I directly addressed numerous aspects of your rant, pointing out it was based on faulty assumptions and various other logical fallacies What does that have to do with the point about backwards Afghan cultural practices and your attempt to defend and justify them? Right, nothing 1) Don't get your history from a movie. The truth is, outside urban centers there was very little support for a powerful centralized govt and a reistence formed organically long before any involvement from Washington 2) Why would I need to answer for or justify what Ronald Reagan said and did? Especially in the context of you trying to justify brutal cultural behaviors by appealing to some form of perceived ingrained and inescapable expression of nature? No, any culture that thinks it's cool to stone a rape victim to death is indeed inferior on the point of women's rights, to cultures that do not behave in such a manner. Yes, because short of isolated pockets that we would attempt to address through higher state authority, such is clearly viewed as unacceptable in a modern context. Which means we have moved on and corrected that inferior behavior Wait, so a dad killing his daughters rapist is analogous to killing his daughter for being raped? Again, you should really think these things through Yes, if you mean assuming that brown people can overcome historical cultural trappings, like anyone else. I am indeed guilty
You present no proof, far from it, you deflect and claim because our President once saw the Muslim extremeists as the 'founding fathers' then but now we attack them as 'inferior' you don't have to address that... :roll:
Again you try and make this a us-them thing- which you at first claim is not the proper metric... i defend nothing the 'freedom fighters' did or as the same gangs are now called 'terrorists'. I find an easy to read BOOK, not movie, to show you where we once slapped the backs of the religious extremists as honorable men. make up crap to try and scoff at it, it is typical CON deflection.
fact is you skip right over where the Aghanis had a fairly moderate government until the Soviets invaded to concentrate on the religious extremists WE helped put into power.
You twist the point I make on the dad killing a rapist. It is a matter of degree, you refuse to accept that and just try and make this them brutal, us noble civilized. :roll:
To many our society is decadent, pornographic, corrupt, and many outside the beltway, just like outside Kabul, have little respect for the central government.
But all of this is a CON deflection- the point is and will remain, it isn't their 'inferior' culture but their desire to resists anything the decadent and corrupt West attempts to foist off on them.
Now the stoning thing you cling to- once we thought nothing of killing a black man for whistling at a white girl. Acquit men who murder 'freedom riders', and restrict the voting rights of fellow Americans. All not part of some ancient past but within my own lifetime. If the reactionary Taliban is seen as barbaric then they are only 50 years behind us. They focus on gender, we focused on race.
I NEVER condoned stoning a rape victim, but how many CONS love the idea of cutting the hand off a thief? Or the penis of a rapist? Again it is a matter of degree you refuse to admit exists. We don't condone cold blooded murder but we do give a great deal of leeway to a father killing in cold blood a man he thinks raped his daughter. We have a new defense- affluensa for poor richie rich types. You see the Islamic extremists as barbaric, but refuse to consider the average Afghani, who this is about, sees Western Society as barbaric/corrupt/decadent. :doh
We don't offer an acceptable alternative, we refuse to understand forcing a society to change overnite is hardly a smooth move.
The discussion hinged on a CON claiming the 'inferior culture' is unable to give their hearts and minds to a Pro-western acceptable governance and cultural morals set.
My point is as long as the 'white man's burden' mindset is continued we will be as unsuccessful as ever. :2wave: