• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US appoints envoy to Muslim world

Kandahar said:
But did you consider that her gender might HELP change perceptions? I doubt Martin Luther King would have been as influential as he was if he were white. But he became the most prominent face of Black America to many white people...and many of them found him (and by extension, black people) to be much less scary than they imagined.

Sometimes it takes strong figures who belong to precisely the groups who are most oppressed. Many Muslim nations have shown this is possible. For example, Pakistan has become decidedly more liberal toward women's rights since Benazir Bhutto was prime minister in the early 90s.
Click to expand...

More than that, I think changing other countries perceptions of us should not involve us changing what we are. We are a country that puts women in a position of authority. Muslim countries have dealt with women in the past, they will have to in the future.
 
The Mark said:
But are we aware of all the religions out there?

For all we know, there could be some random hermit in the rain forrest who started his own religion which only he believes in...do we have to search them all out and send envoys to every one?
Click to expand...

All the more reason not to have a religious envoy, at all. Hence the reason for the seperation of church and state.

I mean, this is redicualous. Should we have had an envoy to the communists? Or, the Nazis? Hell no, we shouldn't have, just like we shouldn't for Islam. This is PC insanity.
 
Redress said:
Are those the types we really want to engage in talks?
Click to expand...
If we're going to "talk" to the Ummah and exclude those types, we're inviting those types to fly some more planes into some more buildings.

Moreover, those types are found everywhere, not just in nations dominated by a particular strain of Islam.
 
celticlord said:
Hardly. It also hardly requires a scholar of Islam to know that certain groups within the "Muslim world" place women in what we would consider second-class status.

Remember that in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, women are not allowed to drive.

Remember that Northern Sudan enforces a strict interpretation of Shari'ah, and as recently as 2007 sentenced women to death by stoning for adultery.

Remember that the bottom of the 2009 Social Institutions and Gender Index is predominantly Muslim.

Remember that the Taliban, during the time of their control of Afghanistan, denied women the right to even leave the house without a male to escort them, denied them education, and even access to healthcare.

Outreach is about changing perceptions--changing the perceptions especially of one's putative enemies. Where is the need greater for shifting perceptions--among fairly moderate Egyptians or among fundamentalist Afghans and Pashtuns?

If the outreach message is going to be rejected by those putative enemies because of the gender of the messenger, how much can realistically be accomplished?

An envoy to the Ummah who will not be allowed to speak to the entirety of the Ummah is hindered in what she can accomplish.
Click to expand...

Remember that Indonesia, which has the largest Muslim population in the world, elected a woman President.

Remember that Pakistan, the second largest Muslim population in the world, elected a woman as Prime Minister.

Remeber that Bangladesh has elected two women Prime Ministers.

Remember that Turkey also elected a woman Prime Minister.
 
Last edited:
celticlord said:
If we're going to "talk" to the Ummah and exclude those types, we're inviting those types to fly some more planes into some more buildings.
Click to expand...

I cannot believe you actually said that. Not talking to some one is not inviting them to attack us.

On second thought, I am going to give you credit that you just phrased that poorly. You are still wrong, but I don't think you are suggesting we are somehow asking to be attacked. I would in this case suggest that there are certain organizations we do not want to negotiate with except on our terms.
 
Last edited:
Redress said:
I don't think you are suggesting we are somehow asking to be attacked. I would in this case suggest that there are certain organizations we do not want to negotiate with except on our terms.
Click to expand...

I think we're asking to be attacked. Do you actually believe that Islamic extremists have the ability to see things from an American Liberal point of view?

Those, "certain organizations", aren't interested in negotiating on anyone's terms.
 
apdst said:
I think we're asking to be attacked. Do you actually believe that Islamic extremists have the ability to see things from an American Liberal point of view?

Those, "certain organizations", aren't interested in negotiating on anyone's terms.
Click to expand...

And, once again, The Taliban and Friends do not represent the entire Muslim world.
 
apdst said:
All the more reason not to have a religious envoy, at all. Hence the reason for the seperation of church and state.

I mean, this is redicualous. Should we have had an envoy to the communists? Or, the Nazis? Hell no, we shouldn't have, just like we shouldn't for Islam. This is PC insanity.
Click to expand...

I agree.

The post of mine you responded to was intended to be tongue-in-cheek.
 
Kandahar said:
And, once again, The Taliban and Friends do not represent the entire Muslim world.
Click to expand...

I don't see all those billions of Muslims lifting a finger to do anything about, "The Taliban and Friends". Muslims hate America, hence the reason PBO didn;t want to be seen giving support to the Iranian protestors; hence the Iranian government trying to scapegoat the United States for helping the Iranian protestors. Don't forget, most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis.
 
Kandahar said:
And there is no Druid World, other than WoW. ;)
Click to expand...

I imagine there's a few hippies, socially challenged college kids, and assorted other Uniterian fat chicks that might take exception to that statement. :lol:
 
jallman said:
I imagine there's a few hippies, socially challenged college kids, and assorted other Uniterian fat chicks that might take exception to that statement. :lol:
Click to expand...

Don't be making personal attacks about Uniterians like that...
 
apdst said:
I don't see all those billions of Muslims lifting a finger to do anything about, "The Taliban and Friends".
Click to expand...

Then you aren't looking very hard. The Taliban gets chased out of nearly every Pakistani village where they try to set up camp. And when the Pakistani military can't or won't intervene, then the villagers do it themselves.

apdst said:
Muslims hate America, hence the reason PBO didn;t want to be seen giving support to the Iranian protestors; hence the Iranian government trying to scapegoat the United States for helping the Iranian protestors.
Click to expand...

That is the Iranian government, not the Iranian people. Uncle Napoleon is a long-running joke among the Iranian people which they constantly use to mock their own government's paranoia.

apdst said:
Don't forget, most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis.
Click to expand...

And this proves what? Do 19 people represent the Muslim world? Do 19 people represent Saudi Arabia? Does Saudi Arabia represent the Muslim world? :confused:
 
Last edited:
apdst said:
I don't see all those billions of Muslims lifting a finger to do anything about, "The Taliban and Friends". Muslims hate America, hence the reason PBO didn;t want to be seen giving support to the Iranian protestors; hence the Iranian government trying to scapegoat the United States for helping the Iranian protestors. Don't forget, most of the 9/11 hijackers were Saudis.
Click to expand...
So Saudi Arabia, with a population of 24 million, represents the 1.5 billion Muslim population?

Why doesn't Indonesia, Pakistan, or Bangladesh, countries with the largest population of Muslims, represent the Muslim population?
 
Last edited:
Kandahar said:
But did you consider that her gender might HELP change perceptions? I doubt Martin Luther King would have been as influential as he was if he were white. But he became the most prominent face of Black America to many white people...and many of them found him (and by extension, black people) to be much less scary than they imagined.
Click to expand...
And those who didn't accept him shot him, just as they shot Medgar Evers and other civil rights leaders.

It's easy to remember Dr. King's dramatic speeches on behalf of equality, just as it's easy to remember Brown v Board of Education of Topeka Kansas. It's less easy to remember Selma, March 7, 1965, when 600 civil rights marchers were beaten and tear-gassed at the Edmund Pettus Bridge. It's less easy to remember the US Marshalls that had to escort James Meredith to his classes. It's less easy to remember the soldiers in Little Rock.

There is much more to the history of the Civil Rights movement in this country than Dr. King's "I have a dream" speech, and not all of that history is pretty or moving or inspiring. Some of it, perhaps even most of it, is pretty damn ugly.
 
Redress said:
I cannot believe you actually said that. Not talking to some one is not inviting them to attack us.
Click to expand...
Talking to some and not others is not exactly showering those "others" with heaps of praise. Talking to some and not others is not exactly friendly and sociable to those "others".

Presenting an envoy to the whole of the Ummah who is only going to engage the "moderate" (i.e., already quasi-friendly) portions of the Ummah is getting pretty close to an implicit statement that the rest are not part of the Ummah.

There are two guaranteed ways to piss people off: 1) include them in groups they dislike, and 2) exclude them from groups they like.

Seems to me an envoy to the Ummah ought to have an agenda besides pissing off parts of the Ummah.
 
celticlord said:
And those who didn't accept him shot him, just as they shot Medgar Evers and other civil rights leaders.

It's easy to remember Dr. King's dramatic speeches on behalf of equality, just as it's easy to remember Brown v Board of Education of Topeka Kansas. It's less easy to remember Selma, March 7, 1965, when 600 civil rights marchers were beaten and tear-gassed at the Edmund Pettus Bridge. It's less easy to remember the US Marshalls that had to escort James Meredith to his classes. It's less easy to remember the soldiers in Little Rock.

There is much more to the history of the Civil Rights movement in this country than Dr. King's "I have a dream" speech, and not all of that history is pretty or moving or inspiring. Some of it, perhaps even most of it, is pretty damn ugly.
Click to expand...

Nice post. Too bad it did not address what Kandahar said.
 
Kandahar said:
And, once again, The Taliban and Friends do not represent the entire Muslim world.
Click to expand...
No, they do not. But they are part of the Muslim world. They are a vocal part of the Muslim world. They are a part of the Muslim world that is quite determined not to be ignored.
 
celticlord said:
Talking to some and not others is not exactly showering those "others" with heaps of praise. Talking to some and not others is not exactly friendly and sociable to those "others".

Presenting an envoy to the whole of the Ummah who is only going to engage the "moderate" (i.e., already quasi-friendly) portions of the Ummah is getting pretty close to an implicit statement that the rest are not part of the Ummah.

There are two guaranteed ways to piss people off: 1) include them in groups they dislike, and 2) exclude them from groups they like.

Seems to me an envoy to the Ummah ought to have an agenda besides pissing off parts of the Ummah.
Click to expand...

She does have an agenda besides pissing off anyone.

We are still the US. We still promote women to positions of power. Condi Rice was able to do her job, and i suspect this woman will be able to as well.
 
Redress said:
Nice post. Too bad it did not address what Kandahar said.
Click to expand...
It addressed exactly what Kandahar said.

Dr. King was significant in advancing civil rights in this country, but the path by which civil rights were advanced was quite violent and bloody at several junctures, and there were quite a few who were determined to resist the change that others desired.

Dr. King did a lot. He did not do it all, and he did not do any of it alone.

Moreover, if our own culture of political correctness is so rigid and unyielding that we cannot acknowledge the very real cultural cross currents that will impact an outreach effort to other cultures, just how in the hell are any of us supposed to hear those other cultures?

Everybody wants "outreach" and "talks". Great. Fine. Wonderful. Are you willing to hear the Sudanese defend their applications of Shari'ah? Are you prepared to listen to Saudis defend the prohibition against women driving? Are you prepared to hear the defense of the burqua and the hijab?

If you cannot listen to those things, whatever you think you might be doing, the one thing you are not doing is "talking".
 
Redress said:
She does have an agenda besides pissing off anyone.

We are still the US. We still promote women to positions of power. Condi Rice was able to do her job, and i suspect this woman will be able to as well.
Click to expand...
Condi Rice was Secretary of State, not envoy to the Muslim world.
 
celticlord said:
It addressed exactly what Kandahar said.

Dr. King was significant in advancing civil rights in this country, but the path by which civil rights were advanced was quite violent and bloody at several junctures, and there were quite a few who were determined to resist the change that others desired.

Dr. King did a lot. He did not do it all, and he did not do any of it alone.

Moreover, if our own culture of political correctness is so rigid and unyielding that we cannot acknowledge the very real cultural cross currents that will impact an outreach effort to other cultures, just how in the hell are any of us supposed to hear those other cultures?

Everybody wants "outreach" and "talks". Great. Fine. Wonderful. Are you willing to hear the Sudanese defend their applications of Shari'ah? Are you prepared to listen to Saudis defend the prohibition against women driving? Are you prepared to hear the defense of the burqua and the hijab?

If you cannot listen to those things, whatever you think you might be doing, the one thing you are not doing is "talking".
Click to expand...

Either you did not comprehend what he said, or are intentionally avoiding it. He specifically said that being black may have been a benefit to King in terms of his effectiveness in the civil rights movement, and that being a woman might benefit Farah Pandith.

You still have not addressed that suggestion. You have just danced around it.
 
celticlord said:
Condi Rice was Secretary of State, not envoy to the Muslim world.
Click to expand...

She still was able to deal with the Muslim world, despite being a woman.
 
celticlord said:
No, they do not. But they are part of the Muslim world. They are a vocal part of the Muslim world. They are a part of the Muslim world that is quite determined not to be ignored.
Click to expand...

The Taliban is a force of about 10,000 people. Islam has 1.8 billion adherents. Perhaps the United States could gear its outreach toward the other 99.9994% of the Muslim world.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom