On Saturday, a terrorist attack targeted at Schofield in Kabul, Afghanistan on Saturday, leaving 85 dead and 147 injured. Very sad attack on females in Afghanistan and this is a country that has a history of mistreatment of women.
https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.cnn.co ... index.html

Sadly, expect complete silence from the Muslim world over this. While they fight for what's happening in Gaza, they'll remain mum over what happens in a muslim country by Islamic terrorists. And the human rights violation in places like Afghanistan is far far worse than any other place on earth.

avier wrote:

Sadly, expect complete silence from the Muslim world over this. While they fight for what's happening in Gaza, they'll remain mum over what happens in a muslim country by Islamic terrorists. And the human rights violation in places like Afghanistan is far far worse than any other place on earth.

Funny how an attack like this can be more-or-less ignored by the rest of the world. It ticks a few intersectional boxes, which makes it even more strange.

Isn't it more or less expected, and is expected to increase in number, as US withdraw its force from the region?

avier wrote:

Sadly, expect complete silence from the Muslim world over this. While they fight for what's happening in Gaza, they'll remain mum over what happens in a muslim country by Islamic terrorists. And the human rights violation in places like Afghanistan is far far worse than any other place on earth.

Attacks and killings only make the news when it's an outside force doing it.

On the view from the outside, if a US bomb had taken out the school during an operation, the demonstrations world wide would be instant, but in my opinion, not because of folks being anti USA but because folks can exert pressure. Who is going to demonstrate against the Taliban, what good would it do and do they even care? How many demonstrations going on about China, how many nations talking about sanctions on China, for a time Hong Kong was on the news every night, recent slow news days.

par13del wrote:

On the view from the outside, if a US bomb had taken out the school during an operation, the demonstrations world wide would be instant, but in my opinion, not because of folks being anti USA but because folks can exert pressure. Who is going to demonstrate against the Taliban, what good would it do and do they even care? How many demonstrations going on about China, how many nations talking about sanctions on China, for a time Hong Kong was on the news every night, recent slow news days.

Good point, and you are mostly right. Last year's worldwide protests against the killing of George Floyd would be an exception: they made no sense, given that he was killed in the US by a US policeman. They were not going to exert any pressure in the US.

Braybuddy wrote:

par13del wrote:

On the view from the outside, if a US bomb had taken out the school during an operation, the demonstrations world wide would be instant, but in my opinion, not because of folks being anti USA but because folks can exert pressure. Who is going to demonstrate against the Taliban, what good would it do and do they even care? How many demonstrations going on about China, how many nations talking about sanctions on China, for a time Hong Kong was on the news every night, recent slow news days.

Good point, and you are mostly right. Last year's worldwide protests against the killing of George Floyd would be an exception: they made no sense, given that he was killed in the US by a US policeman. They were not going to exert any pressure in the US.

Killing of George Floyd was something black people in many different countries could relate to. In many countries black people have big issues that people are not interested in solving, so it's clear from how this incident (and all the others that came before) can stoke interest and annoyance in other parts of the world. The other thing is, things that happen in the US make news everywhere - cable and satalite TV show huge numbers of US shows, news etc so you can't not hear about these things. In Afghanistan you only hear about it if your countries press tell you about it.

We've become completely used to hearing about mass bombings and murders in Afghanistan. It's a horrible thing to say but we have. And there is literally nothing we can do about it. Helping black kids have life chances, not getting involved in crime is something anyone can influence by who they vote for or who they personally lobby (I mean in a proper way - write to your MP/ Senator etc).

We talked about it in the Israel thread, but if the UN had any sort of use it would be involved in these kinds of situations not individual countries.

Braybuddy wrote:

par13del wrote:

On the view from the outside, if a US bomb had taken out the school during an operation, the demonstrations world wide would be instant, but in my opinion, not because of folks being anti USA but because folks can exert pressure. Who is going to demonstrate against the Taliban, what good would it do and do they even care? How many demonstrations going on about China, how many nations talking about sanctions on China, for a time Hong Kong was on the news every night, recent slow news days.

Good point, and you are mostly right. Last year's worldwide protests against the killing of George Floyd would be an exception: they made no sense, given that he was killed in the US by a US policeman. They were not going to exert any pressure in the US.

Even in the USA the demonstrations are still ongoing and the majority of the local laws which govern the conduct of police are not being changed. Indeed the casting of all who participate in a BLM march as activist, terrorist and other nefarious designations has been working to kill the main reason the incident resonated through out the country and the world, namely the systemic abuse of minorities.
Outside of the USA, other than enhancing the anti-American movement, how much has been done to exert pressure on the Federal government to force them to start a serious dialog of what they can do to affect state rights?
In the UK for example, it has spiraled to symbols of slavery being taken down and other "woke" issues, has the initial focus been sidelined or taken over?
The inherent problem of citizen activism is that it is usually based on an obvious flaw / fault / injustice, but because there is no leader, it is easy for "radical" groups with structure and intent to "take over" the drive and ultimately kill it or have it move on to something else.
Things like the below do not happen often, we have this one and the more famous one where the pax on the flight prevented a rapist from being deported, issue in both cases is did they know the arrest or deportation was taking place?
https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/scotti ... 021-05-13/

par13del wrote:

The inherent problem of citizen activism is that it is usually based on an obvious flaw / fault / injustice, but because there is no leader, it is easy for "radical" groups with structure and intent to "take over" the drive and ultimately kill it or have it move on to something else.

The same thing happens in non-democratic countries. When several parties are vying for control, the extreme parties (on either side) tend to be the winners. Why? Because they are extreme, they will take any measures to succeed. If you're a moderate and believe in freedom, you have no chance. The extremes have no problem with killing or silencing you.

Reinhardt wrote:

Killing of George Floyd was something black people in many different countries could relate to. In many countries black people have big issues that people are not interested in solving, so it's clear from how this incident (and all the others that came before) can stoke interest and annoyance in other parts of the world. The other thing is, things that happen in the US make news everywhere - cable and satalite TV show huge numbers of US shows, news etc so you can't not hear about these things. In Afghanistan you only hear about it if your countries press tell you about it.

We've become completely used to hearing about mass bombings and murders in Afghanistan. It's a horrible thing to say but we have. And there is literally nothing we can do about it. Helping black kids have life chances, not getting involved in crime is something anyone can influence by who they vote for or who they personally lobby (I mean in a proper way - write to your MP/ Senator etc).

We talked about it in the Israel thread, but if the UN had any sort of use it would be involved in these kinds of situations not individual countries.

Still a massive overreaction to a problem which doesn't exist in other countries. I would suggest education would be more of a benefit in helping black -- or any -- kids getting involved in crime, not necessarily voting for or lobbying someone. Yes we've become used to hearing about mass bombings in Afghanistan. It seems these lives don't matter anymore.

Braybuddy wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Killing of George Floyd was something black people in many different countries could relate to. In many countries black people have big issues that people are not interested in solving, so it's clear from how this incident (and all the others that came before) can stoke interest and annoyance in other parts of the world. The other thing is, things that happen in the US make news everywhere - cable and satalite TV show huge numbers of US shows, news etc so you can't not hear about these things. In Afghanistan you only hear about it if your countries press tell you about it.

We've become completely used to hearing about mass bombings and murders in Afghanistan. It's a horrible thing to say but we have. And there is literally nothing we can do about it. Helping black kids have life chances, not getting involved in crime is something anyone can influence by who they vote for or who they personally lobby (I mean in a proper way - write to your MP/ Senator etc).

We talked about it in the Israel thread, but if the UN had any sort of use it would be involved in these kinds of situations not individual countries.

Still a massive overreaction to a problem which doesn't exist in other countries. I would suggest education would be more of a benefit in helping black -- or any -- kids getting involved in crime, not necessarily voting for or lobbying someone.

Yes education, but a place where kids can go if they have problem at home, a safe place to do something in their spare time , a role model in the local community etc. This was all being done in for example inner London on council estates. That was then almost all decimated by funding cuts from central government. And that funding, deciding where it goes is where your vote comes in or demanding it from your local representative. Anyway, steering off topic.

Braybuddy wrote:

Yes we've become used to hearing about mass bombings in Afghanistan. It seems these lives don't matter anymore.

I think people should care, but they've become frankly bored of it. Considering the amount of money the US/ UK etc and lives threw at Afghanistan it's a appaling situation that it looks like things could fall back. I feel incredibly sorry for people living there. But as I said, there is little to nothing we can do about it, and the UN is toothless and ineffective in such cases. You also have effective civil war / warlords in Africa murdering the local population in the most barbaric of ways, yet nobody really does anything. The Iraq + Afghanistan efforts really did make people think... why should we send our kids (and lose them ) over there, if it all comes round to bite us. And then there's the financial cost of it. Politically you can't do it and there is no will. Damming inditement of the world we live in today.

Reinhardt wrote:

Yes education, but a place where kids can go if they have problem at home, a safe place to do something in their spare time , a role model in the local community etc. This was all being done in for example inner London on council estates. That was then almost all decimated by funding cuts from central government. And that funding, deciding where it goes is where your vote comes in or demanding it from your local representative. Anyway, steering off topic.

Why is the government responsible for this? Parental and personal responsibilty counts for more.

Reinhardt wrote:

I think people should care, but they've become frankly bored of it. Considering the amount of money the US/ UK etc and lives threw at Afghanistan it's a appaling situation that it looks like things could fall back. I feel incredibly sorry for people living there. But as I said, there is little to nothing we can do about it, and the UN is toothless and ineffective in such cases. You also have effective civil war / warlords in Africa murdering the local population in the most barbaric of ways, yet nobody really does anything. The Iraq + Afghanistan efforts really did make people think... why should we send our kids (and lose them ) over there, if it all comes round to bite us. And then there's the financial cost of it. Politically you can't do it and there is no will. Damming inditement of the world we live in today.

Probably a better example where people could do something but don't is the treatment of the Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang. I don't see governments imposing sanctions or anyone protesting outside Chinese embassies or boycotting Chinese goods in protest at the current slavery being practised in that country. People have been very active in tearing down statues and highlighting slavery in the past, yet they don't seem to be too concerned about actual slavery. Their lives don't seem to matter either.

Braybuddy wrote:

Probably a better example where people could do something but don't is the treatment of the Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang. I don't see governments imposing sanctions or anyone protesting outside Chinese embassies or boycotting Chinese goods in protest at the current slavery being practised in that country. People have been very active in tearing down statues and highlighting slavery in the past, yet they don't seem to be too concerned about actual slavery. Their lives don't seem to matter either.

Simple--realpolitik. China is too important of a trading partner. Just like the US has embargos on Cuba, because it's a small, unimportant country that only make cigars (sarcasm).

Braybuddy : so you think law abiding, successful Black American people don't resent the police treating Black people badly, even if it's not them personally ? And it is them personally anyway, driving a nice car while Black ? Suspicious. Entering a nice home while Black ? Suspicious. Remember the professor arrested for entering his own home ?

Braybuddy wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Yes education, but a place where kids can go if they have problem at home, a safe place to do something in their spare time , a role model in the local community etc. This was all being done in for example inner London on council estates. That was then almost all decimated by funding cuts from central government. And that funding, deciding where it goes is where your vote comes in or demanding it from your local representative. Anyway, steering off topic.

Why is the government responsible for this? Parental and personal responsibilty counts for more.

Reinhardt wrote:

I think people should care, but they've become frankly bored of it. Considering the amount of money the US/ UK etc and lives threw at Afghanistan it's a appaling situation that it looks like things could fall back. I feel incredibly sorry for people living there. But as I said, there is little to nothing we can do about it, and the UN is toothless and ineffective in such cases. You also have effective civil war / warlords in Africa murdering the local population in the most barbaric of ways, yet nobody really does anything. The Iraq + Afghanistan efforts really did make people think... why should we send our kids (and lose them ) over there, if it all comes round to bite us. And then there's the financial cost of it. Politically you can't do it and there is no will. Damming inditement of the world we live in today.

Probably a better example where people could do something but don't is the treatment of the Uighur Muslims in Xinjiang. I don't see governments imposing sanctions or anyone protesting outside Chinese embassies or boycotting Chinese goods in protest at the current slavery being practised in that country. People have been very active in tearing down statues and highlighting slavery in the past, yet they don't seem to be too concerned about actual slavery. Their lives don't seem to matter either.

Less than 1 in 4 Americans can correctly identify all 50 states unlabeled on a map - and you think they’ll protest/care about Uighurs?

Aesma wrote:

Braybuddy : so you think law abiding, successful Black American people don't resent the police treating Black people badly, even if it's not them personally ? And it is them personally anyway, driving a nice car while Black ? Suspicious. Entering a nice home while Black ? Suspicious. Remember the professor arrested for entering his own home ?

No, and I never implied anything of the sort. While there is no doubt a racial element, there also has to be a socioeconimic element as well. Most people in Ireland are white, although there has been a big change in demographics over the last twenty years, which mostly -- but not entirely -- benefits the country. When I see the Gardaí stopping and searching people in the city there is undoubtedly a class factor involved: they are usually young, white, working class lads. The police in the US have a difficult task, with the added element of guns thrown into the mix. I know from my own (very limited) experience of them that they are tough, no-nonsense and not overly friendly, so I would be very careful not to get on the wrong side of them -- ever.

Aaron747 wrote:

Less than 1 in 4 Americans can correctly identify all 50 states unlabeled on a map - and you think they’ll protest/care about Uighurs?

No, I wouldn't expect that at all. I'm more pointing out the hypocricy of the worldwide protesters who could hardly indentify any US state on a map, yet they completely ignore other injustices elsewhere in the world, the vast majority of which would make the behaviour of US police pale into insignificance.

Braybuddy wrote:

Reinhardt wrote:

Yes education, but a place where kids can go if they have problem at home, a safe place to do something in their spare time , a role model in the local community etc. This was all being done in for example inner London on council estates. That was then almost all decimated by funding cuts from central government. And that funding, deciding where it goes is where your vote comes in or demanding it from your local representative. Anyway, steering off topic.

Why is the government responsible for this? Parental and personal responsibilty counts for more.

In an idea world sure. But we don't live in one. Some parents are physically incapable of looking after their kids, some live in povety (UK levels have sky rocketed the last 10 yeras), some due to their own health be it mental or physical, or something has happend in the family, or maybe they are just flat out bad parents. When sitautions like this occur, and it impacts the rest of society to the level it has, then government has to take a role. You can't just tell parents to be better parents, or fix poverty by saying it's up to the parents.

By the way in my example about London, funding and organisation from local councils and central government made a real difference. Gang violence was massively reduced, kids had places to go, they were given role models, parents were given parenting classes - they were pulled into being made responsible and engaged. It all started to work. Then funding was pulled, and everything now is worse that it ever has been. We live in a first world country, which is actually rich. There is no reason whatsoever to have the problems of a 3rd world country. Afghanistan has no options, we do.

Braybuddy wrote:

No, I wouldn't expect that at all. I'm more pointing out the hypocricy of the worldwide protesters who could hardly indentify any US state on a map, yet they completely ignore other injustices elsewhere in the world, the vast majority of which would make the behaviour of US police pale into insignificance.

You know what you're right. But it's easier to fight for something in your back yard. Something that you can influence. To put it simply, if you are American and believe Black people are badly treated in the US then you vote for a different Senator, Government whatever. You have some power. Whether it works or not, that's different but there is at least a way of influencing the outcome directly.

If you want something done about what China is doing, your government has to do that along with other countries. Entirely different scale of cause and solution.

You're right, what Western Goverrnments have done (or lack of ) about the Uighurs is pathetic. What they are doing about the South China sea is not enough. What they are not doing about Brazilian deforestation in the rainforest isn't enough, what they aren't doing about Saudi Arabia isn't enough, what they are doing about Israel and Palistine is pathetic. You can go on all day. Just because you can't do something about those issues, doesn't mean you can't do something about more locally fixable problems.

China is going to be THE problem over the next 20 years. And I say problem, because unlike the USSR they don't give a crap about anyone or anything except themselves. And they have the money, man power and now the knowledge (which the west gave them), and they own half the worlds debt.

Reinhardt wrote:

In an idea world sure. But we don't live in one. Some parents are physically incapable of looking after their kids, some live in povety (UK levels have sky rocketed the last 10 yeras), some due to their own health be it mental or physical, or something has happend in the family, or maybe they are just flat out bad parents. When sitautions like this occur, and it impacts the rest of society to the level it has, then government has to take a role. You can't just tell parents to be better parents, or fix poverty by saying it's up to the parents.

By the way in my example about London, funding and organisation from local councils and central government made a real difference. Gang violence was massively reduced, kids had places to go, they were given role models, parents were given parenting classes - they were pulled into being made responsible and engaged. It all started to work. Then funding was pulled, and everything now is worse that it ever has been. We live in a first world country, which is actually rich. There is no reason whatsoever to have the problems of a 3rd world country. Afghanistan has no options, we do.

I fully accept your points, and understand how they could cause problems in London, but I still don't see how they correlate with a minor event in another country. I would suggest media overkill, and social media (which seems to love a bandwagon) are the main culprits here.

Reinhardt wrote:

China is going to be THE problem over the next 20 years. And I say problem, because unlike the USSR they don't give a crap about anyone or anything except themselves. And they have the money, man power and now the knowledge (which the west gave them), and they own half the worlds debt.

I agree with you on China, but do you really think Russia cares about anywhere ouside its borders, particularly the West? Maybe it will after Putin leaves the stage, but his well-known hatred of the West and continuous meddling in international affairs doesn't give me any hope for the foreseeable.