• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Is The Taliban A Terrorist Organization?

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
The subject was suggested by the closing of this thread....
It May Be The Taliban Has This Right.
*** edit ***
If someone supports the new Afghan regime (even if in jest),
I think they should be able to do so...provided they're not
justifying terrorist acts.

RF should not become an anti-Islam echo chamber.
Note: I am anti-Islam, but dang it, I'm willing to discuss it.
Note: I am pro-Muslim though. Some fine people there.
You should be free to have your opinion about islam:) so I support you on that, and I do not support Taliban or their new government in Afghanistan
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
They've cut off Afghans from leaving via Kabul airport.
I'd say that's indicative they are still very much extremists who use fear to maintain power and control.
That is an oppressive act, but it doesn't appear to be
part of the definition of "terrorism". Many countries
have prevented free travel, yet not been so labeled,
eg, Israel, Saudi Arabia, USSR, N Korea.
Being "extremist" shouldn't equate with "terrorism".
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
You should be free to have your opinion about islam:) so I support you on that, and I do not support Taliban or their new government in Afghanistan
I don't support them either.
And I fully expected that many Muslims wouldn't support them.
But is it reasonable to call this new government "terrorist"?
Why?
 

Wildstar

Member
The subject was suggested by the closing of this thread....
It May Be The Taliban Has This Right.
*** edit ***
If someone supports the new Afghan regime (even if in jest),
I think they should be able to do so...provided they're not
justifying terrorist acts.

RF should not become an anti-Islam echo chamber.
Note: I am anti-Islam, but dang it, I'm willing to discuss it.
Note: I am pro-Muslim though. Some fine people there.

As a female reading the other thread, I admittedly felt disgusted. I consider their treatment of females to be backwards and incredibly repulsive. The question is, is my perspective simply a result of not having existed and not existing under these conditions?
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
RF should not become an anti-Islam echo chamber.
I don't remember the guy's name, but he is a Muslim from the Middle East who fled to the West for his life. He has and does criticize Islam and the Islamic culture that gives rise to the oppressive and dangerous views that lead to the dangers there, the misogyny, and why people like him run for their lives. He was labelled as an Islamophobe by the SPLC.
But in RF I see a mentality he pointed out in that Conservatives are wrong about Muslims (thinking they're all bad and not good) while Liberals are wrong about Islam (thinking it's all good and nothing bad about it).
 

Jeremiah Ames

Well-Known Member
They answer could be a justifiable "yes" last month when they
weren't in power. But now they're the government of Afghanistan.

Sure, sure...we woke progressives in the west disapprove of
their oppressive backward fundamentalist Islamic theocracy.
But we disapprove of a great many governments that aren't
labeled as "terrorist". And some of them commit acts that fit
the definition of terrorism, eg, group punishment of Palestinians
by Israel.
I suppose they could be called a terrorist organization by some.
But then many people consider the US government and the Israeli government as terrorist organizations.

It’s in the eye of the beholder.
 

Spirit of Light

Be who ever you want
I don't support them either.
And I fully expected that many Muslims wouldn't support them.
But is it reasonable to call this new government "terrorist"?
Why?
If they continue harmful action toward civilians in or outside of Afghanistan then yes they are still a terror organization
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
You'd have to ask U.S. officials that question. I can only go by links from U.S. government websites such as the one I posted here, which still lists it as such.
Could you excerpt from the link in post #9 (a US State Dept source)
the listing of the Afghan Taliban as a recognized terrorist organization?
I didn't see it.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I suppose they could be called a terrorist organization by some.
But then many people consider the US government and the Israeli government as terrorist organizations.

It’s in the eye of the beholder.
Per the rules, US law is the sole judge.
 

Debater Slayer

Vipassana
Staff member
Premium Member
I see great opposition on RF to some values common in
Islam, eg, keeping women cloaked, quiet, & uneducated.
This engenders great antipathy towards Islam, & in
particular towards the Taliban as a most extreme example.
Is this bias behind censoring approval of the Taliban regime?
This is a reasonable question.
What do you think?

I just saw this edit. No, that's not why approval of terrorist organizations (per official U.S. designation and law, again) is prohibited on RF. The reason for the prohibition is what I clarified in post #10.

There is a lot of content that doesn't get censored regardless of individual staff members' opinions. The RF staff itself includes multiple members with socially conservative views as well as multiple ones with socially liberal views. We all work within the boundaries set by the forum rules regardless of what we personally believe.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
It is certainly intriguing, I cannot think why, any ideas?
The word "terrorism" is applied so broadly these days
that I cannot explain why others use it as they do.
US government tends to apply it to foes, but not friends,
ie, it's a word that's useful more than descriptive.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
As a female reading the other thread, I admittedly felt disgusted. I consider their treatment of females to be backwards and incredibly repulsive. The question is, is my perspective simply a result of not having existed and not existing under these conditions?
I sympathize. Women in fundamentalist Islam have a rough
road ahead. Note also that the Taliban's treatment of men
isn't wonderful either....especially use clean shaven heathens.
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber & Business Owner
That is an oppressive act, but it doesn't appear to be
part of the definition of "terrorism". Many countries
have prevented free travel, yet not been so labeled,
eg, Israel, Saudi Arabia, USSR, N Korea.
Being "extremist" shouldn't equate with "terrorism".
I see no reason to give them the benefit of a doubt. They aren't any different and they still resort to extreme fear and violence to force social and political change.
And I would label those like Saudia Arabia, NK, China, and even the US as terrorists. These are states who, after all, support and finance terrorism, engage in tactics employed by terrorists, and sanction agents to engage in activities that are generally utilizes by terrorists.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I see no reason to give them the benefit of a doubt. They aren't any different and they still resort to extreme fear and violence to force social and political change.
And I would label those like Saudia Arabia, NK, China, and even the US as terrorists. These are states who, after all, support and finance terrorism, engage in tactics employed by terrorists, and sanction agents to engage in activities that are generally utilizes by terrorists.
A problem is that the official US government list of terrorists
just might possibly could be driven by corrupt politics....just
a speculation by one whose pay grade is too far below to know.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
They answer could be a justifiable "yes" last month when they
weren't in power. But now they're the government of Afghanistan.

Sure, sure...we woke progressives in the west disapprove of
their oppressive backward fundamentalist Islamic theocracy.
But we disapprove of a great many governments that aren't
labeled as "terrorist". And some of them commit acts that fit
the definition of terrorism, eg, group punishment of Palestinians
by Israel.
They could do this with the Taliban, but can't do it with Palestinian.
 

Stevicus

Veteran Member
Staff member
Premium Member
They answer could be a justifiable "yes" last month when they
weren't in power. But now they're the government of Afghanistan.

Sure, sure...we woke progressives in the west disapprove of
their oppressive backward fundamentalist Islamic theocracy.
But we disapprove of a great many governments that aren't
labeled as "terrorist". And some of them commit acts that fit
the definition of terrorism, eg, group punishment of Palestinians
by Israel.

At the risk of sounding cliché, one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.
 
Top