Ahh, Pakistan.

[shnozzola]

Pakistani police have opened a blasphemy case against a teenage Christian boy accused of sending derogatory text messages about Islam's prophet to neighbors in the southern city of Karachi, an official said Friday.

http://www.timesonline.com/news/world/asia/pakistan-christian-teen-accused-of-blasphemy/article_50c17654-b8da-5f4d-a290-a7a5e330cc33.html

Army chief Gen Ashfaq Parvez Kayani, who visited Malala in hospital in Peshawar on Wednesday, said it was time to "stand up to fight the propagators of such barbaric mindset and their sympathisers".

Malala gained attention aged 11, when she started writing a diary for BBC Urdu about life under the Taliban.

Using the pen-name Gul Makai, she wrote about suffering caused by militants who had taken control of the Swat Valley in 2007 and ordered girls' schools to close.

The Taliban were ousted from Swat in 2009, but her family said they had regularly received death threats.

They believed she would be safe among her own community, but on Tuesday, she was stopped as she returned home from school in Mingora, in north-western Swat, and shot in the head.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-19908409

So which way do you want it, Pakistan?

[Brakeman]

Pakistan reminds me of an insane asylum where the inmates have developed gangs that will attack other inmates whose delusion does not coincide with their current hallucination.

Personally I think we should bomb the middle east, not with bombs but with educational material because the stupidity there is burning up the world.

[JL]

Pakistan reminds me of an insane asylum where the inmates have developed gangs that will attack other inmates whose delusion does not coincide with their current hallucination.

Personally I think we should bomb the middle east, not with bombs but with educational material because the stupidity there is burning up the world.

Very apt description !

Personally, I wish I can convince the most skilled, most brutal Mexican drug cartel fighters to deal with likes of the girl's attackers. Just rip off their face whilst alive and dump them into a furnace with zero sedation of any kind. 

Get super angry reading news like this, one can only tolerate so much...

[Nick]

I'm sure if we stay over there longer they will welcome us with open arms.

It's OK. Romney is going to pump up the military and work with those who share our values.  That should go over well.

[Nam]

I like the Ricky Gervais topic someone started, better. I mean this is good but, there's a bit of humor in it, even if sad.

-Nam

[Mr. Blackwell]

If we really wanted to help the Middle East, I mean REALY wanted to HELP, then we should send engineers with schematics and lesson plans instead of soldiers with bullets and planes with bombs.

GE could make a shit ton of money helping them build an infrastructure to provide electricity and training people in the trade. It couldn't possibly cost more than what we spend dicking around with the insurgents.

The "people" would have access to jobs and the convenience of electricity and all the glorious perks that come with it...like the ability to process clean water, improved agriculture, jobs and less stress overall. Let them keep their religion. Let them keep their oil. Let them keep their culture. Just find a way to bring them into the 21st century without imposing our philosophy on them.

But no, the war machine must be lubed daily with the blood of poor people otherwise some cute little rich girl wont get that new pony for Christmas if Daddy Warbucks can't sell his missiles.

[Nam]

You make it seem much or all the Middle East doesn't have those things already.

Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Oman, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Kuwait, Jordan, UE, etc., all have electricity, the internet, skyscrapers etc., everything we have. Some countries are more rural, or poorer, but that exists all around the globe.

You make it seem it's all just sand.

-Nam

[Quesi]

Pakistan is a bizarre place, full of contradictions.  Yeah, a 14 year old survives an assassination attempt for promoting the education of girls.  And yet, there have been, and continue to be, women in power in Pakistan. 

Former Prime Minister Bhutto did not survive an assassination attempt. 



The current leader of the Pakistani supreme court, Asama Jahangir.



There are the athletes.



And yet there, in public buses, there are certain seats for men, and then a small number reserved for women.  http://www.bikyamasr.com/78257/all-aboard-the-womens-rights-bus-in-pakistan/

And then there is Nergis Mavalvala, the celebrated Pakistani astrophysicist who grew up in Karachi and now teaches at MIT.   http://www.irtiqa-blog.com/2012/06/pakistani-queer-woman-astrophysicist.html



Yes.  This amazing woman grew up in Karachi. 

@ Mr. Blackwell- Pakistan is not the Middle East.  It is South Asia. But I most certainly agree with your sentiments. 

[flapdoodle64]

One thing for sure:

USA is not helping the situation by sending drone bombs into Pakistan, a soveriegn nation.  Our drone bombs kill 49 civilians for every so-called terrorist killed. 

When that is your policy, you have no credibility lecturing anyone on human rights.

[jetson]

flap - who are we targeting in Pakistan?

[Nam]

With or without drones, I think the same policy has existed. Just this way less US casualties. Which I believe is all they care about. Is it right? No. But "we" all know that, for the most part.

-Nam

[flapdoodle64]

Here's a link to the study about the Drones:

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2208307/Americas-deadly-double-tap-drone-attacks-killing-49-people-known-terrorist-Pakistan.html

We are allegedly targetting terrorists, evil doers, Al Quaeda, Amway salesmen, etc.  In reality, we are often targetting just some unlucky schmuck who an informant has a grudge against.  Really: in some cases all we have is the report of a dubious informant.

In a way, it's morally the same as if we sent in teams to kill these guys.  Except that drones kill more bystanders.  Many more.

Either way, if we were sending teams of armed assassins into Pakistan, which we sometimes still do, the equation is still the same: When you are killing hundreds and thousands, you don't have any business acting morally superior to a group that tries to kill one.

In another way, because usage of the drones is cowardly, and gives the illusion of being a 'clean' way of killing, it's worse then us sending our gangs of thugs, I mean, Navy Seals.  This is because when you have the illusion that you can make war without risk, it means you will be less inclined to make peace. Also, when you have less contact with your victims, your conscience is likely to be disturbed. 

Just think: all the bad things we say about Pakistan, at least they aren't sending drones into our soveriegn air space, blowing up villages in Kansas or Oklahoma. 

[Mr. Blackwell]

I guess the real question is, if Pakistan could send drones into our air space and bomb OK or whatever...would they?

[Nam]

If they were, we'd be going to war with them. Even if they do have nuclear weapons.

-Nam

[flapdoodle64]

I guess the real question is, if Pakistan could send drones into our air space and bomb OK or whatever...would they?

Well, they'd now be justified, because we bombed them first.

In a way, your post is beautiful, since it spells out US foriegn policy: we claim the right to make war against people who might hypothetically attack us maybe, if they could.  That was the justification for Iraq, I believe.

[Nam]

^it wasn't the oil? Damn...

-Nam

[Mr. Blackwell]

In a way, your post is beautiful

Thank you...all my posts are beautiful on some level 

[jetson]

Thanks for the link flap.  That is uncomfortable to read.  I wish there was a way to justify the actions of our military, but no matter how you slice it, these are missiles, designed specifically to kill humans and destroy infrastructure and property.  Also, the psychological effects on the civilians has to be beyond horrifying, as the article points out.

I've often thought about how awful it must be to simply be a civilian within the borders of a country under siege.  Regardless of the reasons for attacking with military weapons, the civilians are put under such horrific stress having to deal with the threat.  The children must be completely horrified, and are probably not being told that these strikes are necessary (as the U.S. seems to believe).  They grow up with strong memories of foreign military action against them and their families.

On another front, the Middle East has been at war since the dawn of YHWH, and earlier.  It's been literally nothing but war between peoples, both local and foreign for so long.  What an unfortunate time for many of them to be alive.  These drone strikes are especially disturbing because I'm guessing there is no warning at all.

[Quesi]

I guess the real question is, if Pakistan could send drones into our air space and bomb OK or whatever...would they?

The government of Pakistan?  No.  Oddly, we haven't pissed off the government that much yet. 

The Taliban, who cross freely between Afghanistan and Pakistan?  Absolutely. 

The Pashtune people, who travel used to travel freely between Afghanistan and Pakistan?  Depends on the day.  Depends on the family.  Depends on where their food is coming from, and how desperately their family is suffering at any given moment. 

Seven percent of children born in Pakistan die before their 1st birthday.  People who watch their kids die are often angry people. People who watch their family members die during drone strikes are often angry people.  People who've lived most of their lives in the squalor of refugee camps are often angry people.

Who are they angry with?  Different people, different entities at different times.  But tossing drones on their homes is not the most effective way to win them over. 

[shnozzola]

   I started this thread because I was angry at a society that puts on a show against the Taliban mentality when it shoots a 15 yr old girl for wanting to learn, while at the same time allowing the Taliban mentality for what that society picks and chooses.

While I accuse Pakistan of hypocrisy, I also do accuse my country of it, as flap has rightly said.  Neither is right.

[shnozzola]

   This past Saturday the Mennonites were in the square of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, with signs "Now we are the terrorists in Afghanistan - stop the war."   Tough standing in such a GOP stronghold with those signs - I'll bet they took a lot of crap.  And it's interesting to think how the Mennonite mentality stands up to scrutiny.  Helps worldwide in most disasters, fairly closed society, believes in god, many Mennonite sects deny women a leadership role -Hmmm,  if only life were black and white - good people and bad people - easy to pick and choose which sides we should be on when.  Could it be that every one of us is a hypocrite?

[Mr. Blackwell]

   This past Saturday the Mennonites were in the square of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, with signs "Now we are the terrorists in Afghanistan - stop the war."   Tough standing in such a GOP stronghold with those signs - I'll bet they took a lot of crap.  And it's interesting to think how the Mennonite mentality stands up to scrutiny.  Helps worldwide in most disasters, fairly closed society, believes in god, many Mennonite sects deny women a leadership role -Hmmm,  if only life were black and white - good people and bad people - easy to pick and choose which sides we should be on when.  Could it be that every one of us is a hypocrite?

Yes...every single God damned one of us is a hypocrite.

[Nam]

^preach it, brother.

-Nam

[jetson]

Yes...every single God damned one of us is a hypocrite.

That - is hard to argue with!