History Imperialistic History of the United States

[quetzalcoatl9]

Nowhere in your comment does it state that the point of the list was to illustrate that the U.S. would have a tough time controlling Afghanistan.

Yes, I do! Apparently you do not even read the sources for the thread that you start!

Here it is, in the same thread ("The surprising origins of the current "jihad") post #15:

Relax, 2 cents. I actually considered it a compliment that they would be natural warriors.

If you look at the timeline, they seem to be a people who simply will not be defeated.

Where is there racism in that? Infact, if you knew anything about my posts on this forum, then the fact that they are a people who will not lie down defeated is something that troubles me, since I support the US war effort in Afghanistan.

incredible!

All it said was, paraphrasing, Afghanis are natural warriors, look at all these wars they fought.

No, you are not paraphrasing since I was not talking about "all these wars they fought" and I would ask that you retract your statement stupidly arguing that I have ever done so.

 

[MaxS]

From the article:

Quote:
"We were quite shocked," said Doug Pritchard, who reviewed the primers in December while visiting Pakistan on behalf of a Canada-based Christian nonprofit group. "The constant image of Afghans being natural warriors is wrong. Warriors are created. If you want a different kind of society, you have to create it."




who is this genius? you can bet your sweet apples that they are natural warriors

from http://www.gandhara.com.au/afghan_table.html

522 BC -
486 BC Darius the Great expands the Persian empire to its peak, taking most of Afghanistan, including Aria (Herat), Bactriana (Balk, and present-day Mazar-i-Shariff, Margiana (Merv), Gandhara (Kabul, Jalalabad and Peshawar), Sattagydia (Ghazni to the Indus river), Arachosia (Kandahar, and Quetta), and Drangiana (Sistan). The Persian empire was plagued by constant bitter and bloody tribal revolts from Afghans living in Arachosia (Kandahar, and Quetta)

550 AD Persians reassert control over all of what is now Afghanistan. Various Afghan tribes revolt.
652 AD Arabs introduce Islam
962 - 1030 Islamic era established with the Ghaznavid Dynasty (962-1140) Afghanistan becomes the centre of Islamic power and civilization.
1030 Mahmud Ghazni dies. Conflicts between various Ghaznavid rulers arise and as a result the empire starts to crumple.
1140 Ghorid leaders from central Afghanistan capture and burn Ghazni, then move on to conquer India.
1219 - 1221 Invasion of Afghanistan by Genghis Khan and the destruction of Irrigation systems, which turned fertile soil into permanent deserts.
1332 - 1370 Descendants of earlier Ghorid rulers reassert control over Afghanistan.
1370 - 1404 The rule of Timour-i-Lang (Tamerlane) Afghan resistance
1451 An Afghan named Buhlul invades Delhi, and seizes the throne.
1504 - 1519 Babur, founder of the Moghul dynasty takes control of Kabul
1520 - 1579 Bayazid Roshan (Afghan intellectual) revolts against the power of the Moghul government. Roshan was killed in a battle with the Moghuls in 1579, his struggle for independence continued.
1613 - 1689 Khushhal Khan Khattak (Afghan warrior & poet) initiates a national uprising against the foreign Moghul government.
1722 Mir Wais' son, Mir Mahmud, invades Persia and occupies Isfahan. At the same time, the Durranis revolt, and terminate the Persian occupation of Herat.
1725 Mir Mahmud is mysteriously killed and Afghans start to lose control of Persia.
1736 Nadir Shah (head of Persia) occupies southwest Afghanistan, and southeast Persia.
1738 Nadir Shah takes Kandahar.
1747 Nadir Shah is assassinated, and the Afghans rise once again. Afghans, under the leadership of Ahmad Shah Abdali retake Kandahar, and establish modern Afghanistan.
1747 - 1773 Rule of Ahmad Shah Abdali (Durrani). Ahmad Shah consolidates and enlarges Afghanistan. He defeats the Moghuls in the west of the Indus, and he takes Herat away from the Persians. Ahmad Shah Durrani's empire extended from Central Asia to Delhi, from Kashmir to the Arabian sea. It became the greatest Muslim empire in the second half of the 18th century.
1773 - 1793 Rule of Timur Shah Capital of Afghanistan transferred from Kandahar to Kabul because of tribal opposition. Constant internal revolts
1793 - 1801 Rule of Zaman Shah Constant internal revolts (1795) Persians invade Khurasan province
1801 - 1803 Rule of Mahmood Constant internal revolts
1803 - 1809 Rule of Shah Shujah (1805) Persian attack on Herat fails. Internal fighting
1809 - 1818 Mahmood returns to the throne. War with Persia - indecisive victory Internal fighting
1819 - 1826 Sons of Timur Shah struggle for the throne - Civil War, anarchy, Afghans lose Sind permanently
1826 Dost Mohammad Khan takes Kabul, and establishes control
1832 - 1833 Persia moves into Khurasan province, and threatens Herat. Afghans successfully defend Herat
1834 Afghans lose Peshawar to the Sikhs; later they crushed the Sikhs under the leadership of Akbar Khan who defeated the Sikhs near Jamrud, and killed the great Sikh general Hari Singh. However, they failed to retake Peshawar due to disunity and bad judgment on the part of Dost Mohammad Khan.
1836 Dost Mohammad Khan is proclaimed as Amir al-mu' minin (commander of the faithful). He was well on the road toward reunifying the whole of Afghanistan when the British, in collaboration with an ex-king (Shah Shuja), invade Afghanistan.
1839 - 1842 First Anglo-Afghan War After some resistance, Amir Dost Mohammad Khan surrenders to the British and is deported to India. Shah Shuja is installed as a 'puppet king' by the British. (1839-1842) April 1842 - Shah Shuja killed by Afghans. Afghans passionately continue their struggle against the British. Akbar Khan victorious against the British. In January 1842, out of 16,500 soldiers (and 12,000 dependants) only one survivor, of mixed British-Indian garrison, reaches the fort in Jalalabad, on a stumbling pony.
1843 After the annihilation of British troops, Afghanistan once again becomes independent, and the exiled Amir, Dost Mohammad Khan comes back and occupies the royal throne (1843-1863).
1845 Afghan hero, Akbar Khan dies
1855 Dost Mohammad Khan signs a peace treaty with India.
1859 British take Baluchistan, and Afghanistan becomes completely landlocked.
1863 - 1866 Sher Ali, Dost Mohammad Khan's son, succeeds to the throne. 1865 Russia takes Bukhara, Tashkent, and Samarkand.
1866 - 1867 Mohammad Afzal occupies Kabul and proclaims himself Amir. October 1867 Mohammad Afzal dies.
1867 - 1868 Mohammad Azam succeeds to the throne 1868--Mohammad Azam flees to Persia Sher Ali reasserts control (1868-1879).
1873 Russia established a fixed boundary between Afghanistan and it's new territories. Russia promises to respect Afghanistan's territorial integrity.
1878 Start of second Anglo-Afghan War The British invade and the Afghans quickly put up a strong resistance.
1879 Sher Ali dies in Mazar-i-Shariff, and Amir Muhammad Yaqub Khan takes over until October. Amir Muhammad Yaqub Khan gives up the following Afghan territories to the British: Kurram, Khyber, Michni, Pishin, and Sibi. Afghans lose these territories permanently.
1880 Battle of Maiwand July 1880. Abdur Rahman takes throne of Afghanistan as Amir. The British, shortly after the accession of the new Amir, withdraw from Afghanistan, although they retain the right to handle Afghanistan's foreign relations. Abdur Rahman establishes fixed borders and he loses a lot of Afghan land. Nuristan converted to Islam.
1885 The Panjdeh Incident Russian forces seize the Panjdeh Oasis, a piece of Afghan territory north of the Oxus River. Afghans tried to retake it, but was finally forced toallow the Russians to keep Panjdeh, and the Russians promised to honor Afghan territorial integrity in the future.
1893 The Durand line fixes borders of Afghanistan with British India, splitting Afghan tribal areas, leaving half of these Afghans in what is now Pakistan.
1895 Afghanistan's northern border is fixed and guaranteed by Russia
1901 Abdur Rahman dies, his son Habibullah succeeds him. Slows steps toward modernization
1907 Russia and Great Britain sign the convention of St. Petersburg, in which Afghanistan is declared outside Russia's sphere of influence.
1918 Mahmud Tarzi (Afghan Intellectual) introduces modern Journalism into Afghanistan with the creation of several newspapers.
1919 Habibullah is assassinated, and succeeded by his son Amanullah 'The reform King' The first museum in Afghanistan is instituted at Baghe Bala.
1921 Third Anglo-Afghan war Once again, the British are defeated, and Afghanistan gains full control of her foreign affairs. Amanullah Khan initiates a series of ambitious efforts at social and political modernization.
1923 Amanullah Khan changes his title from Amir to Padshah (King).
1929 Amanullah Khan is overthrown by Habibullah Kalakani. After the fall of Amanullah Khan, Mahmud Tarzi seeks asylum in Turkey. The Rise and Fall of Habibullah Kalakani, popularly known as "Bache Saqao" Nadir Khan takes the throne; his tribal army loots government buildings and houses of wealthy citizens because the treasury was empty. Habibullah Kalakani, along with his supporters, and a few supporters of Amanullah Khan are killed by Nadir Khan. Now Nadir Khan establishes full control.
1930 Pro-Amanullah Khan uprising put down by Nadir Khan. Nadir Khan abolishes reforms set forth by Amanullah Khan to modernize Afghanistan.
1933 Nadir Khan assassinated by a college student, and his son, Zahir, inherits the throne. He rules until 1973. Zahir Shah's uncles serve as prime ministers and advisors until 1953. Mahmud Tarzi dies in Turkey at the age of 68 with a heart full of sorrow and despair toward his country.
1934 The United States of America formally recognizes Afghanistan
1940 Zahir Shah proclaims Afghanistan as neutral during WW2
1947 Britain withdraws from India. Pakistan is carved out of Indian and Afghan lands.
1949 Afghanistan's Parliament denounces the Durand Treaty and refuses to recognize the Durand line as a legal boundary between Pakistan and Afghanistan. Pashtuns in Pashtunistan (Occupied Afghan Land) proclaim an independent Pashtunistan, but their proclamation goes unacknowledged by the world community.
1953 Prince Mohammad Daoud becomes Prime Minister.
1954 The U.S. rejects Afghanistan's request to buy military equipment to modernize the army.
1955 Daoud turns to the Soviet Union (Russia) for military aid. The Pashtunistan (occupied Afghan land) issue flares up.
1956 Kruschev and Bulgaria agree to help Afghanistan. Close ties between Afghanistan and USSR.
1959 The Purdah is made optional, women begin to enrol in the University which has become coeducational. Women begin to enter the workforce, and the government.
1961 Pakistan and Afghanistan come close to war over Pashtunistan.
1963 - 1964 Zahir Shah demands Daoud's resignation. Dr. Mohammad Yusof becomes Prime Minister.
1965 The Afghan Communist Party was secretly formed in January. Babrak Karmal is one of the founders. In September, first nationwide elections under the new constitution. Karmal was elected to the Parliament, later instigates riots. Zahir and Yussof form second government.
1969 Second nationwide elections. Babrak and Hafizullah Amin are elected.
1972 Mohammad Moussa becomes Prime Minister.
1973 July 17th: Zahir Shah is on vacation in Europe, when his government is overthrown in a military coup headed by Daoud Khan and PDPA (Afghan Communist Party). Daoud Khan abolishes the monarchy, declares himself President and the Republic of Afghanistan is established.
1974 UNESCO names Herat as one of the first cities to be designated as a part of the worlds cultural heritage
1975 - 1977 Daoud Khan presents a new constitution. Women's rights confirmed. Daoud starts to oust suspected opponents from his government.
1978 Bloody Communist coup: Daoud is killed, Taraki is named President, and Karmal becomes his deputy Prime Minister. Tensions rise. Mass arrests, tortures, and arrests takes place. Afghan flag is changed. Taraki signs treaty of friendship with the Soviet Union. June, Afghan guerrilla (Mujahideen) movement is born.
1979 Mass killings US ambassador killed Taraki is killed and Hafizullah Amin takes the Presidency. Amin is executed, and he is replaced with Babrak Karmal. Soviet Union invade in December.
1980 Dr. Najibullah is brought back from USSR to run the secret police.
1984 UN sends investigators to Afghanistan to examine reported human rights violations.
1986 Babrak Karmal is replaced by Dr. Najibullah.
1987 Najibullah proposes ceasefire, but the Mujahideen refuse to deal with a 'puppet government'. Mujahideen make great gains, defeat of Soviets eminent.
1988 - 1989 Peace accords signed in Geneva. Soviet Union defeated by Afghanistan, total withdrawal by the Soviets occurred on 15 February 1989. Experts agree that at least 40,000-50,000 Soviets lost their lives in action, besides the wounded, suicides, and murders. Mujahideen continue to fight against Najibullah's regime. May, Afghan guerrillas elect Sibhhatullah Mojadidi as head of their government-in-exile.
1992 April 15, The Mujahideen take Kabul and liberate Afghanistan, Najibullah is protected by UN. The Mujahideen form an Islamic State, Islamic Jihad Council, elections. Iranian and Pakistani interference increases, more fighting, Professor Burhannudin Rabbani is elected President.
1994 The Taliban militia are born, and advance rapidly against the Rabbani government. Dostum and Hekmatyar continued to clash against Rabbani's government, and as a result Kabul is reduced to rubble.
1995 Massive gains by the Taliban. Increased Pakistani and Iranian interference.
1996 June, Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, head of Hezbi-Islami, having been eliminated as a military power, signs a peace pact with Rabbani, and returns to Kabul to rule as prime minister. 27 September Taliban militia force President Rabbani and his government out of Kabul. After the capture of Kabul, the Taliban execute Najibullah. Alliance between Government, Hezbi Wahdat, and Dostum Oppression of women by the Taliban, women must be fully veiled, no longer allowed to work, go out alone or even wear white socks. Men are forced to grow beards. Buzkashi, the Afghan national sport is outlawed. Tensions rise as Afghan government accuse Pakistan of aiding the Taliban. Massive human rights violations by the Taliban.
1997 Mass graves of Taliban soldiers containing between 1,500 and 2,000 bodies are found. The men were believed to have been captured in May by general Abdul Malik during the Taliban's brief takeover of Mazar-i-Sharif.
1998 February, Earthquake strikes in northeastern Afghansitan, killing over 4,000 people, destroying villages and leaving thousands of people homeless. August, Taliban finally capture Mazar-i-Sharif, and massacre thousands of innocent civilians afterwards, mostly Hazaras. August 20 United States launches cruise missiles hitting Afghanistan's Khost region. US states its intent was to destroy terrorist bases/training facilities used by Osama bin Laden and his followers. September, Tensions rise between Iran and the Taliban. Iranians are angry about the killing of their diplomats and a journalist by the Taliban when they captured Mazar-i-Sharif. Soon they deploy 70,000 troops to carry out military exercises near the Afghan border. In the end, no fighting occurs between the Taliban and the Iranian army.
1999 February, Earthquake hits eastern Afghanistan, affecting over 30,000 people, and killing at least 60 to 70 people. September, The ex-king of Afghanistan, Mohammad Zahir Shah, calls for a grand assembly, or Loya Jirga to discuss ways of bringing peace to the country. The United Front soon welcomes the idea, but the Taliban ridicule Mohammad Zahir Shah's attempts at establishing peace. October, UN Security Council Resolution 1267 is adopted; sanctions against the Taliban on grounds that they offered sanctuary to Osama bin Ladin.
2000 May, Taliban torture and kill civilians in the Robatak Pass (on the border between Baghlan and Samangan provinces). September, Taloqan finally falls to the Taliban. December, UN Security Council Resolution 1333 is adopted; additional sanctions against the Taliban for their continuing support of terrorism and cultivation of narcotics, etc.
2001 January, Taliban torture and kill numerous civilians in Yakaolang (Hazaras). March, Despite pleas and requests from various international diplomats, Islamic scholars, the Taliban destroy ancient historical statues in the Kabul Museum, historical sites in Ghazni, and blow up the giant Bamiyan Buddhas. World expresses outrage and disgust against the Taliban action. April, Ahmad Shah Masood visits Europe to gather support against the Taliban. April, UN accuses Pakistan of not allowing adequate supply of food and medicines to displaced Afghans, at the Jalozai camp, near Peshawar. June - All female foreign aid workers banned from driving.

-------------------------------------------------
Show me where, in that comment, you mention the united states.

Show me where, in that comment, you use the list of wars to prove anything other than "they are natural warriors"

If you can show me that I would admit to an error.

P.S. keep in mind again I wasn't attacking you, I just didnt want to let something like that slip without showing the other side of the coin (that we have the same sort of history but somehow consider ourselves above being "natural born warriors")

 

[quetzalcoatl9]

Show me where, in that comment, you mention the united states.

Show me where, in that comment, you use the list of wars to prove anything other than "they are natural warriors"

If you can show me that I would admit to an error.

P.S. keep in mind again I wasn't attacking you, I just didnt want to let something like that slip without showing the other side of the coin (that we have the same sort of history but somehow consider ourselves above being "natural born warriors")

as I have already said, it was in post #15 of that thread, which I have already posted, where I clarified my statement since you are not the only one to have assumed that it was because of "wars" that made them "natural warriors". We have been over this already.

I would think that it should be fairly obvious that simply because a country has a history of war that doesn't make them "natural warriors", since that would include every country on earth. What makes them natural warriors is that they have been occupied repeatedly and have a history of resistance. I don't understand what point it is that you are trying to make.

 

[danAlwyn]

(shrugs)

It seems to me that Afghan society for the people who live outside of the main urban districts (and even to those who live inside them), is closer to what a sociologist or anthropologist might term a "warrior" culture, i.e. a culture where males are expected to encounter conflict with a local neighboring group (one of the same tribal ethnicity) within their lifetime. A traditional "warrior" culture would probably consist of the later Plain Indians in North America, where it was expected that every male would be involved either in raids against neighboring tribes, or in battles against white settlers, and hence this was one of the major yardsticks by which they were measured. Where this state was fairly recent for the Afghans (it was predominant in the 19th century if I recall correctly-and progressed in some areas well into the twentieth) it is a lot farther off for western cultures, who exited that state in the late feudal period at latest.

There have been speculations that people from this type of culture are socially conditioned to be better guerilla fighters than those from other cultures, because they are trained from youth at the art of raiding and protecting themselves from surprise attack. So far, I think the jury's still out on that. This is why military theory is so frustrating, there's no mathematics to help you out.

This is how I usually see it. It would then have nothing to do with amount of damage inflicted in their history, but rather with background and social conditioning.

 

[kat]

Excuse me but try not to attack me personally when you're disagreeing with a point I'm making. I didn't mention who made the post for a reason. Note that my contention wasn't an attack on you.

I don't about attacking him, but I th ink you've totally skewed his comment to mean something I don't think he intended.

"Hey, jeez, they sure have had a lot of wars, those damn barbarians. Those uncivilized savages don't deserve the respect of being called being humans. No, they're natural born warriors."

Who said anything about "uncivilized savages", who even suggested that's what he meant?

Not only is this line of thinking logically flawed it is racist.

I think your post here..is a bit of what we call "soft bigotry".

The reason I posted a list of U.S. conflicts was my "support" if you want to call it that to show you can do the same thing about our own country.

If the wars you showed involving the United States showed years upon years of being attacked on our own homeland and defending it with pride and vengeance over and over again. THEN I would think your argument had a leg to stand on. However, I think your concept of "natural born warriors" as being somehow demeaning...is what's a bit odd.

You have no platform to stand on as an American or European if you're trying to patronize the people of Afghanistan.

again..how is being proud and strong enough to defend your nation over and over and over again...something to be ashamed of? how can noting it be patronizing?

That was the purpose of my post, "warrior-resistance culture" indeed.

You say that like it's...er..dirty or something.

 

[danAlwyn]

If the wars you showed involving the United States showed years upon years of being attacked on our own homeland and defending it with pride and vengeance over and over again. THEN I would think your argument had a leg to stand on.

I think it would also have to involve a substantial portion of the population to consider it ingrained upon our culture.

 

[The Smoking Man]

I think it would also have to involve a substantial portion of the population to consider it ingrained upon our culture.

WHAT? You don't all do commando rolls and yell semper fi or FUBAR?

Say it ain't so!

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

I would have to agree that Quetz9's comment has been seriously misrepresented.
There is no comparing the wars sited by Quetz and the majority of the wars fought by America and I think that you're comparison of the two would likely be found more insulting by most Afghans then Quetz's comment. The term "warrior" is most often a reverant one.
Why are you insulted MaxS? Are you from Afghanistan? Were you brought up in or around a similar culture? I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that you may have a legitimate reason to be but if not then why are you taking it upon yourself to be insulted for them?

 

[The Smoking Man]

There is no comparing the wars sited by Quetz and the majority of the wars fought by America and I think that you're comparison of the two would likely be found more insulting by most Afghans then Quetz's comment. The term "warrior" is most often a reverant one.

Heck, I'd go so far as to say that the statements are stupid enough to be ranked alongside: the Chinese run good laundries, Mexicans are lazy, Indians do good tak-away and Jamaicans all smoke Ganja.

People fight because they have to when they are invaded.

Out of an instinct for self preservation, they use the tools and techniques at hand.

Even Sun Tsu will tell you that you never attack ANY force on its own soil unless you have an incredibly overwhealming force.

This isn't rocket science.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Heck, I'd go so far as to say that the statements are stupid enough to be ranked alongside: the Chinese run good laundries, Mexicans are lazy, Indians do good tak-away and Jamaicans all smoke Ganja.

Ah, but you see the difference is in the manner in which you say it. If you're degrading then obviously the people will not be happy. I'm pretty sure that if I make an insult someone is going to be insulted. If I say something positive, especially about something someone may pride themselves on, it will generally be met well don't you think?
Chinese are great businessmen/women.
Hispanics certainly know how to relax and not let the stress of daily life get to them.
Indians have great traditional foods.
Jamaican's tend to be really mellow dudes.
African American's tend to have much better rythme than white people.
Asians seem to do a lot better at math than most other cultures.
ect ect..

People fight because they have to when they are invaded.

Out of an instinct for self preservation, they use the tools and techniques at hand.

Even Sun Tsu will tell you that you never attack ANY force on its own soil unless you have an incredibly overwhealming force.

This isn't rocket science.

From what I understand they have fought well and against great odds. Not only that but they have done it again and again for the past couple centuries or more. How many other countries in the world can boast of that? I think Sun Tsu would have given them a pat on the back.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Ah, but you see the difference is in the manner in which you say it. If you're degrading then obviously the people will not be happy. I'm pretty sure that if I make an insult someone is going to be insulted. If I say something positive, especially about something someone may pride themselves on, it will generally be met well don't you think?
Chinese are great businessmen/women.
Hispanics certainly know how to relax and not let the stress of daily life get to them.
Indians have great traditional foods.
Jamaican's tend to be really mellow dudes.
African American's tend to have much better rythme than white people.
Asians seem to do a lot better at math than most other cultures.
ect ect..

[SARCASM]Oh, well ... if you are going to say stuff like that then fire away. Colin Powell, I am sure, is a good Rapper. [/SARCASM]

Can you say 'patronize'? Sure I knew you could.

 

[MaxS]

Ah, but you see the difference is in the manner in which you say it. If you're degrading then obviously the people will not be happy. I'm pretty sure that if I make an insult someone is going to be insulted. If I say something positive, especially about something someone may pride themselves on, it will generally be met well don't you think?
Chinese are great businessmen/women.
Hispanics certainly know how to relax and not let the stress of daily life get to them.
Indians have great traditional foods.
Jamaican's tend to be really mellow dudes.
African American's tend to have much better rythme than white people.
Asians seem to do a lot better at math than most other cultures.
ect ect..

From what I understand they have fought well and against great odds. Not only that but they have done it again and again for the past couple centuries or more. How many other countries in the world can boast of that? I think Sun Tsu would have given them a pat on the back.

Are you demented or something? Patronizing is still patronizing whether or not you meant it in a "good way."

I'm Jewish but if you tell me I make a lot of money because of my race or religion I'm sure as hell going to take offense, even if you simply meant to compliment me.

If I was black and you said I must be good at basketball I don't think I would be giving you a pat on the back either.

What makes you think if I were Afghan I would be elated that you assume I'm a natural born warrior.

Furthermore, the term "warrior" is not reverent it is dehumanizing, especially when applied to an entire culture. Thats why I was likening "uncivilized savages" to "natural born warriors" - native americans were perceived as natural born warriors too; many people took no pity in their slaughter as a result.

 

[Mercator]

Hey let's start a new fad! The PIC, or patronizing, insulting compliment. Like : Americans look great with combat boots. Japanese have enormous respect for their war heroes. The Taliban are very good at creating a protective environment for their spouses. The Irish have a knack for alternative use of fertilisers. The French are vigorous in organizing pre-olympic events. The American president has great people thinking for him.

 

[MaxS]

Nerds look great in glasses. =D

 

[Mercator]

Cuba is famous for ousourcing of it's penitentiary facilities.

 

[Mercator]

Americans always fly the extra mile to get access to the latest torture technology.

 

[MaxS]

lol i don't think that one can be viewed as even a patronizing compliment

 

[Mercator]

lol i don't think that one can be viewed as even a patronizing compliment

True, it's too close to reality to be a PIC.

 

[Art]

Bush is an inspiration to would be imperialists around the globe.

 

[Informal Logic]

WOW ok chill out, calling the U.S. imperialistic wasn't even the point of this thread bad title get over it

the point was to show that the u.s. has been involved in many many many many armed conflicts, contrasting to the middle eastern list in the other thread

http://www.gandhara.com.au/afghan_table.html

There it is for reference.

P.S. I don't believe the U.S. has ever gone to war to stop genocide. The U.S certainly stopped the genocide in Kosovo but it side stepped Africa entirely. I can't make an intelligent suggestion to what the motivation is, but I don't believe the betterment of humanity has anything to do with it.

P.P.S.

Main Entry: im·pe·ri·al·ism
Pronunciation: im-'pir-E-&-"li-z&m
Function: noun
1 : imperial government, authority, or system
2 : the policy, practice, or advocacy of extending the power and dominion of a nation especially by direct territorial acquisitions or by gaining indirect control over the political or economic life of other areas; broadly : the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence <union imperialism>

Read that again: Broadly - the extension or imposition of power, authority, or influence

The debate on semantics is constant in this forum, especially words such as imperialism, terrorism, etc. It seems we must go through this process repeatedly.

Back to the topic, we know the US lacks a consistent foreign policy, and many members agree genocide or human rights is no more a factor in policy than regime change, etc. And this is this case from administration to administration, both Republican and Democrat. But good luck getting Americans, particularly neocons to understand or acknowledge this.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

Are you demented or something? Patronizing is still patronizing whether or not you meant it in a "good way."

Who here is being condecending aside from you, Mercator, and The Smoking Man? If someone sincerely compliments someone it is not generally called patronizing and if it is it is meant in a positive manner.

I'm Jewish but if you tell me I make a lot of money because of my race or religion I'm sure as hell going to take offense, even if you simply meant to compliment me.

If I was black and you said I must be good at basketball I don't think I would be giving you a pat on the back either.

There is a vast and obvious difference between compliments given to individuals and compliments given to a culture that you seem to be ignoring for the sake of your rather juvenile arguement.

What makes you think if I were Afghan I would be elated that you assume I'm a natural born warrior.

Furthermore, the term "warrior" is not reverent it is dehumanizing, especially when applied to an entire culture. Thats why I was likening "uncivilized savages" to "natural born warriors" - native americans were perceived as natural born warriors too; many people took no pity in their slaughter as a result.

I never assumed such a thing. I only stated that I think an Afghan would probably be more likely insulted by your comparison than the comment made by Quetz9.
As far as the term warrior goes...
http://www.google.com/search?q=warrior+tradition&hl=en&lr=&start=0&sa=N
Maybe you are the one that needs to learn about other peoples cultures and be more sensitive to them. Or maybe you can just read up a bit on the Afghan people...
http://partners.nytimes.com/library...-binladen.html?Partner=PBS&RefId=Eutttn-uFBqv
So who's being patronizing here when you take it upon yourself to be insulted for these people and then demean a major part of their culture by saying that warriors are just savages and barbarians?

 

[Mercator]

The Statutory ape's great sense of humor is second only to his averseness of discrimination.

 

[The Smoking Man]

The Statutory ape's great sense of humor is second only to his averseness of discrimination.

He also seems to be fairly indescriminate when he refers to his links.

While he refers to a whole country, you will note that every link without exception under his google search and the reference to Afghan warriors were to a specific subgroup of people actually engaged in being warriors.

He seems unable to differentiate between the two.

I suppose it is the same mentality that sees ALL moslems as terrorists.

Then there is the question of if being a warrior is an admirable trait.

When one views American TV series of the likes of 'Starship Troopers' and that ilk, ones that invariably fail outside of the USA because of the jingoistic 'huaaa!', 'semper fi' content, it's easy to see what they presume to be a 'warrior'.

There is also the 'redefined' warrior that you have pointed out in 'Jack Bauer' of '24' ... The gun toting, torturing 'everyman warrior for the 21st century'.

Yes, let's all be warriors.

Personally, I tend to admire Ghandi a bit more.

 

[Mercator]

Personally, I tend to admire Ghandi a bit more.

Yeah, "Ghandi looked great in simple clothing".
Maybe he is genuine when he states that labeling a group of people "warriors" is meant to be a compliment, from an American perspective.

I went to the "Zheng He" exhibition in Shanghai. What amazes me is the contrast between his travels around the world , which were essentially peace missions, and European marauding half a century later. The Chinese "discovered" the world, long before we did and in the process did not occupy, subdue or conquered a single soul. This in sharp contrast to the European "warriors" trying to loot anything they found on their way.
It took centuries for Europe to become as civilized as the Chinese and I am afraid that our overseas cousins in the US did not get the message yet. Sad observation is that it took two worldwars before Europeans finally saw the light. What will it take for the American warriors to realize they are an antique anomaly in modern time?

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

He also seems to be fairly indescriminate when he refers to his links.

While he refers to a whole country, you will note that every link without exception under his google search and the reference to Afghan warriors were to a specific subgroup of people actually engaged in being warriors.

He seems unable to differentiate between the two.

I suppose it is the same mentality that sees ALL moslems as terrorists.

Then there is the question of if being a warrior is an admirable trait.

When one views American TV series of the likes of 'Starship Troopers' and that ilk, ones that invariably fail outside of the USA because of the jingoistic 'huaaa!', 'semper fi' content, it's easy to see what they presume to be a 'warrior'.

There is also the 'redefined' warrior that you have pointed out in 'Jack Bauer' of '24' ... The gun toting, torturing 'everyman warrior for the 21st century'.

Yes, let's all be warriors.

Personally, I tend to admire Ghandi a bit more.

No culture is filled entirely with warriors so the warrior class will always be a subgroup. But there are many cultures that revere their warriors where the term is synonamous with hero.

As far as this supposed mentality of mine that would see all Muslims as terrorists I'm pretty sure you have read my comments on another thread regarding that and should see that is not the way I think.

Regarding whether or not being a warrior is an admirable trait I think you have to put that down to a case by case basis. Would you disput that the fighting spirit shown by the Afghan warriors in protecting themselves from invasion is admirable? Because these are the people we were originally speaking of.

Regarding these "warriors" found in media, of which you examples are not good ones, I'm quite positive they are also found in the media elsewhere but in different forms more suitable to those cultures.

I don't think anyone here is going to dismiss Ghandi. If you personally can not find any redeeming qualities in the concept of a warrior that's quite alright. But that brings me back to my main point. Why should MaxS or anyone else take offense on behalf of another culture for a comment that it would seem they would possibly find complimentary? Especially when it was meant as a compliment.

 

[The Smoking Man]

I don't think anyone here is going to dismiss Ghandi. If you personally can not find any redeeming qualities in the concept of a warrior that's quite alright. But that brings me back to my main point. Why should MaxS or anyone else take offense on behalf of another culture for a comment that it would seem they would possibly find complimentary? Especially when it was meant as a compliment.

Probably when the members of the other subgroups can see what you say in all innocence IS offensive.

You mentioned in a previous post telling an African American he was a good basketball player. What if you had just called him good at picking cotton?

Sure, you meant that he does his job well but it's that the task is particularly offensive.

Let's not forget that the bulk of the Moslem people see 'Islam' as a religion of peace and are not warrior fanatics. Most would just like to be left alone to their faith.

I don't know ... we all found it pretty funny when Jackie Chan got trashed in Rush Hour II for using the word 'N*gga'.

And I did so love the M*A*S*H episode when the Nutty general came forward and in a court martial hearing accepted the testamony from a 'Balck' soldier ... an then launches into a rendition of "Mississippi Mud" because they got 'nachral rithm'!

People who patronize rarely know when they do it and most of it is done in pure innocence.

What's my right to take offense? I have a nephew called Saddam.

 

[TheStatutoryApe]

You mentioned in a previous post telling an African American he was a good basketball player. What if you had just called him good at picking cotton?

No I didn't. I said, and only as an example, "Black people tend to have better rythme than white people". And the difference is that I did not tell anyone that they are good at picking cotton.
Half of my co-workers are black actually. So for the purpose of this discussion I decided to ask my co-worker who is working with me right now about this particular point. He laughed and said that white people should be offended by the particular statement and not black people. He laughed even more when I told him about your equating the statement to saying black people are good at picking cotton. Ofcourse you have no way of knowing if I really did ask someone about this but I thought I would just throw that out there.
Also, have you ever heard of a movie called "White Men Can't Jump"? It's a basketball movie.
It seems to me that all you can do is take what are harmless compliments and compare them to obvious social taboos.

Speaking of comedy, have you ever seen Carlos Mencia? He's a hilarious stand up comic. Maybe you all should check him out sometime. His whole schtick is that people, like you, take this whole racial sensitivity thing waaaay too far.

So you have a nephew named Saddam. Are you part of the Afghan culture? If so then I will recognize that you have a legitimate reason to take some sort of offense.
Personally my step father and his family are Japanese. I have good friends that are black, hispanic, Korean, Japanese, ect. and they would probably all laugh at you and your reaction here. I don't know any afghans though so I couldn't really ask them what they think. I do know a Palestinian though and an Armenian. Maybe I should ask them what they think. Ofcourse they're still not Afghans.

 

[The Smoking Man]

Speaking of comedy, have you ever seen Carlos Mencia? He's a hilarious stand up comic. Maybe you all should check him out sometime. His whole schtick is that people, like you, take this whole racial sensitivity thing waaaay too far.

There's a big difference between 'Here leeezard leeezard leeezard' and you are really great warriors during a time when you have just been invaded.

I also want to hear about when you tell your buddy just how cool it is that his race has such natural rythm.

 

[MaxS]

Honestly I don't think you could be any more white.

Its wonderful to see you're proud enough of your multi-ethnic friends to post about them on a forum as proof of your good will.

This is like something out of a bad sitcom, I can just see it

"Hey look daddy, Daquan is here!"

*WooooOOOoOoO clap clap clap

"Yo wassup Mr. Cedar."

*Audience laughs

"Oh, hello uh, Daquan, how are you doing today?"

"Yo I'm banging Mr. Cedar, peace out dawg!"

*Audience laughs histerically

"That Daquan, he sure is a character."

*Awwww

"And all this time I thought he was a car thief!"

*Riotous laughter

 

[quetzalcoatl9]

What's my right to take offense? I have a nephew called Saddam.

Ok, how does that have anything to do with it? I have a grandfather named Adolf, so what?