Omar Khadr's Sister on Hunger Strike

[myata]

Except on September 11, 2001, March 11, 2004, July 11, 2005 etc. And numerous bus attacks, disco attacks in other democracies.

Well, yes, nobody is fully innocent here. But for every incident of civilian death, attack, etc on our "proper" soil, there would probably be orders of magnitude that caused by our direct domination or indirect interference in their affairs and in their land. Starting with open colonial subjugation in the early 1900, to establishment and support of Israel, to machinations and manipulations of governments, to supplying arms to friendly regimes in the later years. Not to forget force fed democratizations of the most recent times. So if one wants to forget or ignore, all the underlying root causes, and only notice the outrageous acts of some delirious individuals, they themselves would be deliriously blind, and little can be added to that.

We're no longer sending out missionaries, or asking them to adopt our G-ds. If they can practice Islam openly here, why can't we go there with reading material of our choice and not die in the process.

Instead we're sending them proxy governments backed by our F-16s. And yes they can practice their faith here, because it's our way. Their ways can be different. Just as said: we want everybody to be like us; and if they aren't, we get angry. Childish reaction really, but it's very sad that with all our technological and political sophistication we just wouldn't (could not?) grow up.

BTW we also need them to work in our mills and pay our pensions. Aging population.

[JB Globe]

Do you realize that once you make an unfounded generalization such as that you have, in effect, conceded your point.

You could have said that the minute folks started generalizing that Muslims are inherently terrorists.

[jbg]

Well, yes, nobody is fully innocent here. But for every incident of civilian death, attack, etc on our "proper" soil, there would probably be orders of magnitude that caused by our direct domination or indirect interference in their affairs and in their land. Starting with open colonial subjugation in the early 1900, to establishment and support of Israel, to machinations and manipulations of governments, to supplying arms to friendly regimes in the later years.

Are you really saying that the establishment of a non-Muslim land (in which Muslims are welcome to live) little larger than PEI, in the middle of a huge and largely unused Islamosphere is a good reason for those attacks.

Not to forget force fed democratizations of the most recent times. So if one wants to forget or ignore, all the underlying root causes, and only notice the outrageous acts of some delirious individuals, they themselves would be deliriously blind, and little can be added to that.

I see little condemnation of the attacks by "some delirious individuals". No statements that "this madness must stop" or anything like that.

Instead we're sending them proxy governments backed by our F-16s. And yes they can practice their faith here, because it's our way. Their ways can be different. Just as said: we want everybody to be like us; and if they aren't, we get angry. Childish reaction really, but it's very sad that with all our technological and political sophistication we just wouldn't (could not?) grow up.

BTW we also need them to work in our mills and pay our pensions. Aging population.

My point is that "what's sauce for the goose..."

[myata]

Are you really saying that the establishment of a non-Muslim land (in which Muslims are welcome to live) little larger than PEI, in the middle of a huge and largely unused Islamosphere is a good reason for those attacks.

What can be said? If one likes to establish something somewhere without local peoples' concent, they're guaranteed to face the music at some point of their career. Mind you: not because I think that it's a "good reason", but because it's a fact of human nature: people don't like to be dominated, and don't easily forgive it.

I see little condemnation of the attacks by "some delirious individuals". No statements that "this madness must stop" or anything like that.

For the record: I condemn all attacks. BTW, here's the most recent example: BBC: US attack in Syria

My point is that "what's sauce for the goose..."

And that point is obviously wrong. Just test it among a group of people. What's good for me, is good for ... correct? People are different, and societies are too. There's no one obvious standard or ideal for everybody to follow. Being different does not necessarily mean being the source of evil and a target for subjugation and domination.

Edited October 27, 2008 by myata

[bush_cheney2004]

....Instead we're sending them proxy governments backed by our F-16s....

I didn't know Canada had any "F-16s"....good on ya!

[DogOnPorch]

I didn't know Canada had any "F-16s"....good on ya!

Didn't you hear? They escort the Canadian "Bear" bombers as they patrol the coasts off of Norway.

---------------------------------

Without rules, we all might as well be up in a tree flinging our crap at each other.

---"Red" Forman: That 70s Show

[myata]

I didn't know Canada had any "F-16s"....good on ya!

Truly. Our ancestor of old hacked with a club and a stone ax. We - with those wondrous F-whatever. And mind you, all to the same noble end - although the ancestor may not have yet invented the word - i.e to grab more of the stuff from someone else. What an amazing progress! What a great foundation to preach and instruct others on the true ways of goodness.

Edited October 28, 2008 by myata

[DogOnPorch]

...and what, pray-tell, are 'grabbing' from Afghanistan?

-----------------------------------

F = Fighter; B = Bomber; C = Cargo; K = Refueling; E = Electronic Warfare

[myata]

...and what, pray-tell, are 'grabbing' from Afghanistan?

Their independence? Their way of life??

[DogOnPorch]

Their independence? Their way of life??

Fond longings for the Taliban, eh? Kind of figured. Do you wear a burqa in Canada in support? I guess, for all we know, you are Omar's sister...lol.

------------------------------------------------------

We have shown that Islam can rule the world perfectly for 14 centuries, and during this time of Muslim power we did not borrow ideas like democracy from others, so why do we need to learn democracy from them now?

---Abu Bakar Bashir

[myata]

OK, standard cliche #1 (normally applied when at an absolute and irrevocable loss of any inteligent, rational argument). Move on.

[DogOnPorch]

OK, standard cliche #1 (normally applied when at an absolute and irrevocable loss of any inteligent, rational argument). Move on.

That's sad. Are you sure you have nothing to say?

------------------------------------

Touche'

[myata]

No, but it's you, silly! You've got nothing more to say and that's exactly why you resourt to standard well worn off and dusted namecalling (Taleban, etc) and no less standard and worn off boogie threats (Al Quaeda, etc). I know it may take awhile to sink in - but take you time.

[jbg]

...and what, pray-tell, are 'grabbing' from Afghanistan?

Their independence? Their way of life??

Well, here's a fair trade (that you won't like). They agree to sealed borders, i.e. no traffic in or out that's not monitored to make sure that the contents aren't contraband in the ultimate destination country (for "exports") or aren't weapons. Further, they agree to no funds transfers other than relating to legitimate commercial transactions. And of course no aid, UN, Islamist or otherwise.

This would ensure that they could maintain their "way of life" free from interference, and that they would pose no dangers to any other peoples.

[DogOnPorch]

No, but it's you, silly! You've got nothing more to say and that's exactly why you resourt to standard well worn off and dusted namecalling (Taleban, etc) and no less standard and worn off boogie threats (Al Quaeda, etc). I know it may take awhile to sink in - but take you time.

Here from a poster that claims we're taking away Afghanistan's 'independence' and 'way of life'. This would assume that you found some merit to the previous 'way of life' and 'independence'...that being of the Taliban. You'll have to excuse me if 1+1 apparently equals 2. Either that or you have some other view of what their previous 'independence' and 'way of life' was that I am unaware of.

------------------------------------------

Dr. Zira: What will he find out there, doctor?

Dr. Zaius: His destiny.

---Planet of the Apes

Edited October 28, 2008 by DogOnPorch

[Peter F]

Their independence? Their way of life??

Well, here's a fair trade (that you won't like). They agree to sealed borders, i.e. no traffic in or out that's not monitored to make sure that the contents aren't contraband in the ultimate destination country (for "exports") or aren't weapons. Further, they agree to no funds transfers other than relating to legitimate commercial transactions. And of course no aid, UN, Islamist or otherwise.

This would ensure that they could maintain their "way of life" free from interference, and that they would pose no dangers to any other peoples.

This is funny! jbg will be the ultimate arbitre of what their way of life is that must not be changed!

I suspect, though, that he is talking about the Taliban and their way of life, as opposed to non-taliban and their way of life.

Not that it matters one whit to the Taliban , or the non-taliban for that matter.

Their 'way of life' will continue as they wish it to continue, and evolve, no matter what the west or anybody else tries to impose on them. Poppy's were not always a big cash crop. At one time fruits did well for exports.

But war has a habit of changing things in ways no one could imagine.

[myata]

Bull's eye; certainly it's up to us (meaning certain folks in this forum, as well as those who think alike, including those of them who once in a while make it high enough to put these ideas into practice) to judge which way life is worthy of existing, and which one needs to be changed. Nothing new there, really.

The sad thing is not that such people still exist. It's that in the uncounted years of history we, as a society, still haven't learned that spreading ideas, even the best ones, by force and fire, is not the thing to do. And what would it take to learn? I don't know.

[bush_cheney2004]

Bull's eye; certainly it's up to us (meaning certain folks in this forum, as well as those who think alike, including those of them who once in a while make it high enough to put these ideas into practice) to judge which way life is worthy of existing, and which one needs to be changed. Nothing new there, really.

Nope....from abortions to clear cutting rain forests.

The sad thing is not that such people still exist. It's that in the uncounted years of history we, as a society, still haven't learned that spreading ideas, even the best ones, by force and fire, is not the thing to do. And what would it take to learn? I don't know.

How do you think this "society" came to be? You know...the one you live in.

[Oleg Bach]

This society did not result in Muslim doctrine - nor did it result from Cabalist secrecy and the Tora - This society where you don't have to worry about someone taking your possession - you husband and child or your money - by simply cracking your head with a rock - Christian doctrine gave us the freedom to be a free enterprise righteous and kind nation. It's changing - God hate and secularzation have resulted in man hate - woman hate - child hate - and the hate of the free thinking benevolent individual - we are now offically ants eating each other. The Khadr's don't love their neighbours as themselves - Nor do the Jews unless you are Mulim or a Jew.

Christains are cowards and have long lost the rebelious nature and soothesaying that was once the movement - they are useless and if Christ was here at this moment he would turn with disgust and leave us to our own destructive self serving device. Civilization of the west and the east was done by a great king from over two thousand years ago and now we call this rebel a myth and we spit in the face of our lord and father that gave us this now dying great wealth and security - we are stupid.

[jbg]

This is funny! jbg will be the ultimate arbitre of what their way of life is that must not be changed!

I suspect, though, that he is talking about the Taliban and their way of life, as opposed to non-taliban and their way of life.

Not that it matters one whit to the Taliban , or the non-taliban for that matter.

Their 'way of life' will continue as they wish it to continue, and evolve, no matter what the west or anybody else tries to impose on them. Poppy's were not always a big cash crop. At one time fruits did well for exports.

But war has a habit of changing things in ways no one could imagine.

My point is that if they want to live a primitive, dangerous way of life, let them. As long as it doesn't affect others and others don't have to subsidize their primal state.

[Army Guy]

Their 'way of life' will continue as they wish it to continue, and evolve, no matter what the west or anybody else tries to impose on them.

Of course you have proof of that or is it your opinion ? please give us a link or source that proves we the west have set conditions on our assistance forcing them into doing things our way.......Where we have forced our ways, our values, our morals, our anything on the people of Afgan...

Bull's eye; certainly it's up to us (meaning certain folks in this forum, as well as those who think alike, including those of them who once in a while make it high enough to put these ideas into practice) to judge which way life is worthy of existing, and which one needs to be changed. Nothing new there, really.

Lets just for sake of argument your right, the Taliban do have a right to exist as before the war, where do they exist ? and what of those that want nothing to do with the taliban and thier ways, don't they have rights as well ? or are they forced to live under the Taliban ? where do they exist ? and if we in the west don't have the right to decide what is good or bad, then who is going to decide where these groups exist ?

And what happens when the Taliban wants to use force and expand, who gets to decide what action is required ? or do we close our eyes and let them settle matters themselfs let nature take it's course....

Mean while back in the west to we add this new found wealth of wisdom to our everyday lives....does this mean that i can kill my niebour because she swims naked in her pool, because i have the rights do do anything i want to , be it under the guise of religion, human rights, personal beliefs the list goes on.....does it mean i can use force to get what ever it is i want....like separate from Canada and have a small chunk of my own nation ARMYGUYVILLE...all hail Armyguy....i can hear it now...

Sorry But back to the real world armyguy, Someone, has already made up those rules, in fact a majority of nations have sat down at the UN and decided together that if we where all going to play in the same sandbox we need some guide lines....carrying out terrorist avtivities is a no no, so is mass murder, so is dening basic human rights....i know i happens all over the globe everyday, and we sit by and watch it all happen....but we can't help them all ....with a few exceptions, Afgan is one of those ....

So to answer your question the Sandbox has voted, and it's time to kick the Taliban off the island....the world has decided it would be a happier place without them....so it's not the few guys on this forum, or for that matter anyone with the power to make those decisions as Harper has....it was a collective decision, by many nations....

[myata]

My point is that if they want to live a primitive, dangerous way of life, let them. As long as it doesn't affect others and others don't have to subsidize their primal state.

+1 (- "primitive, dangerous" and other derogatory terms that really add nothing to the equation). But what we say is not what we do. Just take a look back at the history of the region over last century, and you'll see continous relenless domination, bugging and pestering of these people by who? Correct. So, until we actually and for real leave them alone, there's really no way to tell eternal incarnate evilness from natural trait of human nature to resist domination (we can have another, philosophical discussion about why such trait had come into existence). The resistance that does not always take morally justifiable forms, but is nonetheless as firmly rooted in the fundamentals of social nature, as the the fact that hitting a brick wall hurts - in physical.

Edited October 29, 2008 by myata

[Peter F]

Of course you have proof of that or is it your opinion ? please give us a link or source that proves we the west have set conditions on our assistance forcing them into doing things our way.......Where we have forced our ways, our values, our morals, our anything on the people of Afgan...

Relax, I agree with you. We shouldn't be shoving our morals/ethics/ways down the throats of the people of Afghanistan or anybody else for that matter. I suggest DogOnPortch and jbg believe that the war in Afghanistan is directed towards shoving western ways/morals/ethics down primitive Afghan throats...and I suggest that they believe that is a good thing and they think thats the point of the American invasion and ISAF presence. I think they are wrong.

Lets just for sake of argument your right, the Taliban do have a right to exist as before the war, where do they exist ? and what of those that want nothing to do with the taliban and thier ways, don't they have rights as well ? or are they forced to live under the Taliban ? where do they exist ? and if we in the west don't have the right to decide what is good or bad, then who is going to decide where these groups exist ? And what happens when the Taliban wants to use force and expand, who gets to decide what action is required ? or do we close our eyes and let them settle matters themselfs let nature take it's course....

Normally, we in the west have no right to intervene on another states purely internal matters. Wether the Taliban rule Afghanistan or Warlords rule Afghanistan or the Afghan King rules Afghanistan or Democracy rules Afghanistan is something best left to Afghanistans to figure out through civilized action or civil war. Its up to them.

However, once the actions/inactions of a state have effect on other states well other states are going to act. As the USA did. As Canada can also if it feels it must and has the means.

The morality of helping peaceloving Afghans against tyrants is certainly laudable but not necessarily reason enough. If it were Canada would have shipped the CAF in when the Ruski's invaded. But we didn't and for obvious reasons: Power politics has bugger all to do with morality. Morality as motivation in regards to international strife has a habit of blowing up in the moral party's face. I suggest that the proof of this is that if the USA had not of invaded Afghanistan - Canada certainly would not have.

Mean while back in the west to we add this new found wealth of wisdom to our everyday lives....does this mean that i can kill my niebour because she swims naked in her pool, because i have the rights do do anything i want to , be it under the guise of religion, human rights, personal beliefs the list goes on.....does it mean i can use force to get what ever it is i want....like separate from Canada and have a small chunk of my own nation ARMYGUYVILLE...all hail Armyguy....i can hear it now...

Sure you can do those things if you accumulate enough power. The powerful can create any rights they like.

See Bremner in Iraq, or Stalin, or Lenin, or Ghengis Khan, or Julius Ceaser and the list goe's on and on and on...

Sorry But back to the real world armyguy, Someone, has already made up those rules, in fact a majority of nations have sat down at the UN and decided together that if we where all going to play in the same sandbox we need some guide lines....carrying out terrorist avtivities is a no no, so is mass murder, so is dening basic human rights....i know i happens all over the globe everyday, and we sit by and watch it all happen....but we can't help them all ....with a few exceptions, Afgan is one of those ....

So to answer your question the Sandbox has voted, and it's time to kick the Taliban off the island....the world has decided it would be a happier place without them....so it's not the few guys on this forum, or for that matter anyone with the power to make those decisions as Harper has....it was a collective decision, by many nations....

Sure. Carry on. Apparently you got 3 years left to complete the job.

[myata]

Of course you have proof of that or is it your opinion ? please give us a link or source that proves we the west have set conditions on our assistance forcing them into doing things our way.......Where we have forced our ways, our values, our morals, our anything on the people of Afgan...

You're there (complete with tanks, artillery and airforce). What other proof do you need?

No, it's you guys who need to proove that it's Afgans themselves chose democracy, etc, yada. And to prove that you need no more and no less than simply get out - and see what kind of country they'll build or rebuild, for themselves.

Lets just for sake of argument your right, the Taliban do have a right to exist as before the war, where do they exist ? and what of those that want nothing to do with the taliban and thier ways, don't they have rights as well ? or are they forced to live under the Taliban ? where do they exist ?

The same exact place where they existed before we began our glorioius effort of rebuilding them. People will live where and how they can, according to their traditions and practices, and change those tradtions when and in the ways they want and can. Outside world can and should guarantee (we however always fail to do that, engaging ourselves on long term democracy quests instead) that crimes against humanity aren't tolerated. And that's as far as it should go. Nobody here is clean enough to be a lecturer how things should be with others; our very own history of residential schools for one example, speaks as much.

and if we in the west don't have the right to decide what is good or bad, then who is going to decide where these groups exist ?

Well, people are. And for themselves. Hard to get, I understand, when you know exactly what they should or shouldn't be doing. Like little robots in some grand plan.

Mean while back in the west to we add this new found wealth of wisdom to our everyday lives....does this mean that i can kill my niebour because she swims naked in her pool, because i have the rights do do anything i want to , be it under the guise of religion, human rights, personal beliefs the list goes on.....does it mean i can use force to get what ever it is i want....like separate from Canada and have a small chunk of my own nation ARMYGUYVILLE...all hail Armyguy....i can hear it now...

Except you got it all wrong. Individuals can do anything - with themselves, including believing in outrageous things, hurting themselves, and so on. Yeah, it'd be so much better if everybody only thought the right thoughts, took their garbage out on the same day and minute, bought the right amount of stuff (not too much and not too little) and so on. The only problem with that is that's not very likely to happen. Mind control could help, but it's a bit late in coming. Short of that, we are all left to our often less than perfect individual devices. I can't see why it should be any different with people's societies? Really do we that one universal wise and superhumanistic guru who thinks nothing for themselves and only cares about well being of others? Next time you'll see one, make sure to introduce them.. Or was it Mr G.B. or T.B.? Then how did it happen that the cost of their benevolence has come about as high as Saddam himself could have worked hard to achieve, if given free hand and much of freedom loving assistance?

Sorry But back to the real world armyguy, Someone, has already made up those rules, in fact a majority of nations have sat down at the UN and decided together that if we where all going to play in the same sandbox we need some guide lines

OK

So to answer your question the Sandbox has voted, and it's time to kick the Taliban off the island....the world has decided it would be a happier place without them....so it's not the few guys on this forum, or for that matter anyone with the power to make those decisions as Harper has....it was a collective decision, by many nations....

No, it wasn't like that at all, and we've discussed it at length, and allegations against Taleban haven't been proven in any court of justice, and nobody can simply "vote" to "kick out". The system we have now doesn't come close to justice and even then it's ignored by whoever it's not convenient to (e.g Iraq). Anyways, it's a different topic. The general problem with that point of view is that many people doing same thing isn't necessarily the sign of them doing the right thing. On very contrary, very often (find any number of examples to that) people come together in doing wrong thing because it's easier to justify that way.

[Army Guy]

The morality of helping peaceloving Afghans against tyrants is certainly laudable but not necessarily reason enough. If it were Canada would have shipped the CAF in when the Ruski's invaded. But we didn't and for obvious reasons: Power politics has bugger all to do with morality. Morality as motivation in regards to international strife has a habit of blowing up in the moral party's face. I suggest that the proof of this is that if the USA had not of invaded Afghanistan - Canada certainly would not have.

Yes, the morality portion of this mission has recieved the majority of the headlines and attention, but who can blame them it really, any government engaging in a war needs the support of the people or it is going to fail.....but Morality it is not the only reason we are here. our primary reason was to fullfill our defensive pact aggrements and treaties, does not sound as good as we are here to help the defenseless Afgan people...

And Yes, you are correct, Canada would not be in Afgan had it not been for the US, our treaities with NATO, and other defensive pacts, and agreements...Nobody would, and the Taliabn would be thriving today..

Sure you can do those things if you accumulate enough power. The powerful can create any rights they like.

See Bremner in Iraq, or Stalin, or Lenin, or Ghengis Khan, or Julius Ceaser and the list goe's on and on and on...

Not according to Myata, nobody has the right to interfer, everyone is entitled to do whatever we choose regardless of consquences.

Sure. Carry on. Apparently you got 3 years left to complete the job.

There is not alot of confidence in those figure here, alot can happen in 3 years....