What Is Cheaper Today Than 30/40 Years...
ChatterBank0 min ago
It's The Fluffy Bunny Wonder Taliban......
79 Answers
https:/
....right oh Tobias, they are all good guys now!
....right oh Tobias, they are all good guys now!
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by ToraToraTora. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
For good PR. Read downright lies.
https:/
'It is untrue we don't force women to wear a Burkah'
"So they can walk around without one? "
' Of course. As long as they wear a Hijab'!!!
https:/
'It is untrue we don't force women to wear a Burkah'
"So they can walk around without one? "
' Of course. As long as they wear a Hijab'!!!
retrocop - //
I wonder who are supposed to have the repressive ways here.
Since the Taliban have returned we see two bodies hanging from a overhead gantry. Taliban justice. Hands are still cut off for theft. Women (not the men I note still stoned for adultery).
If that is an example of good Taliban PR then Allah protect the ordinary Afghan people where terror has returned to them. //
As I have pointed out to naomi, my reference to the Taliban 'PR' was intended sarcastically.
But my point remains valid -
History has shown that attempts to change a repressive regime into something more humane using invasion and military force is simply doomed to failure, as we should have been learning, but haven't, from Viet Nam onwards.
We know what the answer is not, because we keep proving it to ourselves.
Persuasion, which means dialogue, is the only way changes are ever going to happen. Force clearly does not work.
I wonder who are supposed to have the repressive ways here.
Since the Taliban have returned we see two bodies hanging from a overhead gantry. Taliban justice. Hands are still cut off for theft. Women (not the men I note still stoned for adultery).
If that is an example of good Taliban PR then Allah protect the ordinary Afghan people where terror has returned to them. //
As I have pointed out to naomi, my reference to the Taliban 'PR' was intended sarcastically.
But my point remains valid -
History has shown that attempts to change a repressive regime into something more humane using invasion and military force is simply doomed to failure, as we should have been learning, but haven't, from Viet Nam onwards.
We know what the answer is not, because we keep proving it to ourselves.
Persuasion, which means dialogue, is the only way changes are ever going to happen. Force clearly does not work.
We have been down this road many times Naomi.
You appear to remain firmly entrenched in your often expressed view that militant Islamists remain utterly intractable and beyond all reasoning.
The problem with that stance is that it does prevent any attempts to engage in a dialogue in which the advantages of a change in some attitudes by the Taliban could be beneficial to them, could be undertaken.
Margaret Thatcher was always of a similar view, announcing that she 'would not negotiate with terrorists'.
Fortunately, more enlightened minds understood that negotiation is the only realistic way forward, and the abandonment of her proudly stated mantra has led to peace in Northern Ireland.
I am not so naive as to suggest that negotiations with Islamists will ve anything like as straightforward.
There are gulfs of historical hostility, together with widely differing cultural attitudes to be addressed.
But the simple fact remains, we must attempt to enter dialogue with the Taliban, because the attempted military options have been a resounding failure, achieving nothing except to strengthen their hostility towards the West.
We cannot carry on allowing their repression to continue unchallenged, we simply need to stop approaching them with our notion that our way of life is morally superior, and they must adopt it.
That will get us nowhere, but we need to try and find common ground, however difficult that appears to be.
You appear to remain firmly entrenched in your often expressed view that militant Islamists remain utterly intractable and beyond all reasoning.
The problem with that stance is that it does prevent any attempts to engage in a dialogue in which the advantages of a change in some attitudes by the Taliban could be beneficial to them, could be undertaken.
Margaret Thatcher was always of a similar view, announcing that she 'would not negotiate with terrorists'.
Fortunately, more enlightened minds understood that negotiation is the only realistic way forward, and the abandonment of her proudly stated mantra has led to peace in Northern Ireland.
I am not so naive as to suggest that negotiations with Islamists will ve anything like as straightforward.
There are gulfs of historical hostility, together with widely differing cultural attitudes to be addressed.
But the simple fact remains, we must attempt to enter dialogue with the Taliban, because the attempted military options have been a resounding failure, achieving nothing except to strengthen their hostility towards the West.
We cannot carry on allowing their repression to continue unchallenged, we simply need to stop approaching them with our notion that our way of life is morally superior, and they must adopt it.
That will get us nowhere, but we need to try and find common ground, however difficult that appears to be.
Yes, AH, we have been down this road many times and still you fail to understand that the only thing the IRA have in common with Islamic fundamentalists is that they kill people in terror attacks. I hesitate to advise you yet again to look at the reasons behind their actions and ask what would serve to appease each - the answer to which gives you the whole answer.
Naomi - I don't need 'advice' thank you, I am well aware of the Fundamentalists' approach, but intractibility is not an excuse to metaphorically fold your arms and tell yourself it's pointless to try.
That simply allows things to continue, while you tell yourself there is nothing you can do, and that's their fault.
It's not the way progress is made in any areas of life, and like me, you don't need advice on simple realities.
That simply allows things to continue, while you tell yourself there is nothing you can do, and that's their fault.
It's not the way progress is made in any areas of life, and like me, you don't need advice on simple realities.
Naomi - Your constantly, and unreservedly superior attitude about Islam, as though your version is the only version that counts, makes discussion impossible, so I'll bid you good evening, and continue to exchange thoughts with anyone else who may not have their mind made up and their attitudes cast in stone, unable to stop their inbred sense of moral and intellectual superiority from considering that there may be the possibility of dialogue, because neither side is ever going to be as intractable as you.
I do wonder how you manage to type with your arms so firmly crossed, and whether your superior sneer makes your face ache.
I do wonder how you manage to type with your arms so firmly crossed, and whether your superior sneer makes your face ache.
-- answer removed --
let's not forget the taliban mindset is entrenched in the days of there prophet literally, and this view will not change, for them it would be
heresy, why go forward with the decadent apostate world, when they think they are guided by there book, it cannot be undone, it's for all time, but people do rise up, but i dont think so in afghanistan, to tribal
and in that, they do not trust eachother, but only through islam.
heresy, why go forward with the decadent apostate world, when they think they are guided by there book, it cannot be undone, it's for all time, but people do rise up, but i dont think so in afghanistan, to tribal
and in that, they do not trust eachother, but only through islam.
Sarcasm is never a good debating tool especially when the poster is the only one who knows or professes to know they are using sarcasm in their debate.
It can easily be used to cover up a boo boo when lofty opinions are presented as fact, but when challenged, cannot provide the material requested to validate those opinions. I call it bovine excreta and I am of the belief your post does not fly.
I offered two links to counter your claim and I won't wait much longer for you to disprove that what you post is nothing more than what's in your imagination.
It can easily be used to cover up a boo boo when lofty opinions are presented as fact, but when challenged, cannot provide the material requested to validate those opinions. I call it bovine excreta and I am of the belief your post does not fly.
I offered two links to counter your claim and I won't wait much longer for you to disprove that what you post is nothing more than what's in your imagination.
Latest Posts
How Can The Truth Be Offensive?
News4 mins ago
Film, Media & TV5 mins ago
Crosswords7 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.