Afghan women in jail for being raped

[Banquo's Ghost]

Can someone explain to me why NATO soldiers are dying to perpetuate a system where women and girls are incarcerated because they have been raped?

Lord knows I'm no fan of imperialism, but if we have decided to invade a place and impose regime change, and then continue to sacrifice our young people to keep the mullahs down, why would we countenance such appalling imprisonment? Surely we have a duty, once we have decided that intervention is the only recourse, to impose decency? Should not Karzai be jailed himself? If it's not our business to interfere with cultural "norms" why are we there in the first place?

"They are very aware of the inequality in the system," said Royal Navy Lieutenant Rebecca Parnell, a member of the Cimic, or civil-military co-operation, team. "The most refreshing thing is that there are plans coming from the Department of Women's Affairs. It is not just us pushing our ideas on to them."

Oh, that's all right then. We are very aware. There are plans.

[Kralizec]

I recall that a few years ago an Afghan christian, former muslim was about to be executed for apostacy but the court took an escape route by declaring the man insane. Sadly the treatment of rape victims seems to be a structural problem.

As for my explanation, the most obvious reason would be that overtly forcing down our values on the legal system would only add to the perception that the Kabul government is a puppet of the west. Imagine if we had to send more troops to fight unruly peasants picking up AK's and mopeds for their God-given right to rape women and let the victim get the blame for it.

[Adrian II]

Can someone explain to me why NATO soldiers are dying to perpetuate a system where women and girls are incarcerated because they have been raped?

Because we flattened that country, so we own it. And own it we do. If we didn't, the Taliban would be back in power within a year. And if the Taliban weren't a proven security danger to Nato countries, I think we should leave Afghanistan to its own mess and get the hell out of there. That's the ony reason we are there: for us. None of those fancy 'plans' will ever work until Afghanistan joins the 21st century. Unfortunately one can bomb a country back to the Stone Age, but not forward into the future.

[PanzerJaeger]

Disgusting. And I agree, we need to be doing a lot more imposing and far less acquiescing in that ____hole.

[rory_20_uk]

The Brits went in there before. We got slaughtered. There are many areas of the world that could be better. It is not for us to try to sort out every mess - especially ones furthered by perverted religions.

If you think you can change the culture post invasion, I'm sorry but that isn't going to happen.

[Leet Eriksson]

Didn't the US release a statement that amounts to "we have to respect their laws!" when saudia put a woman in jail for talking to a saudi man at starbucks.

Afghanistan is pretty much like saudia as far as the US is concerned, an ally and a security measure for american influence in the region, they rule however they damn well want basically.

[rvg]

Saddening, considering that 35 years ago it was a relatively progressive and liberal (by middle-eastern standards) state.

[Louis VI the Fat]

I don't think we would stand for this if Afghani victims of racist attacks were jailed.

When forced to choose between the rights of men of different culture or the rights of women, anti-racism beats anti-sexism every single time.

[lars573]

Glass half full perpective:
She's only in jail. In other parts of the world she'd have been beaten to death by her male relatives.

[KarlXII]

Just when I thought we were making progress

[CountArach]

Glass half full perpective:
She's only in jail. In other parts of the world she'd have been beaten to death by her male relatives.

That's like the glass being 1/8 full...

[Moros]

Glass half full perpective:
She's only in jail. In other parts of the world she'd have been beaten to death by her male relatives.

She still might get beaten, either in prison or when she gets out...

[Louis VI the Fat]

Meh, ten French soldiers dead today.

The situation in Afghanistan is detoriating. 'Safe Kabul' is under pressure, the Taleban are on the rise, women are under siege.


The Afghano-pakistan conglomerate is a mess. Rapidly sinking into tribalism, warfare, Islamism. Two hundred million people this year, up from 150 million ten years ago, failing central government, at odds with itself, India and the West, and nuclear armed.

[English assassin]

Bad news Louis.

Because we flattened that country, so we own it. And own it we do. If we didn't, the Taliban would be back in power within a year. And if the Taliban weren't a proven security danger to Nato countries, I think we should leave Afghanistan to its own mess and get the hell out of there. That's the ony reason we are there: for us. None of those fancy 'plans' will ever work until Afghanistan joins the 21st century. Unfortunately one can bomb a country back to the Stone Age, but not forward into the future.

I'm not convinced Afganistan was ever a member of the 20th century, not before we got there, not before the Russians got there. So I'm not inclinded to take any responsibility for the less than enlightened attitude of its population.

The demographics are a real worry. As I've said before about that region, no country where a major demographic is sexually frustrated young men with guns is going to work out. Of course women are handed over to men at the age of 7 as "payment", and of course they have their first child at 11.

If we had the troops (which we don't) and if we flooded the place, could we enforce a slightly more liberal system for the 20 years it might take to become embedded? Probably not. But it occurs to me this must be a problem that the British encountered a lot in the good old days. We must have had an answer. For instance we made suttee murder, (eventually) and hung those responsible. I do wonder about the father of the seven year old. Can we find him? If we do, could we shoot him? If not, who was the village senior man at the time? Can we find him? If we do, can we shoot him?

I bet word would get round PDQ.

NB all suggestions of capital punishment without trial are metaphorical. Sort of.

[rory_20_uk]

Suttee was villified by the locals as well as the Brits. As far as I am aware the ways of the Afghans are generally liked by most of those who live there. With the support of the locals and something like 50 years, Suttee was destroyed. With neither the time, the support or the manpower it's a lost cause.

[English assassin]

Suttee was villified by the locals as well as the Brits. As far as I am aware the ways of the Afghans are generally liked by most of those who live there. With the support of the locals and something like 50 years, Suttee was destroyed. With neither the time, the support or the manpower it's a lost cause.

I bet they aren't liked by the 50% of the population who are women.

But you are probably right. Containment then. What we need is some sort of local strongman...

[Dâriûsh]

Afghanistan post-Operation Enduring Freedom, same mullahs, different militia. So why is this disgusting injustice even surprising?

Saddening, considering that 35 years ago it was a relatively progressive and liberal (by middle-eastern standards) state.

There was more to Afghanistan at the time than just Daoud Khan’s presidential palace in Kabul.

[KrooK]

Yep - situation....
On the other hand if Taliban still rules there, she would be killed and before that ....
probably raped 10 times.

All in all I completely agree that NATO is loosing into Afghanistan.

[Leet Eriksson]

^^ Nato isn't losing, just because there were some casualties. The taliban have been permanently set back and if anything they are shifting their resources from iraq back to afghanistan according to the latest news reports which means their resources are becoming very limited.

[KarlXII]

Yep - situation....
On the other hand if Taliban still rules there, she would be killed and before that ....
probably raped 10 times.

All in all I completely agree that NATO is loosing into Afghanistan.

No, it is not. Attacks have sprung back up, naturally, this happens in war. It's called an offensive. However, every offensive costs the Talibans tens of hundreds of insurgents. NATO is very effective in breaking Taliban control of provinces, however, insurgents tend to hide and spring back up.

[CountArach]

No, it is not. Attacks have sprung back up, naturally, this happens in war. It's called an offensive. However, every offensive costs the Talibans tens of hundreds of insurgents. NATO is very effective in breaking Taliban control of provinces, however, insurgents tend to hide and spring back up.

I would contest that it costs them thousands of insurgents, because on the other hand it does create many people who would not otherwise have fought with the Insurgency. In fact I found this article which I found interesting and relevant:

For over two millennia, Afghans have reacted poorly to foreign occupation, and their animosity has increased in tandem with the occupation's duration. Western forces have now been resident for nearly six years, and resentment is rising not only in the Taliban's bastion in southern Afghanistan, but also in areas where the Taliban not only has little presence, but where it has heretofore been opposed. In recent months, for example, anti-regime and anti-coalition attacks have occurred in the northeastern province of Parwan—where the Northern Alliance predominates; the Tajik-dominated and previously anti-Taliban provinces of Herat and Farah in western Afghanistan; and in Kabul province, from where, although Taliban adherents have historically been few, the June 17 bomber in Kabul reportedly came (Khaleej Times, June 9; Associated Press, June 8).
[...]
While hoping for the best from Karzai and the West, Afghans appear increasingly prepared to fend for themselves by resisting the "repressive regime [in Kabul] marred with corruption, insecurity, and warlords," and by taking up arms against the foreign occupation (Khaleej Times, June 9).

I agree with it, the occupation and the Afghan government are creating a great number of insurgents.

[Fragony]

Bad news Louis.




I'm not convinced Afganistan was ever a member of the 20th century, not before we got there, not before the Russians got there. So I'm not inclinded to take any responsibility for the less than enlightened attitude of its population.

The demographics are a real worry. As I've said before about that region, no country where a major demographic is sexually frustrated young men with guns is going to work out. Of course women are handed over to men at the age of 7 as "payment", and of course they have their first child at 11.

If we had the troops (which we don't) and if we flooded the place, could we enforce a slightly more liberal system for the 20 years it might take to become embedded? Probably not. But it occurs to me this must be a problem that the British encountered a lot in the good old days. We must have had an answer. For instance we made suttee murder, (eventually) and hung those responsible. I do wonder about the father of the seven year old. Can we find him? If we do, could we shoot him? If not, who was the village senior man at the time? Can we find him? If we do, can we shoot him?

I bet word would get round PDQ.

NB all suggestions of capital punishment without trial are metaphorical. Sort of.

We aren't there to civilise afghanistan we are there to deny hatebeards the room to operate. Afghanistan will of course fall back to tribalism but that is of no concern to us, always been like that. Find beards shoot beards and build a school for cosmetics-sake.

[Dâriûsh]

I don't think we would stand for this if Afghani victims of racist attacks were jailed.

When forced to choose between the rights of men of different culture or the rights of women, anti-racism beats anti-sexism every single time.

Can't believe that I missed this one.


Truly a very good post, Louis, and a very good point. Thank you.

[Kralizec]

nevermind

[Adrian II]

Meet Afghan President Hamid Karzai's friends.

[KrooK]

And I still think we are loosing into Afghanistan.
Of course there are teens talibans dead for every coalition soldier but....
they have uncomparable bigger human resources.
They have force local population to help - otherwise they can kill local population.
On the other hand NATO can do nothing. Sadly Poles are very good example.
When n.... kill our soldiers - we cry about loses. WHen our soldiers by mistake shots some civilians
during fight with taliban - they are accused of genocide.

THATS WHY I THINK WE SHOULD USE MONGOL TACTIC - KILL TALIBANS, THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR FRIENDS AND THEIR ANIMALS. In the end we should destroy their homes.

[Adrian II]

THATS WHY I THINK WE SHOULD USE MONGOL TACTIC - KILL TALIBANS, THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR FRIENDS AND THEIR ANIMALS. In the end we should destroy their homes.

[Dâriûsh]

THATS WHY I THINK WE SHOULD USE MONGOL TACTIC - KILL TALIBANS, THEIR FAMILIES, THEIR FRIENDS AND THEIR ANIMALS. In the end we should destroy their homes.

Is that not being done already?

...but US coalition spokeswoman Rumi Nielson-Green said on Saturday that five civilians – two women and three children connected to the militants – were among the dead. The US is to investigate the incident.

[Louis VI the Fat]

THATS WHY I THINK WE SHOULD USE MONGOL TACTIC

Rubbish mate.

Horse archers tire too soon in hilly terrain. We should build a crusade, send in some tough knights. Maybe together with some Huscarls or even Vikings. Vanilla of course, some provinces are desert.

[KrooK]

Yep - French knights would be best.

How long will we be staying and watching on muslims attacking us.
They respect only strenght. Why can't we give them strenght.