Topic: Peace Corps

[JamesBot 9000]

Anyone here either been in the Peace Corps or have a friend/family member in the PC? My sister joined a while ago (I dunno why I waited this long to make a topic about it) and she's currently in Uzbekistan teaching English in a middle school.

[spleenman]

I had a friend that was.  He went to Africa to try and set up running water for some village and came back bitter and disillusioned.

He said he'd never do it again.  Maybe it just depends where they put you.  Ubekeztan sounds better to me than fighting off Malaria and starvation in some human pit of despair.

[The Bladesinger]

I'd never want to do such a thing, I like my way of living and don't want to leave it for something worse, even if I might be able to help people ina crappy place, just not my thing.

PS. It's Uzbekistan.

[Sr. Commissar Gribb]

ubezicksatn

buzekickstand

usedbeckingstan

errrr

[The Bladesinger]

Tricky aint it?

Look in an Atlas if you really want to know how to spell tricky contries and places, such as Herzegovina, Kamtjatka, Gdansk, Göteborg, Teheran, Riyhad and Västerås (my home town).

[1|\|(|_||31 |\/|4§73]2 |<|_|§h4|\|]

PS. It's Uzbekistan.

look closely: James did spell it that way (and he didn't modify his post).

[Archon Vijayle]

Spleenman didn't

[spleenman]

Spleenman didn't

Is there another place you had it confused with?  

[Archon Vijayle]

probably

[Eridain]

well, since uzbekistan is a place where people vanish after rallying against the president and there is confirmed info about deathcamps, id say its one crappy place, id never go anywhere near it. but hey, they get money from gwb to fight for democracy, sounds ludicrous. how come americans always give money to the evildoers on this planet, like the taliban and mujaheddin???

[Farsear Riddle]

americans always give money to the evildoers on this planet, like the taliban

  Liberal LIES, You are a Liberal LIAR

 Fact – the us government never gave a single penny to the Taliban. It did however give massive amounts of humanitarian relief thru US and international aid organisations. IIRC it gave more than all of the EU countries combined. Perhaps it is this humanitarian aid you find so objectionable?

and mujaheddin

 Dam right they did and what a brilliant manoeuvre it was. Helped to speed the death of the USSR. None of those weapons are still even functional thanks to virtually no maintenance, and it is thru virtue of the stingers design impossible that any are now anything more than unguided rockets with a tiny warhead.

 In real-politic alliances are always fleeting unless you have a strong cultural link such as with the USA and the UK. Do you even suggest in a fit of insanity that the US should not have helped the Taliban to kick the Soviets out of their country?

 Btw anyone who cannot see that the situation in Afghanistan is now much better is so dumb they don't even qualify as part of the human race. I’m not saying it is perfect, but what problems are left are just much reduced versions of a few of the old ones.

 Liberal Lies do not go unchallenged from now on, kapish.

[miclantecuthli]

Btw anyone who cannot see that the situation in Afghanistan is now much better is so dumb they don't even qualify as part of the human race. I’m not saying it is perfect, but what problems are left are just much reduced versions of a few of the old ones.

I don't think so. Ever been in Afghanistan? I know someone who just returned from Afghanistan (a belgian soldier). They weren't allowed to leave their camp becuase Kabul was too dangerous, they were only allowed to leave it for certain missions. Many say that kabul is the one of the safest places of Afghanistan, i wonder how "safe" the rest of Afghanistan is.

The taliban controlled most parts of Afghanistan and Afghanistan was relatively stable when the taliban was in power. The situation changed however, the ancient warlords are in power now, each with their own rules and they fight each other.

I am happy that the taliban is gone, should have happened earlier, but the situation now isn't better than before. Women still have to wear their burqa in most places. I hope (and believe) that the situation will be better in a few years, but claiming that Afghanistan is safer now than under the taliban is something i don't believe. The international communty still has lots of work there.

[Farsear Riddle]

 miclantecuthli  are you totally brain dead the taliban were just a loose collection of warlord and thieves - there was no stability. And now people are not being dragged of to be stoned to death for flying a kite, get a grip of reality man. I call that one massive improvemant. Was your soldier friend in afghanastan while the Taliban were in power....... thought not. So he is not exactly an expert in making comparisons now is he.

[miclantecuthli]

miclantecuthli  are you totally brain dead the taliban were just a loose collection of warlord and thieves - there was no stability.

and now? A collection of warlords and thiefs, i don't see the difference. Most warlords are conservative Muslims -> still no rights for women, still executions.

there's even a bigger problem: opium. Opium = lots of money for the warlords -> lots of extra criminality

I don't say that the situation under the taliban was good, I only have the impression that the situation is still similar. I also think that it is difficult to discuss this. We don't have lots of information about the stuation there.

[JamesBot 9000]

well, since uzbekistan is a place where people vanish after rallying against the president and there is confirmed info about deathcamps, id say its one crappy place, id never go anywhere near it.

Um....wrong. I don't know where you're thinking of, but it ain't Uzbekistan.

[Sartori]

I don't think so. Ever been in Afghanistan? I know someone who just returned from Afghanistan (a belgian soldier). They weren't allowed to leave their camp becuase Kabul was too dangerous, they were only allowed to leave it for certain missions. Many say that kabul is the one of the safest places of Afghanistan, i wonder how "safe" the rest of Afghanistan is.

The taliban controlled most parts of Afghanistan and Afghanistan was relatively stable when the taliban was in power. The situation changed however, the ancient warlords are in power now, each with their own rules and they fight each other.

I am happy that the taliban is gone, should have happened earlier, but the situation now isn't better than before. Women still have to wear their burqa in most places. I hope (and believe) that the situation will be better in a few years, but claiming that Afghanistan is safer now than under the taliban is something i don't believe. The international communty still has lots of work there.

Afghanistan has only returned to the state it was in shortly after Russia gave up on it's invasion.

And yes the Taliban did impose a great deal of stability on the nation when it finally did take over and you'd probably also find that it was comparitively safer when the Taliban were in charge....   Well, at least if you obeyed the Taliban....

americans always give money to the evildoers on this planet, like the taliban
 
 

  Liberal LIES, You are a Liberal LIAR

Fact – the us government never gave a single penny to the Taliban. It did however give massive amounts of humanitarian relief thru US and international aid organisations. IIRC it gave more than all of the EU countries combined. Perhaps it is this humanitarian aid you find so objectionable?

Yes they did...  as you have mentioned the US did supply munitions and money to the Mujahidin during the Russian occupation which eventually disolved and become lots of different factions after Russia pulled out. One of those factions eventually became the Taliban.

Oh and heres a quote from the CIA world fact book...

Afghanistan's recent history is characterized by war and civil unrest. The Soviet Union invaded in 1979, but was forced to withdraw 10 years later by anti-Communist mujahidin forces supplied and trained by the US, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others. Fighting subsequently continued among the various mujahidin factions, giving rise to a state of warlordism that eventually spawned the Taliban. Backed by foreign sponsors, the Taliban developed as a political force and eventually seized power. The Taliban were able to capture most of the country, aside from Northern Alliance strongholds primarily in the northeast, until US and allied military action in support of the opposition following the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks forced the group's downfall. In late 2001, major leaders from the Afghan opposition groups and diaspora met in Bonn, Germany and agreed on a plan for the formulation of a new government structure that resulted in the inauguration of Hamid KARZAI as Chairman of the Afghan Interim Authority (AIA) on 22 December 2001. The AIA held a nationwide Loya Jirga (Grand Assembly) in June 2002, and KARZAI was elected President by secret ballot of the Transitional Islamic State of Afghanistan (TISA). The Transitional Authority has an 18-month mandate to hold a nationwide Loya Jirga to adopt a constitution and a 24-month mandate to hold nationwide elections. In December 2002, the TISA marked the one-year anniversary of the fall of the Taliban. In addition to occasionally violent political jockeying and ongoing military action to root out remaining terrorists and Taliban elements, the country suffers from enormous poverty, a crumbling infrastructure, and widespread land mines.

[Farsear Riddle]

By the same logic one could say that if I gave a beggar a £5 note and then five years later he became a terrorist I am sponsoring terrorism. Classic Liberal-Logic.

 Where does the CIA quote mention the "stability" people enjoyed under the Taliban, maybe you could find me a source on that one. Perhaps you should start by looking through the Al-Queda web pages, if such a thing even exists.

The Taliban were a loose alliance of competing warlords and pety criminals led by a one eyed religious fanatic. Stable ?


 Nice try buddy, but no cigar.

[spleenman]

The taliban controlled most parts of Afghanistan and Afghanistan was relatively stable when the taliban was in power. The situation changed however, the ancient warlords are in power now, each with their own rules and they fight each other.

This is like saying that Nazi Germany was stable.  Of course, what brutal, repressive regime isn't stable?

I am happy that the taliban is gone, should have happened earlier,

Oh does this mean you support the war on terror or not?

but the situation now isn't better than before. Women still have to wear their burqa in most places. I hope (and believe) that the situation will be better in a few years, but claiming that Afghanistan is safer now than under the taliban is something i don't believe. The international communty still has lots of work there.

Women are not required to wear their burqa there - where do you guys get this stuff?  I'm sure many still do it out of fear for some type of reprisal or reverence to the muslim religion - nothing more.  At least people aren't shot in the head for having no beard.

Danger is a relative concept.  You and I probably wouldn't feel safe in Compton, but compared to Afganistan ...  anything's better than the oppression they lived with.

And yes the Taliban did impose a great deal of stability on the nation when it finally did take over and you'd probably also find that it was comparitively safer when the Taliban were in charge....   Well, at least if you obeyed the Taliban....

And if you didn't they shot you in the head after a mock trial.  And you think America's death penalty is strict?  How'd you like to get stoned to death for a short beard or owning a TV set or a book?  No thanks.

Yes they did...  as you have mentioned the US did supply munitions and money to the Mujahidin during the Russian occupation which eventually disolved and become lots of different factions after Russia pulled out. One of those factions eventually became the Taliban.

The Taliban government was installed by the Pakistanis.  Blaming the U.S. for a radical faction is hardly objective since the Soviets started the instability with their 1979 invasion.  The Taliban didn't even exist in 1979.  

Of course, I think weren't the Soviets trying to stem muslim radicals from infilitrating their country for the reason of going in Afganistan?  So whose fault is it really?  Check your facts.

Oh and heres a quote from the CIA world fact book...

Afghanistan's recent history is characterized by war and civil unrest. The Soviet Union invaded in 1979, but was forced to withdraw 10 years later by anti-Communist mujahidin forces supplied and trained by the US, Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, and others. Fighting subsequently continued among the various mujahidin factions, giving rise to a state of warlordism that eventually spawned the Taliban. Backed by foreign sponsors, the Taliban developed as a political force and eventually seized power. The Taliban were able to capture most of the country, aside from Northern Alliance strongholds primarily in the northeast, until US and allied military action in support of the opposition following the 11 September 2001 terrorist attacks forced the group's downfall. In late 2001, major leaders from the Afghan opposition groups and diaspora met in Bonn, Germany and agreed on a plan for the formulation of a new government structure that resulted in the inauguration of Hamid KARZAI as Chairman of the Afghan Interim Authority (AIA) on 22 December 2001. The AIA held a nationwide Loya Jirga (Grand Assembly) in June 2002, and KARZAI was elected President by secret ballot of the Transitional Islamic State of Afghanistan (TISA). The Transitional Authority has an 18-month mandate to hold a nationwide Loya Jirga to adopt a constitution and a 24-month mandate to hold nationwide elections. In December 2002, the TISA marked the one-year anniversary of the fall of the Taliban. In addition to occasionally violent political jockeying and ongoing military action to root out remaining terrorists and Taliban elements, the country suffers from enormous poverty, a crumbling infrastructure, and widespread land mines.

Um ... yeah and I would point out a lot of mines were Soviet and the Taliban encouraged poverty by keeping the people (particularly women) uneducated so they could stay in power.  How does the CIA factbook implicate the U.S. as a bad guy?

[miclantecuthli]

The taliban controlled most parts of Afghanistan and Afghanistan was relatively stable when the taliban was in power. The situation changed however, the ancient warlords are in power now, each with their own rules and they fight each other.

This is like saying that Nazi Germany was stable.  Of course, what brutal, repressive regime isn't stable?

and your point is? Did I say that I liked the taliban, did I say that they did a great job?

I am happy that the taliban is gone, should have happened earlier,

Oh does this mean you support the war on terror or not?

I don't see the relevance of this question. I am agaisnt terror and would be happy if Al Qaeda disapeared, but i don't support Bush his "war on terror". I believe that the west (America, the EU, I don't care who) should react when terrible things happen. The taliban was awful and it's good that they're gone.

Before you ask: no, I was (and still am) against the war in iraq. Saddam was a terrible dictator, but I believe that there were other methods to solve the problem.

but the situation now isn't better than before. Women still have to wear their burqa in most places. I hope (and believe) that the situation will be better in a few years, but claiming that Afghanistan is safer now than under the taliban is something i don't believe. The international communty still has lots of work there.

Women are not required to wear their burqa there - where do you guys get this stuff?  I'm sure many still do it out of fear for some type of reprisal or reverence to the muslim religion - nothing more.  At least people aren't shot in the head for having no beard.

Danger is a relative concept.  You and I probably wouldn't feel safe in Compton, but compared to Afganistan ...  anything's better than the oppression they lived with.

Women are indeed not required to wear a burqa, not according to the law, but reality is different. Most warlords want women with burqas. the situation changed officialy, but not in reality. They indeed do it out of fear.