Taliban gunned down 6 American soldiers.

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

The news doesn't say TTP does it? They are talking about the Taliban which rules Afghanistan. So I am guessing it is the Afghan or in your book, the good Taliban which beheaded the Sikhs.

Again it is the same lies that try to confuse ppl like u. In my book those who beheaded the sikhs r terrorists and the place u mentioned is in pakistan under TTP or they have strong hold there. Dont u think u should get ur fact right instead of accusing ppl just on guessing.

Last time i heard on news karzai was ruling afghanistan by the support of western powers and not taliban.

TARIQ

 

[roadrunner]

What ever makes you think Taliban stoning a woman face to turn it into a pulp for adultery is normal.
If you think Canada and Afganistan have similar treatment of women, I cannot argue with you.

This is it isn't it? Your type simply divert the topic when you've been fully answered onto something else. In this case, it's stoning women, which you insinuate I would believe is normal based on contradicting your narrow minded unidimensional analysis of Taliban ethics.

But alright, let us MOVE the discussion to something we were NOT discussing before. It's gone from is "it alright for authority to paddlewhip someone" to "is stoning normal"?

The answer is it's not normal in my view. Neither is execution in my view. It's a primitive method of execution. Matters such as honour and adultery are just trivial in my opinion but that is my conditioning. Pay attention to this conditioning bit you seem to be missing.

So if Afghans would prefer adultery to be illegal, and the harsh punishment of death by stoning, then that is their business. If Afghans would like a lesser punishment, then that too is their business. If Afghans would like no adultery law, then that too is their business. Is it wrong for Afghans to demand a stoning law, no. That is their choice. Explain to me what entitles you to set the yardstick for Afghan law, and not the Afghans themselves.

BTW, I think my culture is better than that of Taliban's

I don't agree your culture is better than the Taliban's in the slightest. It's just noone cares enough to report on the goings on in your culture. Plenty of cases where Hindus stone each other do occur in India, along with plenty of others where they simply eat each other.

Here's some news of Hindus stoning each other over adulterous affairs.

Or just bury children alive

Why should you be the yardstick for any other culture when your culture in my opinion is regressive? (note it is my opinion that yours is a regressive culture since child cannibalism makes me sick, I'm a little torn as to whether this would justify invasion since the children are not alleged to be criminals or broken any laws, as in the stoning cases - this isn't genocide, but would be another appropriate pretext to justify war and interference).

and the West has better and just treatment of humans than muslim countries could ever achieve. That is why they accept people from all over the world and treat them equally while foreign journalists are beheaded and women are mutilated in muslim countries.

That's a little bit of an over-exagerration. Foreign journalists usually are not to be beheaded in most Muslim countries. But because security in some Muslim countries is poor, it occurs. I would agree that developed countries have a good record on human rights.... which is what makes them developed. I don't know why you're putting India into that category.

Again, the US did not ivade Afghanistan to save women but to capture Osama

Then you agree the women's rights reason is a load of rubbish, which is the point I've been making all along. Since OBL and Al Q have been extinguished from Afghanistan, you'll now need a better excuse for Americans to die for Bharat.

 

[Ahmad]

seems the muslim world is still split between hardcore and modern atleast on this forum anyway.

i dont agree with that. overwhelming majority of muslims reject the taliban and al qaeda ideas. if some people especially in here do side with the taliban has nothing to do with muslims or islam, it is purely politically scoring(FOR Now),but the same people do not want a taliban rule on themsevles.

 

[roadrunner]

i dont agree with that. overwhelming majority of muslims reject the taliban and al qaeda ideas. if some people especially in here do side with the taliban has nothing to do with muslims or islam, it is purely politically scoring(FOR Now),but the same people do not want a taliban rule on themsevles.

Many of the people on here that side with the Northern Alliance (which is in power) do it for political or ethnic reasons, but wouldn't like to be ruled by them themselves either. You can see it easily when they refer back to women's rights constantly and try to show provocative images (like you have done). Suggesting women's rights and the wearing of Burkhas on their heads is a reasonable cause for a war, is utterly ridiculous.

Afghanistan is for the Afghans to rule in my opinion. I hope they get funding for education and will realize that all these strict rules really aren't too important. That won't come about by force. It will come about in other ways.

 

[gambit]

This is it isn't it? Your type simply divert the topic when you've been fully answered onto something else. In this case, it's stoning women, which you insinuate I would believe is normal based on contradicting your narrow minded unidimensional analysis of Taliban ethics.

But alright, let us MOVE the discussion to something we were NOT discussing before. It's gone from is "it alright for authority to paddlewhip someone" to "is stoning normal"?

The answer is it's not normal in my view. Neither is execution in my view. It's a primitive method of execution. Matters such as honour and adultery are just trivial in my opinion but that is my conditioning. Pay attention to this conditioning bit you seem to be missing.

So if Afghans would prefer adultery to be illegal, and the harsh punishment of death by stoning, then that is their business. If Afghans would like a lesser punishment, then that too is their business. If Afghans would like no adultery law, then that too is their business. Is it wrong for Afghans to demand a stoning law, no. That is their choice. Explain to me what entitles you to set the yardstick for Afghan law, and not the Afghans themselves.

You cannot have it both ways. We do not live in an intellectual and moral vacuum. Everything we do in life, even biological actions, have their justifications. You cannot toss away moral and intellectual evaluations whenever it suits you. If the Taliban way of Islamic life does not agree with you, what are YOUR moral and intellectual justifications for that personal argument and its internalization? And this is not about entitlement by anyone to set any yardstick for any society. It is about one's own moral and intellectual justifications for acceptance and/or rejection of a way of life. If you reject stoning to death as punishment for adultery, then it is reasonable to assume you would not participate in that event. And it you think it is wrong for you, what are your moral and intellectual justifications for the argument that it is not wrong for someone else?

 

[Ahmad]

Some photos of religious police caning some women (by Ahmad iir).


A photo such as this seems to stir your emotions very easily, yet you don't seem to mind much worse cases of caning of women and indeed of children that occurs in other countries. What is it that makes it hideous to raise a cane to a woman that might be breaking the law in Afghanistan, yet raising a cane in these instances is alright? Is it that they dress in a different way? Or look a bit different?
Paddling hasn't been banned in all western countries, or caning. So it is a valid punishment. What is the difference between these canings in your opinion?

Brother roadrunner,
It is sad to see these things are happening, i personally didnt know about padding, canning etc, where i live, you dont see these punishments, it might be in some other east european country, but anyway, it is horrible and condemnable. since it is not in my country it didnt catch my attention before, we already got much more on our own plate. but do these acts justify the actions of the taliban which is a milion times worse against their own people? i was put in jail for less than a week because i had a shorter beard, i also was hit with a thick metal cable because i was not on my way to mosque for Jama'at, beating women on the leg with thick metal cable for having bold coloured or better cloths was normal. respectable people used to get slapped and beaten and humiliated in front of dozens because they were carrying their sons or daughters' weddings photos, yet i dont complain about these things because we had seen much worse from the taliban. They barred our women from going to school and uni for several years, by doing this they gave the already illiterate nation another hard and bloody punch. killing villagers in very large numbers, burning their houses, farm and cities was a norm for the taliban. it is easy to say something nice about the taliban and defend them from behind the computers, but once you taste the taliban you will have different ideas.

 

[Ahmad]

Many of the people on here that side with the Northern Alliance (which is in power) do it for political or ethnic reasons, but wouldn't like to be ruled by them themselves either. You can see it easily when they refer back to women's rights constantly and try to show provocative images (like you have done). Suggesting women's rights and the wearing of Burkhas on their heads is a reasonable cause for a war, is utterly ridiculous.

Afghanistan is for the Afghans to rule in my opinion. I hope they get funding for education and will realize that all these strict rules really aren't too important. That won't come about by force. It will come about in other ways.

I dont know who would side with the so called NA? If you mean me, then the answer is negative. and please go back to my previous posts, you will never see a thing to justify any invasion of afghanistan because the taliban mistreated women, they simply mistreated all humen being but women got more of the hit. the last thing, the so called NA(a very wrong name indeed) is not in power, they are in opposition. Yes, afghanistan is for Afghans as a whole, hope we dont equate the taliban with all afghans.

 

[roadrunner]

You cannot have it both ways. We do not live in an intellectual and moral vacuum. Everything we do in life, even biological actions, have their justifications. You cannot toss away moral and intellectual evaluations whenever it suits you. If the Taliban way of Islamic life does not agree with you, what are YOUR moral and intellectual justifications for that personal argument and its internalization? And this is not about entitlement by anyone to set any yardstick for any society. It is about one's own moral and intellectual justifications for acceptance and/or rejection of a way of life. If you reject stoning to death as punishment for adultery, then it is reasonable to assume you would not participate in that event. And it you think it is wrong for you, what are your moral and intellectual justifications for the argument that it is not wrong for someone else?

It is similar to the punishment for murder. Some will say murder is to be punished by execution as occurs in the US. Others will say murder should be punished by a prison term. So which is right? Personally I find all forms of execution barbaric, and that is where my moral compass is. Yours might be different? So murder is pretty much universally regarded as a bad one. Adultery in a lot of western countries is not. But in other countries it is (apparently) a big no. Am I the one, or are you the one, that is the wisdom tree whose moral beliefs they should follow? Or are they entitled to their own moral beliefs (and consequently entitled to determine the severity of the punishment for an offence)? If it's the first, what are your reasons?

 

[Jigs]

Many of the people on here that side with the Northern Alliance (which is in power) do it for political or ethnic reasons, but wouldn't like to be ruled by them themselves either. You can see it easily when they refer back to women's rights constantly and try to show provocative images (like you have done). Suggesting women's rights and the wearing of Burkhas on their heads is a reasonable cause for a war, is utterly ridiculous.

Afghanistan is for the Afghans to rule in my opinion. I hope they get funding for education and will realize that all these strict rules really aren't too important. That won't come about by force. It will come about in other ways.

The U.S. invaded Afghanistan because 3,000 people were killed by their "culture" as you say which seems to support terrorism. These strict rules have had thousands killed for religious reasoning. Were you not just recently trying to justify these as cultural values ? Then maybe the NAZIS extermination of jews was just the cultural values of the "Master Race".

Sorry but i am thankful the U.S. doesn't stand for BS culture that beheads people and has women beaten for showing a little bit of skin and stoned to death for adultery based on some justifications out of centuries old religious text. Call it what you want but in the most basic human levels deep down it is evil and wrong. So if civilians need to die for this to be fixed for the greater good of the world then be it. Trying to justify and compare and contrast it only shows your lack of overall humility in the matter. Is it so hard for you to say this is humanly wrong in the most basic of levels and i in no way understand or support it ?

 

[roadrunner]

The U.S. invaded Afghanistan because 3,000 people were killed by their "culture" as you say which seems to support terrorism. These strict rules have had thousands killed for religious reasoning. Were you not just recently trying to justify these as cultural values ? Then maybe the NAZIS extermination of jews was just the cultural values of the "Master Race".

Sorry but i am thankful the U.S. doesn't stand for BS culture that beheads people and has women beaten for showing a little bit of skin and stoned to death for adultery based on some justifications out of centuries old religious text. Call it what you want but in the most basic human levels deep down it is evil and wrong. So if civilians need to die for this to be fixed for the greater good of the world then be it. Trying to justify and compare and contrast it only shows your lack of overall humility in the matter. Is it so hard for you to say this is humanly wrong in the most basic of levels and i in no way understand or support it ?

Read up on the events of 911, the Afghan war. You get too emotional and repeat the same schoolboy garbage instead of trying to piece together a response that moves with the debate. If you come up with something reasonable that makes you believe the arguments presented are wrong, then present them. I'll respond then.

 

[Jigs]

Read up on the events of 911, the Afghan war. You get too emotional and repeat the same schoolboy garbage instead of trying to piece together a response that moves with the debate. If you come up with something reasonable that makes you believe the arguments presented are wrong, then present them. I'll respond then.

It is simply not something that can be debated. This is basic human rights and it is something established by the UNHRC and many other organizations. What am i going to debate with someone that has trouble comprehending this ? I am a Turk after all and we are people who become emotional when human beings are oppressed and treated with cruelty. If it is garbage then so be it at least i know i am human and refuse to stand for it.

 

[JonAsad]

It is simply not something that can be debated. This is basic human rights and it is something established by the UNHRC and many other organizations. What am i going to debate with someone that has trouble comprehending this ? I am a Turk after all and we are people who become emotional when human beings are oppressed and treated with cruelty. If it is garbage then so be it at least i know i am human and refuse to stand for it.

Kurds are human too, think about it? Did they beat women?

 

[TARIQ BN ZIYAAD]

i dont agree with that. overwhelming majority of muslims reject the taliban and al qaeda ideas. if some people especially in here do side with the taliban has nothing to do with muslims or islam, it is purely politically scoring(FOR Now),but the same people do not want a taliban rule on themsevles.

assalam alaikum

Brother what happened to u is bad and to the whole afghanistan taliban is a product of civil war. They were stupid in their implementation of laws. Most of them were illiterate. I know a taliban who was from uzbic ethnicity i asked him did u some time force ppl to pray the prayer twice he accepted it happened. Nobody is saying taliban were angels. I personnely have buisseness dealing with many afghans who r not pushtoons they r tajik dari ( i think) speaking ppl ,uzbeks they hate taliban very much. I dont know any pashtoons.

I dont know about urself but we meet muslims from all over the world we all agree taliban were stupid but nobody accept someone from outsides comes in bomb them and call them terrorists and about alqaeda this is terrorist organisation and if it was not the west muslim would have delt with them but unfortunately now everybody know alqaeda while ten years ago nobody knew about them.

U always mention they killed thousands burned many villages carte to tell us which villages and what period and if someone challenges the authority in any state of the U.S or in ur country how the authorities deel with them.


My dua for u afhgansitan that u have peace in there and whoever is interfering in ur country stop doing it

May Allah protect the ppl of afghanistan from war and destruction aameen

TARIQ

 

[Ahmad]

They were stupid in their implementation of laws.

The laws were stupid themselves, let alone its implementation, but i personally and many other people dont have that much of problem with it due to the fact that we got much more serious problems.

Most of them were illiterate.

They were taliban who were educated in Madrasahs especially in Pakistan, not sure how we can lable them as illiterate, yes the majority of them were literate and had some illiterate as well.

I know a taliban who was from uzbic ethnicity i asked him did u some time force ppl to pray the prayer twice he accepted it happened. Nobody is saying taliban were angels.

You dont see many non pashtoon talib among the taliban, maybe 2-3%, it is an overwhelmingly pashtoon organization which includes the pashtoons of pakistan as well. it has got a strong flavour of pashtoon nationalism under the mask of religioun, i dont think that will be good for pakistan either.

U always mention they killed thousands burned many villages carte to tell us which villages and what period and if someone challenges the authority in any state of the U.S or in ur country how the authorities deel with them.

what authority my friend, they came to power by gunpoint, nobody voted them in. Secondly, if they had killed the soldiers of their opponents then nobody would have cared about it. They were all gunmen from both sides, the more they had killed each other the better for the rest of our people, but taliban went to houses, took everybody out and shot them dead which didnt fit their caracterastic, be it language, ethnicity, religion or way of life. Masacares, burning houses, villages, cities was not something new to them.

 

[Gold1010]

i dont agree with that. overwhelming majority of muslims reject the taliban and al qaeda ideas. if some people especially in here do side with the taliban has nothing to do with muslims or islam, it is purely politically scoring(FOR Now),but the same people do not want a taliban rule on themsevles.

are you sure?

In most issues on this forum muslims always bring up religion.

just my opinion anyway