Where are the Feminists on the War In Iraq and Afghanistan?

For instance this type of blatant ignorance of Afghan history. I guess that's what one might think from reading Ann Coulter, but here's a more accurate account:

"In the 1960s and '70s, Afghanistan was a typical developing country, poor and struggling, with a slowly expanding role for women. By 1964 they had been granted the vote. The cities had begun to produce a small elite of educated women, who entered the professions, wore Western skirts and mixed comfortably with men. The Soviet invasion in 1979 was a disaster for Afghanistan generally. But under the Russians, women's rights were protected--even advanced to a degree that alienated some in Afghanistan's tradition-bound society. More women were introduced into government, given an authority that many men found unnerving. Shaima Yunsi was a senior aide to the Interior Minister, Afghanistan's internal spymaster. "I was responsible for collecting information on the jihad warriors" who fought the Russians, she says. She likes to show a photo of herself from those days; in it she wears a green army uniform with a pistol tucked under her belt."

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,185651,00.html

 

I've seen this type of anecdote a bunch of times, and I always have the same reaction.

1. Given that she was stationed in Town X, what the hell does she know about what is going on in Towns A-W, Y, and Z???
2. OF COURSE soldiers are going to overstate the security of the nation...where THEY are it's safe. That's the nature of an insurgency. They don't fight head on against the big boys. We'll attack Fallujah, and the same thing will happen that has happened before...we'll kill 100 of the enemy, and 200 innocent bystanders, and the enemy will be able to easily recruit 100, if not 200, more insurgents. Our soldiers will dominate Fallujah, then they'll hand over control to indigenous Iraqi forces. They will fail. Rinse, repeat.

 

B..b...but I thought the soldiers were the targets for the insurgents?

 

Are you really this dense? Or just piss poor at sarcasm?

In unconventional warfare, the strategy is NOT to try to overrun the occupying armies mass formations. It's to pick off isolated targets, preferrably with an IED set off by remote control.

 

Hey Patton, just admit that you mixed up your talking points.

You and Bush at least have that much in common. Can't admit when you are wrong?

"OF COURSE soldiers are going to overstate the security of the nation...where THEY are it's safe." - superdave

You said the soldiers were safe!
So, how's the occupation going again?

Heck, the Green Zone isn't even "safe" anymore.

 

FYI,
my friend's sister, the doctor, traveled through numerous small villages and towns accompanying reconstruction crews primarily. She even spent a few days in Mosul. She only came under fire once in the entire time, though she was confronted by local militia several other times with no adverse results.

She returned to some villages several times to treat illnesses and injuries. Each time she was very well received by the people who appreciated the fact that, apart from major cities, there was very little quality medical care.

The situation she described in the battle area was that groups of insurgents have gathered in a relatively small number of places, usually using highly populated areas where they can blend into the crowds of people, do their hit-and-run knowing that US forces do not to fire into crowds. But then how do you really know who is who when the insurgents wear the same clothes as civilians. It's very difficult because the locals can't afford to take sides even when they don't support the insurgents because their own countrymen will kill them if they are on the opposite side.

 

I'll say it once again, Catholic women can leave the church anytime they want. Nuns can leave the convent anytime they want. Don't say it is repressive when there is an open door policy. As for sex ed, just because someone does not agree with your type of sexual education does not mean they are anti sex-ed.

 

Man is that some piss poor logic.

 

So she was in Kurdish country? Fair enough.

 

Yeah, you don't like it leave! Don't expect us to include you. We been doing this thing for a long time and we ain't changing. Oh and the fact that our numbers are declining doesn't mean anything. [/sarcasm]

Somebody should push this wonderfull plan on the global scale. Instead of sending aid just drop fliers, 'don't like your repressive regime.....move!'

 

My last post was in response to an earlier post which claimed the Catholic Church as being repressive to women. How come someone say it is repressive to women? Do you ask church going female Catholics if they are being repressed? I'll be the first to admit the church has some issues when it comes to women but to make a blanket statement about such a large organization shows a real bias.

 

Essentially, your claim is that noone in America is "forced" to go to church, so it can't be considered "repressive."

Well, first, millions of parents and schools do absolutely "force" kids to go to church, so your initial premise is suspect.

But even if true, it wouldn't eliminate the possibility of a powerful cultural institution like the church from being a repressive force in society. In fact, physically forcing someone to do something is probably a much LESS effective means of repression than the psychological, emotional, and symbolic strategies used by the church against women.

By your last comment about "some issues," perhaps you understand this, and we're just disagreeing with the defintion of repression.

 

Well either she's lying or guessing (wrongly).

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2004/09/28/international/29ATTACK-GRAPH.html

 

I didn't say "repressive." I said hostile to women. And the church is hostile to women.

As for leaving the church, I did that years ago.

I don't understand what you're trying to say here.

 

Please find and link to a post where the word "repressed" was used by someone other than yourself in regard to the Catholic Church.

 

Plenty of info on women's issues here.

http://www.hrw.org/women/

I'm glad Ann Coulter has brought this to the forefront. What is she doing about women's rights?

 

Well, how's about this?

Good.

Uh, can you say political pork? But, ah a little can be expected. At least they're helping, right?

umm....?

mmm...well, I guess we won't have to worry about the Iraqi women's national team for awhile. And, well, the Iraqi men's team did well at the olympics, quite possibly because there was no Iraqi Title IX...paging Dr Flannigan...
http://www.feminist.org/news/newsbyte/printnews.asp?id=8669

 

Running away from pies. Because she refuses to be confined to the kitchen and be the target of airbrne pies like too many women who came before her.

 

"Not date-rape.. but real rape"? Coooool.

 

Exactly. Someone who differentiates "Date-rape" from "real rape" is exempted from being given any sort of credibility when it comes to women's issues.

 

We do have another Ann Coulter classic.

 

Ann Coulter can't possibly be female.

Or, for that matter, human.

 

In fact, she's probably the one doing the date-raping.

 

Fixed.

In all honesty, on a purely physical level, if she put on 15 pounds she'd be pretty hot. As it is, she's a smarmy loud mouthed racist Skeletor. Who wants to hit that?