to Afghanistan immediately, while Afghans with the good sense to prefer not to live in a violent Islamic nightmare should be welcomed to Belgium (etc...) with open arms.

I mean this literally.

 

[dudalb]

I think westerners who promote this laughable drivel should should be forcibly relocated to Afghanistan immediately, while Afghans with the good sense to prefer not to live in a violent Islamic nightmare should be welcomed to Belgium (etc...) with open arms.

I mean this literally.

I wonder if Michale H would have cndemned Jews who fled Naxi Germany causing a Brain Drain as well.

 

[Michel H]

I wonder if Michel H would have condemned Jews who fled Naxi Germany causing a Brain Drain as well.

No, I don't condemn the Jews who fled Germany in the 1930s because they were openly persecuted (Nuremberg laws and so on).

But the Taliban have not voted laws which segregate or discriminate those who have worked for Western countries, or for the democratic government. Instead, they have decreed, and repeated an amnesty.

 

[Michel H]

I think westerners who promote this laughable drivel should should be forcibly relocated to Afghanistan immediately, while Afghans with the good sense to prefer not to live in a violent Islamic nightmare should be welcomed to Belgium (etc...) with open arms.

I mean this literally.

Then you are even more intolerant than the Taliban.

And it's not drivel, it's about preventing a predictable economic catastrophe.

The Taliban should take steps to make sure their country doesn't become an "Islamic nightmare" (one may cite an inclusive government, for example, if this is possible).

Objectively, just having worked for a foreign government, or for the legitimate, democratically elected government of Afghanistan, should be no cause for shame (in most cases) or for running away.

 

[Ziggurat]

Then you are even more intolerant than the Taliban.

And it's not drivel, it's about preventing a predictable economic catastrophe.

First, you're wrong on the facts: economic catastrophe cannot be prevented now. The Taliban will run the economy into the ground no matter who stays or leaves.

Second, you're basically arguing in favor of slavery on economic grounds, and that's just repulsive.

The Taliban should take steps to make sure their country doesn't become an "Islamic nightmare" (one may cite an inclusive government, for example, if this is possible).

In other words, the Taliban should not be the Taliban.

But they are. And they want an Islamic nightmare. That's their explicit goal. They like it that way. And if your ignorance on this point actually held any sway in the world, you would be directly responsible for getting people killed. I take comfort in believing that you hold no actual influence over anything.

Objectively, just having worked for a foreign government, or for the legitimate, democratically elected government of Afghanistan, should be no cause for shame (in most cases) or for running away.

The Taliban don't give a **** about what's objective.

 

[Ziggurat]

No, I don't condemn the Jews who fled Germany in the 1930s because they were openly persecuted (Nuremberg laws and so on).

But the Taliban have not voted laws which segregate or discriminate those who have worked for Western countries, or for the democratic government. Instead, they have decreed, and repeated an amnesty.

And yet they keep killing such people anyways. They don't need laws to do so, they don't feel bound to public promises either.

"Don't run. We are your friends."