Afghanistan

[Planigale]

And yet, the Taliban still take child brides, and they do have sex with them while they are under age. Maybe you should lecture them about how their interpretation of Islam is wrong.

I don’t think you will convince them, though.

I notice you avoid the fact that 'child' brides are legal in the US, and having sex with your 'under age' child bride legal in the US, indeed a child bride cannot refuse consent to sex in the US as she is a minor and the husband the guardian, so legally she cannot be raped by her husband until she reaches majority. Why is it evil if done by Afghanis but OK if done in the US?

What is the age of consent in Afghanistan?

 

[trustbutverify]

Demonized by the west, Taliban forces provide gainful employment for women in the food services industry:

Najia was at home with her three young sons and daughter in a small village in northern Afghanistan when Taliban fighters knocked on their door.

Najia's daughter Manizha, 25, knew they were coming -- her mother had told her they'd done the same thing the previous three days, demanding that she cook food for up to 15 fighters.
"My mother told them, 'I am poor, how can I cook for you?'" said Manizha. "(The Taliban) started beating her. My mother collapsed, and they hit her with their guns -- AK47s."
Manizha said she yelled at the fighters to stop. They paused for a moment before throwing a grenade into the next room and fleeing as the flames spread, she said. The mother of four died from the beating.

 

[theprestige]

Demonized by the west, Taliban forces provide gainful employment for women in the food services industry:

Maybe it's an isolated incident. Here in the US we understand that our police departments are corrupt and bigoted institutions. It's not just a one or two bad apples. They're all bad apples. And the ones that aren't are too few to make a change. When a cop shoots an unarmed man in the back, it's because that's the way the police like to do things, as an institution and a culture.

But that doesn't mean the Taliban is the same way.

 

[Mike!]

I notice you avoid the fact that 'child' brides are legal in the US, and having sex with your 'under age' child bride legal in the US, indeed a child bride cannot refuse consent to sex in the US as she is a minor and the husband the guardian, so legally she cannot be raped by her husband until she reaches majority. Why is it evil if done by Afghanis but OK if done in the US?

What is the age of consent in Afghanistan?

I suppose we should define what a "child bride" is first. In the U.S., the youngest a child can be legally wed is 16, and that's in less than 2/3 of the states, the rest being 17 or 18.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage

https://www.bhwlawfirm.com/legal-age-consent-united-states-map/


What IS the age of consent in Afghanistan?

 

[Ziggurat]

I notice you avoid the fact that 'child' brides are legal in the US, and having sex with your 'under age' child bride legal in the US, indeed a child bride cannot refuse consent to sex in the US as she is a minor and the husband the guardian, so legally she cannot be raped by her husband until she reaches majority. Why is it evil if done by Afghanis but OK if done in the US?

What is the age of consent in Afghanistan?

Yet more pathetic attempts at moral equivalency. You really don't want to recognize the Taliban's crimes, do you? Or is it just that you hate the US that much? It's quite peculiar.

Child marriages in the US are not the norm, but an exception to the norm, and they have to jump through legal hoops in order to qualify. Child marriages ARE the norm in Afghanistan, made more horrific by the Taliban taking girls as war spoils. There's nothing even remotely like that here.

And you are wrong about rape laws in the US. Marriage is an exception to statutory rape, but it is not a defense against rape in general. In other words, sex isn't rape just because of age, but it is still rape due to a lack of consent.

 

[dudalb]

Maybe it's an isolated incident. Here in the US we understand that our police departments are corrupt and bigoted institutions. It's not just a one or two bad apples. They're all bad apples. And the ones that aren't are too few to make a change. When a cop shoots an unarmed man in the back, it's because that's the way the police like to do things, as an institution and a culture.

But that doesn't mean the Taliban is the same way.

I have seen some pathetic attempts at moral equivelncy, but this takes the cake.
I think someone is fully invested in a romantic view of the Taliban as brave, heroic, and misunderstood Anti Imperalist Freedom FIghters, and will never give up that opinion. Polirical ideologies can be just as immune to evidence and reason as religious beliefs.

 

[theprestige]

Since the Taliban has largely been trained, equipped, and funded by Pakistan, this suggests a fairly positive view of Pakistan as well.

 

[Michel H]

Since the Taliban has largely been trained, equipped, and funded by Pakistan, this suggests a fairly positive view of Pakistan as well.

What do you mean by "this"? The "isolated incident" or the takeover of most of Afghanistan by the Taliban.

Regarding Pakistan, it seems to me this this interview (from 3:48) of Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan by Judy Woodruff (PBS) on July 28 is interesting.

According to Khan, "U.S. really messed it up" in Afghanistan.

 

[Michel H]

Yet more pathetic attempts at moral equivalency. You really don't want to recognize the Taliban's crimes, do you? Or is it just that you hate the US that much? It's quite peculiar.

I think that many people (including myself) would agree that democratic societies are better for the people than totalitarian Islamic societies.

But one should not forget that the U.S. brutally invaded Afghanistan in 2001 (they came uninvited ...). Because of this, I don't think the Americans can claim to be morally superior to the Taliban.

 

[The Atheist]

Anyone left in any doubt about the Taliban and China will not be now:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021...an-to-rely-on-chinese-money-spokesperson-says

“China is our most important partner and represents a fundamental and extraordinary opportunity for us, because it is ready to invest and rebuild our country,” the Taliban spokesperson was quoted as saying in the interview.

 

[Ziggurat]

I think that many people (including myself) would agree that democratic societies are better for the people than totalitarian Islamic societies.

But one should not forget that the U.S. brutally invaded Afghanistan in 2001 (they came uninvited ...). Because of this, I don't think the Americans can claim to be morally superior to the Taliban.

Yes, actually, we can.

When we invaded, were people clinging to the sides of airplanes trying to escape us? No, they were not. In fact, the reverse happened. In 2002, 1.5 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan voluntarily returned to Afghanistan, one of the largest refugee returns in history. If our invasion was so brutal, why did so many Afghans decide conditions were better after our invasion than before? And why now do so many Afghans expect conditions to become worse under the Taliban?

I know you're reflexively anti-American, but these attempts at equivalency are just getting sad.

 

[Ziggurat]

Anyone left in any doubt about the Taliban and China will not be now:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2021...an-to-rely-on-chinese-money-spokesperson-says

Nope, I've still got doubts. It's not like the Taliban have never lied in public pronouncements. And they don't exactly have a track record of friendliness with China either.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/dip...ban-may-be-behind-bus-attack-killed-9-chinese

That's not a one-off either, there are numerous other examples of Taliban attacks on Chinese within Pakistan. Maybe they'll change their tune, but I wouldn't bet good money on it. We shall see.

 

[Michel H]

Yes, actually, we can.

When we invaded, were people clinging to the sides of airplanes trying to escape us? No, they were not. In fact, the reverse happened. In 2002, 1.5 million Afghan refugees in Pakistan voluntarily returned to Afghanistan, one of the largest refugee returns in history. If our invasion was so brutal, why did so many Afghans decide conditions were better after our invasion than before? And why now do so many Afghans expect conditions to become worse under the Taliban?

I know you're reflexively anti-American, but these attempts at equivalency are just getting sad.

It is true that I am frequently critical of U.S. policies, but this doesn't quite mean anti-American (there are undoubtedly some good aspects in American society, democracy and protected freedom of speech for example).

The U.S. brutally invaded in 2001 to protect the conquests of their crony Israel. During the 20 years that followed, life probably improved for many Afghans (and the West probably paid many bills), but there was also a civil war that never stopped. This meant lots of bombings, drone strikes, civilians killed (see for example this excellent article by Scott Ritter: https://www.rt.com/op-ed/533572-us-drone-afghanistan-isis/), terror attacks, many people killed or injured ...

That's the problem when you come in a country "uninvited" ...

Paradoxically, one might say it is actually the U.S. which gave some legitimacy to the Taliban, because they probably now appear as "liberators" for some people in the Muslim world.

The Taliban aren't particularly civilized, but at least they didn't come from the other side of the world to invade, most of them are probably true Afghans.

 

[GlennB]

I guess having been brought up as a muslim, my knowledge of Islam is better than yours. This statement is false and is intended to be offensive. There is no evidence that the Prophet was interested in prepubescent children. There is not a clear separation between marriage and 'engagement' in historic cultures, Marriages were often contracted at early ages throughout history. Marriages and sexual desire were in general unrelated. What is very clear in all accounts is that there was a considerable period (years) between the marriage and consummation of the marriage. This is very strong evidence that your statement is wrong.

"Al-Tabari says she was nine at the time her marriage was consummated.[33] Sahih al-Bukhari's hadith says "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old."[34]"

from Aisha^WP

 

[Ziggurat]

It is true that I am frequently critical of U.S. policies, but this doesn't quite mean anti-American (there are undoubtedly some good aspects in American society, democracy and protected freedom of speech for example).

The U.S. brutally invaded in 2001 to protect the conquests of their crony Israel.

Oh, that's right. You aren't anti-US, you're anti-Israel. Even though Israel has basically jack **** to do with Afghanistan.

It's getting harder and harder to not conclude that your bias isn't merely against Israel itself. You seem to have... something more going on.

During the 20 years that followed, life probably improved for many Afghans (and the West probably paid many bills), but there was also a civil war that never stopped.

Were you under the impression that Afghanistan was peaceful before we arrived?

Because it wasn't.

Paradoxically, one might say it is actually the U.S. which gave some legitimacy to the Taliban, because they probably now appear as "liberators" for some people in the Muslim world.

The Taliban have no interest in liberty. That's never been their priority, and they've never claimed it was.

The Taliban aren't particularly civilized

And Nazis aren't particularly nice.

but at least they didn't come from the other side of the world to invade, most of them are probably true Afghans.

Because getting killed by your neighbor is so much more preferable than being killed by a foreigner, for some reason.

 

[Michel H]

Oh, that's right. You aren't anti-US, you're anti-Israel. Even though Israel has basically jack **** to do with Afghanistan.

It's getting harder and harder to not conclude that your bias isn't merely against Israel itself. You seem to have... something more going on.

What I have going on is certainly not antisemitism, if this is what you would like to suggest.

My point is very simple: if you want to stop terrorism, don't invade half of the world. Instead, turn your attention to Israel, stop the occupations. Because of their past of terrible persecutions, the Jews seem to be systematically overprotected by the West nowadays.

 

[The Atheist]

Nope, I've still got doubts. It's not like the Taliban have never lied in public pronouncements. And they don't exactly have a track record of friendliness with China either.

I'm picking they want to be seen as a legitimate government, and all the moves so far suggest that's true, as EU start to engage with them:

https://www.france24.com/en/asia-pa...tions-for-operational-engagement-with-taliban

 

[theprestige]

The U.S. brutally invaded in 2001 to protect the conquests of their crony Israel.

That makes no sense at all. Anti-semitism isn't known for being particularly rational or coherent, but even in that context this is still unusually stupid.

 

[trustbutverify]

The U.S. brutally invaded in 2001 to protect the conquests of their crony Israel.

This is exactly the caliber of drivel to be expected from someone who wishes Nazi Germany had developed an atomic weapon.

During the 20 years that followed, life probably improved for many Afghans (and the West probably paid many bills), but there was also a civil war that never stopped. This meant lots of bombings, drone strikes, civilians killed (see for example this excellent article by Scott Ritter:

Ritter is a pathological narcissist, who was more than happy to aggressively advance whatever position his employer required, right up until the moment they stopped feeding his diseased, boated ego. After that, he turned to Seymour Hersh and underage girls to make him feel like a real man.

 

[Planigale]

Yet more pathetic attempts at moral equivalency. You really don't want to recognize the Taliban's crimes, do you? Or is it just that you hate the US that much? It's quite peculiar.

Child marriages in the US are not the norm, but an exception to the norm, and they have to jump through legal hoops in order to qualify. Child marriages ARE the norm in Afghanistan, made more horrific by the Taliban taking girls as war spoils. There's nothing even remotely like that here.

And you are wrong about rape laws in the US. Marriage is an exception to statutory rape, but it is not a defense against rape in general. In other words, sex isn't rape just because of age, but it is still rape due to a lack of consent.

Statistics please. What is the median age of marriage?

By law (pre Taliban ie for most of the past 20 years persons had to be over 16 to marry.

In Pashtun culture marriages are arranged (something I think is wrong and un-Islamic), 'marriages' (more akin to engagements) traditionally might occur young, but brides might stay with their family until older before moving in to the husbands home. Essentially as would have been true for most of history in most of the world marriageable age is post menarche. This is not unique to Afghanistan, but is very much a class / education / rural issue. The community I come from in England certainly has an issue with this. Girls would be taken out of school in England at age 14 + sent off to family in rural villages in the tribal part of Pakistan, be married off and not return until pregnant. One of the failings of social services and education in the UK was being overly culturally sensitive to avoid being seen as racist and failing to protect young girls from sexual exploitation. I and my sister were relatively protected because our parents were from a professional rather than working class background, and our parents eloped. Which was always the weapon we used when discussions about suitable boys arose with the aunties. The point of this personal digression being that there are cultural norms that are nothing to do with the Taliban, arranged marriage and young marriage for men and women is the norm.

Also what is the evidence that the Taliban are taking girls as war spoils. This would not be Islamic, and the Taliban are very islamic.

!ssues are
1) many people believe propaganda put out by anti-Islamic right wing groups.
2) many people do not distinguish between Islamist groups.
3) many people do not understand the Taliban are essentially a political and religious organisation, most of the military forces are allied to the Taliban but not controlled by the Taliban. The Haqqani network is the largest military grouping, it is the group that was allied to Al qaeda and sheltered Bin Laden. They are also perpetrators of several of the atrocities that you blame the Taliban for. They are not controlled by the Taliban. They are coalition partners.
4) The Taliban are not international terrorists, they are focussed purely on the internal issues of Afghanistan.

i do not dispute that atrocities happen, but it is not and never has been Taliban policy to rape and murder children. Islam Pashtun culture is certainly patriarchal, but it is not barbaric.

If any are familiar with Irish politics the relationship between the Taliban and many of the military units is a bit like the relationship between Sinn Fein and e.g. the Real IRA (not the provisionals). Or even perhaps a little like the relationship between the catholic church and the IRA.