www.ditl.org

Cpl Kendall wrote:We should just pull out everyone and let them have their tribal paradise, offer anyone who wants to come with a plane ticket and shut down all relations and trade. If they get uppity again, well the US spent billions of dollars on the B-2, let the AF use it as a bombing range.

If someone hadn't put lines on a map, no one would even know there was a country there.

That's the problem with the middle east and Africa. A bunch of white guys decided to come along and tell them all where they were going to live, who was their countrymen and who wasn't. Amazingly enough it hasn't worked out so hot.

Tyyr wrote:That's the problem with the middle east and Africa. A bunch of white guys decided to come along and tell them all where they were going to live, who was their countrymen and who wasn't. Amazingly enough it hasn't worked out so hot.

Arbitrary lines on a map don't usually seem to go over well at all.

Tyyr wrote:That's the problem with the middle east and Africa. A bunch of white guys decided to come along and tell them all where they were going to live, who was their countrymen and who wasn't. Amazingly enough it hasn't worked out so hot.

Tsukiyumi wrote:Arbitrary lines on a map don't usually seem to go over well at all.

Funny, 'cause things went so well in creating Checkoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Greece, right?

Mikey wrote:Funny, 'cause things went so well in creating Checkoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Greece, right?

Mikey wrote:Funny, 'cause things went so well in creating Checkoslovakia, Yugoslavia, and Greece, right?

Well the last isn't doing too badly (unless you're a planespotter), and the first only needed an extra line added.

And the less said about the second one the better, eh?

Captain Seafort wrote:Well the last isn't doing too badly (unless you're a planespotter)

Not now. Ask the Macedonians how they liked it before, though.

Captain Seafort wrote:the first only needed an extra line added.

And it's incredible that the addition of that line went as bloodlessly as it did.

Nutso wrote:

stitch626 wrote:Why again are they still aloud to be their own country?

They're obeying us. Once a democratically elected Afghan leader decides he isn't going to play ball with us, we'll bomb the s**t out of them and put someone friendlier in power.

Unfortunately, it isn't that simple. From what I can tell from my experiences of islamic women from a friend (obviously, it is a different demonination), many women believe that this servitude is RIGHT to serve their husbands.

Nutso wrote:"Though shalt not abuse thy wife." But the way followers of any religion just pick and choose what part they want to follow, women would still be f***ed.

But isn't it abusive not to use man's superior logic and tough love to keep the weaker sex from creating perverse sins underlining their most base instincts.

See, easily corrupted.

Its religion. Which means that its true meaning rarely ever matters. "Thou shalt not kill" became "Thou shalt kill all who don't suck your cock or agree with everything you say no matter how stupid it may be".

The middle east and Africa and about half of South America should just be bombed into the stone age again. Kill off about 3/4th of the population and then let them start over again. Oh, and we should add France and Russia to this just for the hell of it.

Reliant121 wrote:

Nutso wrote:

stitch626 wrote:Why again are they still aloud to be their own country?

They're obeying us. Once a democratically elected Afghan leader decides he isn't going to play ball with us, we'll bomb the s**t out of them and put someone friendlier in power.

Unfortunately, it isn't that simple. From what I can tell from my experiences of islamic women from a friend (obviously, it is a different demonination), many women believe that this servitude is RIGHT to serve their husbands.

They don't know any better. They were never given a choice. Even if an Islamic wife in an abusive relationship could summon the courage to run away from that "husband," and also leave her children behind, where could she go? It would be a sin against God to leave your husband so no one would take you in. You can't go back to your father. It's likely he traded you to this husband for favor. You have no working skills, as I doubt women are allowed to learn anything in a school. Can't be hired as a maid (homemaking is the one skill I'm certain these women have) since disobeying your husband would surely be a crime in countries where religion is law. They got nothing but a husband and dreams of Heaven.

I find that as quite sad.

Deep - you can't bomb someone back to the Stone Age if they're already in the Stone Age.

It's Deep's Solution: similar to the Shep Solution, only not as restrained.