so if your mom tells you a sweaty man one day will climb on top of you and have sex with you once you're 12 you arent scared? cool.

i disagree with the war, as i said, i dont need to support invasion to also look down on archaic and gross cultural practices. i can do both.

my original post stands, the Taliban solves one issue of little boys being raped, and replaces it with another the enslavement of the female gender en masse. and beheading gays, dissidents, and just about whomever they want.

it should have been easier to get the new afghan govt to end the raping of little boys than it would be to modernize the Taliban, afterall you're clapping them on the back for ending it immediately. Poof the practice is gone.


as is typical you take a simple statement, distort it, likely buzzed or hungover, then ignore common ground to strawman because you're overly combative and feel u need to educate others with what u found on wikipedia this week. never change bobb, as if u could.

pedophilia is not a culture.

Arranged marriages were the norm in western culture for thousands of years. Your arbitrary decision on age is meaningless.

And there was no point with the new government where anything would be resolved regarding the female role in Afghanistan society, or the consequences of homosexuality, dissidents, or whatever else. They're still a 99.7% Sunni Muslim nation. They don't follow western law, they follow Sharia. Sharia imposes duties on men and women, and their prophet set the precedent for the acceptable age of consummation. Sharia is pretty clear about the consequences of homosexuality. Sharia is pretty clear about the consequence of dissenting against leadership. The fact is, even if we had managed the situation in such a way that the Taliban laid down their weapons and accepted the new government, within just a couple election cycles of US withdrawal, Taliban leaders would have ended up voted back in control. Pew Research has been on top of this issue for years.

The reason that the Taliban had nearly total control of the nation when we invaded was not because they were just that vicious. It was because the majority of the population agreed with them. So rather than allowing them to retain control, we supported dissidents that the majority in Afghanistan did not agree with, who's practices were haram. No matter what we thought we were going to accomplish when it comes to human rights in Afghanistan, it was always slated to fail. And the reason is simple: Their society is built around the tenants of their religion. And they are NOT open to changing that.



We agree. The desire to rape prepubescent children is not a culture. And the Taliban's penalty for anyone who commits it is execution.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Aug 19 2021 07:06am

you keep throwing wikipedia articles at me as if i support the war, believed in the new Afghan govt, supported rebuilding, etc.

my only point was that as far as ending boy porking goes thats a hell of a thin silver lining, specifically for the women of afghanistan that in your estimation just weren't raised right to accept their sweaty hashish smoking husbands.

at this point im guessing if i just posted "taliban = bad" you'd have posted 5 pages on the situation. you clearly need to be heard. go ahead and post some more, im happy to nod along while you do with a "oh wow", "that's crazy", "whoa, nuts", like i do when my wife shares water cooler gossip.

The fact is that everything you're saying is just bullshit. Arranged marriages didn't go away under US occupation. Even districts that "abolished" the practice only saw a 50% drop. Teenage girls were still being forced to marry. Toddlers ended up with their marriages arranged while still in the crib.

All this was still occurring en masse during US occupation. Do you get it? FGM was still occurring under US occupation. Do you get it? The US was supporting and promoting haram practices, while the Taliban will bring back proper Sharia.

The only person "needing to be heard" here is you. We accomplished NOTHING in Afghanistan. The puppet government accomplished NOTHING as well. There was NO "silver lining" to the US occupation. The fact that there's any silver lining at all to the Taliban retaking control means they're already a step ahead.

Continue attempting to talk about women's rights in Islamic Theocracies though. It clearly makes you feel smart somehow. Oh, and a last note, arranged marriages impact men as well. They have no more choice in most cases than than the women, regardless of age.

so a 50% reduction isn't noteworthy? ok.

the rest is just lazy strawmans ive already cleared out but u re-raised lol. sad.

No, it's not noteworthy. The fact that the government was so ineffectual that it "banned" a practice and was completely unable to enforce it's ban, and had so little citizen support for it's ban that they were still continuing the practice anyhow without any "Taliban Mandate", makes it laughable more than noteworthy.

The "lazy strawmans" are clearly your own. When you act as though it's the Taliban who's enforcing things like FGM and Arranged Marriages as well as executions of homosexuals, yet those things were still going on for 20 years in areas where the Taliban had no control, only the new government did, you've reached the point of "duh" where reality just no longer matters.

Your quip about "Taliban = bad" is stupid and pointless as well. Because for the people of Afghanistan, they're better than any other available alternative.



Speak for yourself. I've always dated women older than myself, and married a woman older than myself.

Understanding that other cultures may believe that people are "adults" at a younger age doesn't mean I'd support it in the US. It does, however, mean it's easy as hell to point out the people who're attempting to judge a foreign culture based on values that foreign culture does not share.

This post was edited by InsaneBobb on Aug 19 2021 07:36am

He’s an ephebophile man, not one of those sickos.

i never did. i simply pointed out they dont and never will have any interest in ending them.

liberalizing afghanistan was always a pipe dream under the shaky new govt of hashish smoking lazy fucks who were unpopular with the population (im aware the taliban won democratic elections by a wide margin), but its impossible under the taliban. i point this out and you go off lol.

i dont support the "new govt" which is all but gone, i dont have faith in the afghan army we wasted money on, i dont support the invasion or occupation at all, but i simply dislike the Taliban more and that upsets you for some reason? lol. ok.

The odd part is that our primary disagreement is the perspective. "I don't like the Taliban" comes from a western perspective, the idea of having them in control of your own nation. You're sympathizing with people when you don't share basic values. That's a mistake. When viewing leadership from a foreign perspective, it's important to empathize. That requires putting yourself in their shoes, understanding their values, etc. So from a "for the good of the Afghani people" perspective, the Taliban seems to be exactly what they need: A strong leadership by nationalists who share the basic values of the population, and are willing to fight for the independence and sovereignty of their Nation.

For my part? I much prefer the Taliban to Hamas. My main concern when it comes to foreign governments is that they aren't attempting to attack their neighboring nations. The Taliban never did that. Hamas does regularly. So from the empathy standpoint, the Taliban is fine. From the "what's best for the rest of the world" standpoint, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the Taliban. Anyhow, things to do. Fun chat.