The invasion of Afghanistan in the name of women’s rights is not going well.
Report: More young girls face rape in Afghanistan.
Rapes targeting girls as young as seven are on the increase in Afghanistan where conditions for women are little better than under the Taliban, the U.N. and rights groups say.
In its annual report on human rights, the U.N. warned conditions were deteriorating in the war-ravaged country despite U.S.-led efforts after the 2001 removal from power of the hardline militia.
“Violence is tolerated or condoned within the family and community, within traditional and religious leadership circles, as well as the formal and informal justice system,” said Navi Pillay, the U.N. high commissioner for human rights.
buzzkill 5:39 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink |
So you are blaming the invasion for the abuse of women? I don’t think so.
At what point in Afghanistan’s recent past was the country a paradise for women’s rights?
Shams al-Nahar 6:03 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink |
There was, presumeably, some sort of social brake and restraint in place that prevented at least some of this violence. Consider Buzzkill, cher, the concept of ‘merican missionariism, and how it corrupted stable ecologies. Any sort of violent instability hurrts women and girls the most. Look at Dafur.
If the neocons could be persuaded to use a Kepler-trigo cost/performance matrix they would see that the SuperAwesome World Police cause more suffering than they alleviate every frickin’ time.
But, alas, like the tribalistic primitives they remain, they simply don’t get real science.
pi.info 6:13 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink |
And remember, Afghanistan has been under foreign occupation (and the perpetual state of war that comes with it) for a lot longer than the US has been there, about three decades.
Check out this article:
The military hides under the skirts of women to justify war in Afghanistan.
buzzkill 6:36 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink |
By this thinking, a police officer who busts a drunk is responsible for the drunk going home and beating his wife. The alibi of displaced responsibility can also be applied to sectarian violence in Iraq. American Military bears responsibility for the inhuman things that others do to each other.
It is a BS argument and you obviously could not convict in a court.
What can we say? Populations do not do well under the stress of military conflict and the US Military should have a minimal presence in both Iraq and Afghanistan. The fact that some Afghanis rape or kill as a possible result of this stress is foremost the responsibility of the criminals themselves.
Shams al-Nahar 6:46 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink |
Oh I call bullshytt on this.
The police officer is doing his JOB.
The Superawesome World Police are MEDDLING.
buzzkill 6:49 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
MEDDLING like in Bosnia?
Shams al-Nahar 6:50 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
The Superawesome World Police had the plausible burdha of NATO.
But yes, MEDDLING.
buzzkill 7:08 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
That is extreme, but I will accept meddling in the case of Iraq. Just cause you are the shining sun and everything good. But in Afghanistan, we supposedly have universal jurisdiction or some legal justification to be there apprehending international criminals responsible for planning murder and mayhem in the US.
That is not meddling.
Shams al-Nahar 7:24 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
Oh noes….in Afghanistan we went there to rip up the fabric of their society and punish them like bad children, instead of treating with them as a nation-state.
It is still MEDDLING.
buzzkill 7:43 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
The taliban? Foreign AQ people and the Taliban? Those Taliban? MEDDLING?
Excuse me while I tune up my violin for a very sad rendition Ballad of the Oppressed Taliban. One might even call it a Extraordinary Rendition.
Shams al-Nahar 7:46 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
Were the Taliban the government of Afghanistan?
Did the Taliban attack us?
Were the Taliban any worse than Kim Jong Il and his starvation work camps?
Why do we treat with Kim?
Oh, yeah, nukes.
buzzkill 7:52 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
Partially
The answer is either yes or they gave aid and support to fugitives which makes them guilty. So, Yes. They attacked the United States directly or indirectly.
Huh? Doesn’t matter. North Korea rattles a saber and detains a few journalists.
Are you forgetting that 3000 people were murdered in the US? We’re not gonna let that go. It has to be addressed.
matoko_chan 9:58 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
How become we didn’t extradite Usama then?
If the Taliban were not acting on behalf of the state of Afghanistan….why did we punish the whole state?
Truly, I do not understand.
How do we address it?
How do we get…..justice for the 3000?
What would that look like?
buzzkill 10:58 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink
The US did not punish the whole nation. Come on. These are recent historical memories. Operation Enduring Freedom was a coalition with the UK and UN led forces and Afghani Northern Alliance….
Justice would be to dismantle the organization on the Afghanistan-Pakistan border which declared war on the US.
I can see there being trouble sorting good taliban from bad. I would say there are consistent figureheads which have led forces against the United States. These people have to go.
That done, some treaty could probably be negotiated.
Shams al-Nahar 1:22 pm on July 9, 2009 Permalink
pfft…..we levied an occupation force on them and made war on their citizens and installed a different regime.
I see no justice in that.
pi.info 6:31 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink |
Nobody spoke better to this aspect of war and occupation than Chris Hedges, writing here during Israel’s recent violence against Gaza.
Change Afghans for Palestinians, and the US for Israel.
Dan 10:02 pm on July 8, 2009 Permalink |
makoto_chan would you have rather let the Taliban kill more Hazaras?
Shams al-Nahar 1:33 pm on July 9, 2009 Permalink |
We can’t be the Superawesome World Police ANYMORE, Dan.
We can’t afford it and it just makes people hate us.