Does she even logic??

[–]LucasTrask 12 points13 points14 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 9 points10 points11 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 21 points22 points23 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+]so_valid 13 years ago [recovered] (35 children) | Copy Link

My Grandpa is a veteran of ww2. Went through from 1940 to 1945. Saw a lot of combat, a lot of friends die. He has said to me more than once that the war was often the hardest on the women. I've heard this from other veterans too.

Not completely sure I agree, but it isn't an illogical or misandric thing to think.

[–]Bobsutan 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]so_valid4 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago* (29 children) | Copy Link

[–]dinky_hawker 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (20 children) | Copy Link

[–]dinky_hawker 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

[–]dinky_hawker 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig -2 points-1 points0 points 13 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

[–]SteelCrossx 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

In what ways are WWII and Afghanistan equal? Aside from the bullets both hurting.

This question isn't exactly clear but I'd like to try to answer.

Both wars began with an attack upon American soil by foreign nationals (Pearl Harbor and 9/11), from there Congress authorized the Commander-in-Chief (through a Declaration of War for WWII, through a joint resolution for Afghanistan) to act on behalf of the nation, the duly elected President then deployed American military troops in accordance with executive authority, those troops entered the country(s) that claimed responsibility or were officially allied with those that did (in the case of WWII) in order to engage the enemy as directed by the general officers whom had been given command of their respective situations.

As an Afghanistan veteran, I'd be more than receptive to anything you may believe makes Afghanistan a fake war. I see you have mentioned that there was not a coherent enemy but I don't believe that to be true. The Taliban was the acting government of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan at the time, though they were not recognized by the UN which recognized the Islamic State of Afghanistan as a government-in-exile.

The Taliban maintained an informal network of warlords that enacted a semi-standardized system of law enforcement that recognized Islamic Law, along with Pashwali and Taliban issued edicts, as legally binding; those whom violated those rules were subject to summary 'justice'. While not recognizable as a Republic, Democracy, or even Monarchy; the Taliban was a tribal structure and the Poshtuns are composed of various formal clans that create a hierarchical system which we would recognize as a governing body. Al Qaeda provided 31,000 trained troops to compose the bulk of the Taliban's fighting force (another 14,000 were Afghan nationals) which were headed by Mullah Mohammad Omar.

This all shows a government structure, trained military, and formal leadership of that military. While it may not be clearly defined by western standards, applying those standards to a very different culture may not be fair.

[–]Ted8367 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[–]SteelCrossx1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SteelCrossx1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SteelCrossx1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SteelCrossx1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]SteelCrossx1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I meant "or" only as a standard disjunctive, one or the other or both. It was the more forgiving reading of your claim because I don't want to misrepresent you. To be honest, I both disagree with this and also do not see the relevance. I can only explain my disagreement.

The Taliban was a governing body. They may not have had a congress, elections, hereditary inheritance, or other formal trappings but they had a legal system (Islam, Pashwali, edicts) which they enforced and a clan based tribal structure. Most societies existed like this, if they were not monarchies, until the Greeks pioneered Democracy.

As for the declaration of war, the United States Congress did delegate that authority to the President whom did so. While the Taliban may not have in the same sense, due to a different governmental system, I want to specify why I don't understand why this would matter.

Lets say, for the sake of this conversation, I stipulate that the United States invaded without proper justification, unilaterally, and engaged a government that did not understand why the invasion was occurring nor did they ever declare war in return. Why is that not a war? If Japan had bombed Pearl Harbor, not received a response or declaration of war, went on to invade and decimate the Hawaiian population without official opposition, would that not be a war? If not, why? I believe we may simply be defining this word differently. I'm taking the "a rose by any other name" stance. The idea that governing bodies have to sit down, agree to title something a war, and then act by a certain code for something to be considered a war would be a very modern conception of war, at very least. So much so we'd possible be in danger of WWII being the only "real war" in world history.

I want to make sure I'm absolutely clear. I am not concerned in debating if Afghanistan was or was not justified at this moment. The only thing I am questioning is what constitutes a war and why those conditions are what they are.

[–]escalatordoors1 point 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Both wars began with an attack upon American soil by foreign nationals

The American-Japanese war (not something even comparable to the war in Europe) was started with a planned attack by the Empire of Japan on the United states of America with the intent if capturing Hawaii and regaining Japanese naval supremacy in the pacific.

Afghanistan was started when a non-governmental group crashed a plane into a building, with the intent of scaring the shit out of the Americans enough that they would stop occupying the middle east.

As an Afghanistan veteran, I'd be more than receptive to anything you may believe makes Afghanistan a fake war.

Afghanistan is more of a political police action with drones and tanks than an actual war. Go look up some things about the Russian invasion of Germany, then tell me how they are comparable.

The Taliban had significant control over some things, but they were hardly the government of the nation. And regardless, I would consider the 9/11 attacks to b semi-justified considering what the US had been doing to the middle east for the past decades. Can you imagine what the US would have done had the situations been reversed?

The Taliban maintained an informal network of warlords that enacted a semi-standardized system of law enforcement that recognized Islamic Law, along with Pashwali and Taliban issued edicts, as legally binding; those whom violated those rules were subject to summary 'justice'. While not recognizable as a Republic, Democracy, or even Monarchy; the Taliban was a tribal structure and the Poshtuns are composed of various formal clans that create a hierarchical system which we would recognize as a governing body.

I agree up until you say they count as a government body. And even then, in wars you aren't supposed to kill the entire government, just the soldiers who are a threat to you (dirt farmer's aren't threats...)

Al Qaeda provided 31,000 trained troops to compose the bulk of the Taliban's fighting force (another 14,000 were Afghan nationals) which were headed by Mullah Mohammad Omar.

And how many of these "soldiers" were trying to attack the US on US soil compared to how many were trying to revolt against American occupation?

This all shows a government structure, trained military, and formal leadership of that military. While it may not be clearly defined by western standards, applying those standards to a very different culture may not be fair.

You have made some good points, but I still disagree. WWII and Afghanistan are worlds apart in all ways but the bullets hurting.

[–]SteelCrossx2 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

I could argue the Taliban was a governmental agency again but it seems tangential to the idea that Afghanistan was not a real war. I simply don't see a coherent thesis within this response to support that but arguments that there are differences among the similarities I pointed out. I wouldn't deny that. They're two entirely different events separated by so long that no one could have served in both WWII and Afghanistan.

If you want to define "real war" and then explain why Afghanistan is not that, I honestly am very interested in hearing that. If the argument is that Afghanistan wasn't as 'hardcore' as WWII because we now have drones and tanks... well, every older generation could make that argument about every newer generation's conditions. An argument that war has fundamentally changed from time X but not an argument against realness, I wouldn't think.

[–]Pecanpig0 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]themountaingoat 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[–]Pecanpig 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+]so_valid 13 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Haha, what a fucking stupid response. "Oh he is probably just being chivalrous." Anything to have a self pitying whine. Why don't you go talk to some of the German, French and Russian women who were raped and mutilated. Or, let me guess, you just assumed that we were really only talking about American women?

[–]themountaingoat 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[+]so_valid 13 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah. I guess that is the only kind of suffering women experienced during WW2. And, by the way, I never said the veterans were whiners. I'm saying that you, who never experienced anything like that, are the self pitying whiner. You actually accused my veteran Grandpa of white knighting for fucks sake.

[–]themountaingoat 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]Aaod 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

To be fair WW2 was a different beast due to the total war aspect. Women had to work some of them performing mens jobs and you had things like victory gardens massive rationing and other factors. Lots of them also had to follow the men around to bases and such and try and fight work. Everyone had to make sacrifices back then is the thing. Not to mention knowing your husband and or sons are fighting and have a very real likelihood of dying. Which is worse the emotional aspect or the real face to face aspect.

The more I think about it was harder for the women emotionally and harder in reality for the men. Women think we are privileged because they look at it from an emotional level and we think they are because we look at it from a factual and logical level as a example what does a woman get over a man such as affirmative action and they look at it as we don’t get cat called on the streets.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[–]so_valid3 points 13 years ago [recovered] | Copy Link

[–]apt-get_life 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]samnoelle27 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]themountaingoat 8 points9 points10 points 13 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]themountaingoat 4 points5 points6 points 13 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]themountaingoat 0 points1 point2 points 13 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]themountaingoat 1 point2 points3 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

[–]friestogo 2 points3 points4 points 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[+][deleted] 13 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]5th_Law_of_Robotics 10 points11 points12 points 13 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Title	Does she even logic??
Author	[deleted]
Upvotes	6
Comments	54
Date	December 29, 2012 11:42 AM UTC (13 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/15me0m/does_she_even_logic/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/does-she-even-logic.1005525 https://theredarchive.com/post/1005525

Comments