International Taliban Ban All Afghan Women From Higher Education, Parks, Gyms, Working for NGO's.

It is exactly what we did, did you not read my link? The reason we lost is because we insisted on an unconditional surrender instead of accepting a total surrender with a single condition for amnesty.

The big difference is that the Taliban are not a modern, industrialized army ruling over an urbanized population but rather an insurgent group fighting in their home turf with favorable terrain in a largely rural society. With a modern army once you destroy their industrial output and occupy their major cities you control most of the population and have eliminated their capacity to conduct war against you but that is not the case when you're fighting an insurgency in a rural country.

You have to have the will to destroy whatever required to stop their supply including the people willing to fight. We could have done that if we had said fuck it total war.

I don't support that because it's not our job and should not be.

We have more then enough power to destroy the entire country and leave nothing standing. We don't have the stomach for that and should not have even tried to "bring democracy " to them.

It's not our job and is a lost cause.
 
You have to have the will to destroy whatever required to stop their supply including the people willing to fight. We could have done that if we had said fuck it total war.

I don't support that because it's not our job and should not be.

We have more then enough power to destroy the entire country and leave nothing standing. We don't have the stomach for that and should not have even tried to "bring democracy " to them.

It's not our job and is a lost cause.
Is your argument that we should've just depopulated Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban? Yeah that'll win hearts and minds.

Btw the USSR in its occupation killed between 9%-11% of the population and still failed, how much more do you think we should've killed?
 
Is your argument that we should've just depopulated Afghanistan to defeat the Taliban? Yeah that'll win hearts and minds.

Btw the USSR in its occupation killed between 9%-11% of the population and still failed, how much more do you think we should've killed?

What did we do to Germany on that scale is what was required.

The point you are missing is we could have done it but I don't support it because it's not our job.

The point would not be to win hearts and minds.
 
What did we do to Germany on that scale is what was required.

The point you are missing is we could have done it but I don't support it because it's not our job.
I've already explained why Germany was a bad analogy and also pointed out that the USSR did depopulate the country as you're advocating for here so not sure why you can't see that its not as easy "Just defeat the Taliban bro"
 
Afghanistan: Taliban bans women from working for NGOs
By James FitzGerald & Haniya Ali
BBC News


Women's freedoms have been further curtailed in Afghanistan, after the Taliban barred them from working for non-governmental organisations (NGOs).


The Islamist rulers said female NGO staff had broken strict dress codes.

The edict has been condemned by the organisations themselves, as well as the UN. It comes just days after female students were banned from universities.

Female Afghan NGO workers acting as the main earners in their household told the BBC of their fear and helplessness.

One asked: "If I cannot go to my job, who can support my family?" Another breadwinner called the news "shocking" and insisted she had complied with the Taliban's strict dress code.

A third woman questioned the Taliban's "Islamic morals", saying she would now struggle to pay her bills and feed her children.

"The world is watching us and doing nothing," said another female interviewee. The BBC is not publishing the women's names in order to protect them.

Saturday's order came in a letter from the Ministry of Economy to both national and international NGOs. It threatened to cancel the licence of any organisation that did not swiftly comply.

By way of explanation, it said women were breaking Sharia law by failing to wear the hijab.

The move has sparked international outrage, with US Secretary of State Antony Blinken saying it could disrupt aid deliveries and prove "devastating" to millions of Afghans.

It was also described as a "clear breach of humanitarian principles" by a senior United Nations official.

UN agencies have a significant presence in the country, carrying out relief and development work. An urgent meeting of the Humanitarian Country Team was planned for Sunday to respond to the news.

An employee of Save the Children told BBC News the organisation was planning to meet Taliban authorities, amid worries some NGOs would have to close if they could not employ women.

It is also feared that Afghan women could be left unable to receive aid directly, if organisations are only allowed to employ men. Taliban rules prevent men from working with women.

Female employees were "essential" for reaching other women and girls, explained Melissa Cornet from Care International.

She added: "Without them, the humanitarian situation might deteriorate rapidly, in a situation where most of the country is already facing life-threatening levels of hunger."

The South Asian branch of Amnesty International described the ban as "yet another deplorable attempt to erase women from the political, social and economic spaces" of Afghanistan.

One doctor working in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif and nearby remote villages said she was "sad and devastated" at the development.

She predicted "great difficulty" for women trying to access medicine, as they "can't fully tell their problems to men".

Meanwhile, one imam - whose identity is again being protected by the BBC - said the Taliban was "not committed to any Islamic value".

He explained: "Islam has not said that men can educate and women cannot. Or men can work and women cannot. We are confused about this decision."

A ban on women attending Afghan universities earlier this week met similar criticism. It triggered protests - including in Herat on Saturday - which were rapidly suppressed by the Taliban.

Since seizing back control of the country last year, the group has steadily restricted women's rights - despite promising its rule would be softer than the regime seen in the 1990s.

As well as the ban on female university students - now being enforced by armed guards - secondary schools for girls remain closed in most provinces.

Women have also been prevented from entering parks and gyms, among other public places.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-64086682
 
I've already explained why Germany was a bad analogy and also pointed out that the USSR did depopulate the country as you're advocating for here so not sure why you can't see that its not as easy "Just defeat the Taliban bro"

They still didn't go all out. Where was the carpet bombing. Did they level the cities.
 
They still didn't go all out. Where was the carpet bombing. Did they level the cities.

Sounds like you think Afghanistan and The Taliban were the same thing.

Even if they were, it never would have worked and would have made things a thousand times worse in the long run.
 
@Deorum @Islam Imamate

OK now I’m thinking that the Taliban is Based

Fkm9P_iWIAQDrpg.jpg
*Minister of Higher Education bans higher education*
bold-commentary.gif

<36>
 
Sounds like you think Afghanistan and The Taliban were the same thing.

Even if they were, it never would have worked and would have made things a thousand times worse in the long run.

We could have leveled the country or whatever was needed to kill or run all of the Taliban out. As soon as we left something just as bad would have slowly can back to replace them. Which is the way of that area of the world.
 
We could have leveled the country or whatever was needed to kill or run all of the Taliban out. As soon as we left something just as bad would have slowly can back to replace them. Which is the way of that area of the world.

Right.

Best case scenario you still don't win, and you prove to the world you are in fact savage barbarians.

How on Earth do you justify leveling a country on the other side of the world?
 
Right.

Best case scenario you still don't win, and you prove to the world you are in fact savage barbarians.

How on Earth do you justify leveling a country on the other side of the world?

If the protect people that attack you.
 
Never understood the marriage between America's leftist and radical islamists.

I guess they think that they'll be able to shriek "hate speech, words are violence" and totally use accusations of Nazism to stop them from sawing their heads off with knifes, for preaching homosexual tolerance..

I dunno just saying
 
Never understood the marriage between America's leftist and radical islamists.

They're in a safe space, and the people they're advocating for are brown. Nothing more to it. If ever the time came where Islamic rule came to America, they think they would be able to persuade the new regime into an understanding of "diversity and tolerance" with some Youtube videos. They would be arrested shortly afterwards for spreading blasphemy, and still not get it as they were sentenced to death.
 
If the protect people that attack you.

What's the goal and your best possible outcome?

And how many blood enemies are you willing you make? How many are you willing to radicalize?

Getting the hell out was probably the best possible move and Trump made it happen, even if he did it badly and set up Biden to take the blame.
 
They're in a safe space, and the people they're advocating for are brown. Nothing more to it. If ever the time came where Islamic rule came to America, they think they would be able to persuade the new regime into an understanding of "diversity and tolerance" with some Youtube videos. They would be arrested shortly afterwards for spreading blasphemy, and still not get it as they were sentenced to death.
I agree with you whole heartily... I'm pretty sure that leftists would be butchered in the town square while conservatives would probably escape being killed...simply because they hold traditional views , such as God family and all that jazz..
We would probably be forced into cleaning up the blood and lots of manual labor....

Unless they ofcourse decide to attempt to convert us... If that happens we'd probably be killed right along side the leftists.
 
What's the goal and your best possible outcome?

And how many blood enemies are you willing you make? How many are you willing to radicalize?

Getting the hell out was probably the best possible move and Trump made it happen, even if he did it badly and set up Biden to take the blame.
it's not Trump's fault the Biden administration purposely ignored the set withdrawal date, according to the deal that was made

Bidens administration did that on purpose, it was the only way they could turn what Trump did for peace and stability into a loss
 
Can you explain what you mean by this?

Which "leftists" are supporting radicals?
if you don't know then I'm not interested in telling you. Your head must be in the sand and I'm not in the mood to go to the beach today
 
They still didn't go all out. Where was the carpet bombing. Did they level the cities.
What cities do you have in mind? 80% of the population lives in rural areas btw.

Just to reiterate, the USSR killed between 9%-11% of the population so how much more should we have killed for this plan to work?
We could have leveled the country or whatever was needed to kill or run all of the Taliban out.
<Huh2>
 
Back
Top