Karzai repeals women's rights to obtain votes

[CommanderJameson]

As pointed out by skwdenyer over in Speed, Plod & The Law, there's an article in the Guardian describing how Hamid Karzai, the spectacularly useless president of Afghanistan, has signed off legislation that basically reverts women to chattels of their husbands. Can't leave the house without permission. Can't refuse sex without a "reasonable excuse" (and I strongly doubt that "I'm watching Taliban Today, and I've got a headache" will count). Can't get a job or go to school without hubby's say-so.

Huh. Tin-pot pseudoleader in broken third-world nation signs off on fundamentalist Islamic legislation to obtain votes of influential clerics and their followers. Film at 11.

Only this particular broken third-world nation is one that my tax pounds are at play in; the president in question's tenuous grasp on power is only maintained by the presence of UK and other forces, and didn't we just fight a war to get rid of the Taliban?

Twat. As one of the Guardian readers (yes, I'll agree with anyone, me) pointed out, this is a law designed by men, for men. We should ship all the women and kids out and leave the fundamentalist gits to their own devices.

I'm perhaps out of step with current Government thinking, but I don't automatically respect a viewpoint simply because it exists. I don't give a crap about respecting the Shia views in Afghanistan, because they run counter to pretty much everything I consider to be right and proper.

Why are we supporting this idiot?

[CommanderJameson]

Fittster said:

CommanderJameson said:

Why are we supporting this idiot?

Are you in favour of the country being used as a terrorist training camp?

Couldn't care less, to be honest. I'm firmly in the "terrorism as vastly overstated threat used to conceal more insidious agendas" tinfoil-hat-wearing school of thought.

[CommanderJameson]

Cara Van Man said:

CommanderJameson said:

Fittster said:

CommanderJameson said:

Why are we supporting this idiot?

Are you in favour of the country being used as a terrorist training camp?

Couldn't care less, to be honest. I'm firmly in the "terrorism as vastly overstated threat used to conceal more insidious agendas" tinfoil-hat-wearing school of thought.

That's good to know. It will be of massive consolation next time I'm over there, away from my family, whilst being involved in very real missions against insurgants, taliban and terrorists.

What's that got to do with my point?

[CommanderJameson]

Marf said:

Cara Van Man said:

The forces aren't just there for show or to cover up Jaqui Smiths latest faux pas, you do know that, yes?

No, you're out there to facilitate a resource grab of epic proportions whilst our government spins our presence there as bringing democracy to the savages.

Frankly our government had no business sending you and your colleagues to risk your lives in that god forsaken dust bowl.

I, and I suspect the other posters in this thread, have nothing against you or the forces in general, but instead have a problem with the lickspittle government who sent you out there in the first place.

Exactly my point, more eloquently explained.