As far as I can see there are two simple sides to the story. Either you agree that women are second class citizens to be treated as sex slaves, and with no support for medical attention, or you feel women should have equal rights as men to the simple choices in life... such as freedom to wear comfortable clothing and receive medical attention when needed. Women of the Taliban do not, and neither do women of many other radical Islamic groups. The discussion has nothing to do with western forces being in Middle East countries. That is an entirely different matter altogether. Alexlah obviously agrees that husbands should have the right to mutilate their wives for whatever infraction the man can dream up..

Nope....looks like koheesti does not want to commit to something that he knows will have to result in an admission of error.

Whatshisface posted a link about "Violence Against Women Is No Rationale for Military Violence". I haven't commented on that subject so where would the admission from error come?

I was willing to leave this thread alone where it was but being the good little troll you are, you keep pushing. For the umpteenth time, provide proof to your false accusation. You may think that dodging and deflecting is a good stategy, but the longer you do, the more obvious it is what you are.

Nope....looks like koheesti does not want to commit to something that he knows will have to result in an admission of error.

Whatshisface posted a link about "Violence Against Women Is No Rationale for Military Violence". I haven't commented on that subject so where would the admission from error come?

I was willing to leave this thread alone where it was but being the good little troll you are, you keep pushing. For the umpteenth time, provide proof to your false accusation. You may think that dodging and deflecting is a good stategy, but the longer you do, the more obvious it is what you are.

No. You are the dodger.

Go back and read the entire thread. Understand my contention, understand how my contention relates to the Time article, and see how you are prevaricating by asking for proof so specific that it could be difficult to prove in an Afghan court, let alone with internet evidence alone.

I am offering you a chance to commit to a stance. Thus far, you have committed only to a very narrow and specific stance that is not the whole of the debate, nor is it within the spirit of the debate or the Time article.

Years ago on this forum I instigated the creation of the wai-ing emoticon, now exclusive to this board. While I came up with the idea for it another member, FlyingDutchman was responsible for the handiwork.

I now would like to see the creation of another emoticon which I could see being used profusely here (inspired by whathisname ).

This representation is not quite what I had in mind, but it's a good start. It would need a seriously disgruntled face and the animation would see our wind-up toy racing around hither and fro, bouncing off of one object to the next.

Unfortunately, it's been many years since the FlyingDutchman has been active. Where to find the talent now?

I don't know why you bother, it's pretty clear these guys are far more interested in criticizing the U.S. and it's military, rather than any real concern for Afghan civilians.

Hit - Nail - Head.

This rule also applies to almost every one of their posts in OTB, no matter what the subject is supposed to be.