Afghanistan - 20 years on

[Blackjack Davy]

Women were allowed to own property as well as inherit it its just that when they married their property automatically became their husbands to do with as they pleased, until the married women's act changed that sometime in the 19c iirc

 

[Angilion]

Women were allowed to own property as well as inherit it its just that when they married their property automatically became their husbands to do with as they pleased, until the married women's act changed that sometime in the 19c iirc

Not legally, although that did sometimes happen. That's why, for example, there were specific legal protections in the Magna Carta for women who owned property, businesses, etc. Law-makers were trying to prevent married women having their property rights compromised by their husbands because they knew it sometimes happened. Under Norman law the property of both spouses became owned by the marriage. The Married Women's Property Acts (there were 2 - 1872 and 1884, I think...maybe 1874 and 1882) changed the rules for women only. So the wife's property remained her own and the husband's property remained jointly owned. Hence the famous phrase from a married woman back then - "What's mine is mine and what's his is ours". That's exactly what the law stated at the time. The reason why there were 2 MWPA was because the first one covered only property a woman owned before getting married and the second extended it to cover property she gained while married. Or maybe the other way around.

And that was Norman law, i.e. after 1066 in England. If you go back further, there was less sexism.

 

[jpaul]

Truss on a jolly in the USA, and meanwhile data breach on the at risk Afghan friends identities, worse than than Boris gaff on Zaghari-Ratcliffe;
if the bbc had sat on the news article though, like the guardian didn't on Kabul embassy data.

 

[Von Smallhausen]

I can't help but feel that history is repeating itself in that the British Empire, just about at its peak in the 19th Century, couldn't subjugate Afghanistan and the Soviet Union couldn't do it in the 1980s and their military machine was immense at the time. Move forward to 2001 and the combined forces of NATO couldn't do it either.

Taking over is one thing but trying to train up an army with rampant corruption in the ranks and expecting them to maintain a stable country is quite another. I feel that the invasion was a red mist reaction post 9/11 with little gained and a lot lost including thousands of troops and countless civilians.

It's an awful situation that's been left and the Taliban have landed on their feet with a lot of western military hardware being gifted to them.

 

[Hagar]

What happens in the sandpit stays in the sandpit.

 

[arknor]

Move forward to 2001 and the combined forces of NATO couldn't do it either.

only because their hands are tied behind their backs.

do you think ww2 would have been won if they followed current protocol ? there's probably very few wars in history that would have been.

Taliban could basically change from taliban > civilian at will and order a taxi home whilst nato watches

I bet they wish they never took reporters in with the Iraq invasion

 

[Nasher]

NATO would have steamrolled Afghanistan and Iraq in a weekend if it was total war. We were trying not to kill too many people.

 

[Tefal]

I can't help but feel that history is repeating itself in that the British Empire, just about at its peak in the 19th Century, couldn't subjugate Afghanistan and the Soviet Union couldn't do it in the 1980s and their military machine was immense at the time. Move forward to 2001 and the combined forces of NATO couldn't do it either.

Taking over is one thing but trying to train up an army with rampant corruption in the ranks and expecting them to maintain a stable country is quite another. I feel that the invasion was a red mist reaction post 9/11 with little gained and a lot lost including thousands of troops and countless civilians.

It's an awful situation that's been left and the Taliban have landed on their feet with a lot of western military hardware being gifted to them.

I think it would take several generations.

You need to nearly totally replace the mindset

So you really need grand parents, parents and kids raised with western values (and benefits, nothing kills an uprisng like good food, TV and video games) before you leave for it to stick.


Then the ol

 

[Tefal]

only because their hands are tied behind their backs.

do you think ww2 would have been won if they followed current protocol ? there's probably very few wars in history that would have been.

Taliban could basically change from taliban > civilian at will and order a taxi home whilst nato watches

I bet they wish they never took reporters in with the Iraq invasion

Germany was occupied for 45 years by the allies after ww2, another 25 years and we might have been getting somewhere

 

[Rroff]

Germany was occupied for 45 years by the allies after ww2, another 25 years and we might have been getting somewhere

Give it another 25 years with some of the older harder line Taliban dying out we'd probably see a different story. Albeit many of the tribal differences and so on would probably remain but overall the society would have grown up to a critical mass that accepted many practises as normal and less easily undo things like women's rights, etc.

Some of the girls who saw international recognition in things like robotics and other STEM subjects, etc. were from some of the more isolated parts of Afghanistan as well so it was slowly starting to make inroads beyond just the most populated areas.

 

[deuse]

"Grand Jury Returns Indictments Charging 2 Afghan Evacuees with Crimes While at Fort McCoy & Wisconsin Residents with Gun & Drug Crimes"

https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwi/p...rging-afghan-evacuees-crimes-while-fort-mccoy

"unrelated cases, two individuals have been charged with crimes while at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. Bahrullah Noori, 20, is charged with attempting to engage in a sexual act with a minor using force against that person, and with three counts of engaging in a sexual act with a minor, with one count alleging the use of force."

That's their life finished.

Well done biden for letting this happen.
They have only been in the US for a few weeks.

 

[Terminal_Boy]

Germany was occupied for 45 years by the allies after ww2, another 25 years and we might have been getting somewhere

Germany got rid of it’s religious nutters in the 16th century and had been an entirely civilised, modern nation until the Mad Austrian took over the place.

 

[StriderX]

"Grand Jury Returns Indictments Charging 2 Afghan Evacuees with Crimes While at Fort McCoy & Wisconsin Residents with Gun & Drug Crimes"

https://www.justice.gov/usao-wdwi/p...rging-afghan-evacuees-crimes-while-fort-mccoy

"unrelated cases, two individuals have been charged with crimes while at Fort McCoy, Wisconsin. Bahrullah Noori, 20, is charged with attempting to engage in a sexual act with a minor using force against that person, and with three counts of engaging in a sexual act with a minor, with one count alleging the use of force."

That's their life finished.

Well done biden for letting this happen.
They have only been in the US for a few weeks.

Are you pretending Biden is omniscient? I don't think it's possible for there not to be crime in any sample of population as large as the evacuation from Kabul, one should also be aware that the current instance of violent crime in the US is sitting somewhere between 300-400 per 100000 population (366 in 2019).

3 per 100000 is utopian in comparison.

Doesn't excuse it though, even if the whole ordeal is immensely stressful.

 

[ianh]

3 additional child rapes which wouldn't have happened per 100000 is utopian in comparison.

Just to put into context how awful what you said really is.

This isn't "either/or" it's 3 additional crimes which wouldn't have happened if the perpetrators were still in Afghanistan. Also, thats just 3 extra child rapes that have been reported in one small city and doesn't include any additional crimes committed by any of the "post collapse" 65,000+ Afghan refugees currently in the US (not including any that left from 2001-2021 "pre collapse").

Now, are the overwhelming vast majority of thee refugees going to lead a law abiding life in the US - yes - but will there also be a small number who do go on to commit crimes, some of which will be extremely serious - also yes - so it's not unfair to point this out and ask why should US citizens (usually in the poorest areas typical of where the refugees get dumped) be expected to suffer from this rise in additional crime and not say anything?

 

[Roar87]

Are you pretending Biden is omniscient? I don't think it's possible for there not to be crime in any sample of population as large as the evacuation from Kabul, one should also be aware that the current instance of violent crime in the US is sitting somewhere between 300-400 per 100000 population (366 in 2019).

3 per 100000 is utopian in comparison.

Doesn't excuse it though, even if the whole ordeal is immensely stressful.

This wasn't just "violent crime" though like a fight broke out, it was attempted rape, and those are annual stats not weekly. Rape in Afghanistan isn't punished most of the time, and it's rather common funnily enough

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_Afghanistan#Available_statistics_and_stigma

 

[Angilion]

Just to put into context how awful what you said really is. [..]

No. What you did was make something up and falsely pass it off as something StriderX wrote. You explicitly stated it was something they wrote. It wasn't. You are lying. Personally, I would say what you are doing is libel. Which is (rightfully) illegal.

 

[RoboCod]

No. What you did was make something up and falsely pass it off as something StriderX wrote. You explicitly stated it was something they wrote. It wasn't. You are lying. Personally, I would say what you are doing is libel. Which is (rightfully) illegal.

 

[ianh]

No. What you did was make something up and falsely pass it off as something StriderX wrote. You explicitly stated it was something they wrote. It wasn't. You are lying. Personally, I would say what you are doing is libel. Which is (rightfully) illegal.

OK

I do find it odd that you seem "annoyed" at me and my reply yet didn't use your own post to additionally say anything about the children that were raped, which to give him his dues, StriderX in an edit later. Oh well, guess to you what I wrote is deemed worse and therefore more worthy of being replied to than those 3 children being raped. Not that I believe that you condone it in any way (I don't think you're that sick in any way), I just find it odd that having read the story my post was the first thing you felt "annoyed" enough about to reply to, rather than the pretty horrific story which will be used by some as a brush to unfairly tar all Afghan refugees with.

 

[Angilion]

OK

I do find it odd that you seem "annoyed" at me and my reply yet didn't use your own post to additionally say anything about the children that were raped, which to give him his dues, StriderX in an edit later. Oh well, guess to you what I wrote is deemed worse and therefore more worthy of being replied to than those 3 children being raped. Not that I believe that you condone it in any way (I don't think you're that sick in any way), I just find it odd that having read the story my post was the first thing you felt "annoyed" enough about to reply to, rather than the pretty horrific story which will be used by some as a brush to unfairly tar all Afghan refugees with.

Unlike you, I didn't think it reasonable to use children being raped as a tool to score points over someone.

EDIT: Also, your post was a lie intended to do harm to a specific individual. Not simply a post. You didn't and still don't see anything wrong in that. And you don't see anything wrong in using children being raped as a political tool for smearing someone, which is why you're trying the same at me. Are you a professional? Writer for the Daily Mail, maybe?

 

[ianh]

Unlike you, I didn't think it reasonable to use children being raped as a tool to score points over someone.

EDIT: Also, your post was a lie intended to do harm to a specific individual. Not simply a post. You didn't and still don't see anything wrong in that. And you don't see anything wrong in using children being raped as a political tool for smearing someone, which is why you're trying the same at me. Are you a professional? Writer for the Daily Mail, maybe?

"Political tool for smearing someone" - "score points over someone" - "writer for the Daily Mail" - OK.

I thought StriderX was unintentionally minimising the crime with his statement which said that "violent crime in the US is sitting somewhere between 300-400 per 100000 population (366 in 2019). 3 per 100000 is utopian in comparison" and wanted to remind him that the "3 per 100000 is utopian in comparison" isn't utopian for the 3 kids who were raped. StriderX understood this and later edited in a extra line to text to his post and everyone gets it.

So no "political tool for smearing" (odd thing to say), no "points scoring", no "Daily Mail writing" - that one really confused me as a I twice mentioned how this stories like this will be used by some to unfairly target the overwhelming vast majority of law abiding refugees, which doesn't seem very "Daily Mail" of me.

So any other unconscious biases you have about me or my post are purely on you alone. I understand that you seem to think I'm the sort of horrible person you've built-up me up in your mind to be i.e. someone who you think would use the rape of children just to "point scores" on a forum, so I don't expect my reply to have a sudden "Ah I see now" effect on you and, as I don't feel like derailing this thread any further would change that, I'll just read but not reply to whatever you post next, allowing both to step away a little and let the thread get back to a discussion on Afghanistan.