[Serious] G-20 leaders, don’t forget the women’s rights advocates rotting in Saudi prisons

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

Agreed. I don’t think he grasps that, while getting these women out of prison is undeniably a good thing, it doesn’t come close to addressing the core issue, which is that Saudi Arabia is the kind of country that would imprison women for asking for basic human rights in the first place.

Boru

This topic is not discussing what's wrong in Saudi Arabia, it is discussing:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/...story.html

[url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/g-20-leaders-dont-forget-the-womens-rights-advocates-rotting-in-saudi-prisons/2020/09/13/fd5f756a-f374-11ea-999c-67ff7bf6a9d2_story.html][/url]

Please stop deviating the topic to make it turn from a request to the G-20 to a discussion about Saudi Arabia.

These women are in prison, the Saudi regime is oppressive and led by lunatics that require a response from the G-20.

Once again I advise you to respect the [Serious] tag.

Thank you.

It's also not discussing the percentage of Muslims in the world.

These women are in prison, the Saudi regime is oppressive and led by lunatics that require a response from the G-20.

You JUST said that the topic isn't the Saudi Arabia, now you want to include Saudi oppression in the topic. Make up your mind.

Boru

[WinterHold]

This topic is not discussing what's wrong in Saudi Arabia, it is discussing:

[url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/global-opinions/g-20-leaders-dont-forget-the-womens-rights-advocates-rotting-in-saudi-prisons/2020/09/13/fd5f756a-f374-11ea-999c-67ff7bf6a9d2_story.html][/url]

Please stop deviating the topic to make it turn from a request to the G-20 to a discussion about Saudi Arabia.

These women are in prison, the Saudi regime is oppressive and led by lunatics that require a response from the G-20.

Once again I advise you to respect the [Serious] tag.

Thank you.

It's also not discussing the percentage of Muslims in the world.

These women are in prison, the Saudi regime is oppressive and led by lunatics that require a response from the G-20.

You JUST said that the topic isn't the Saudi Arabia, now you want to include Saudi oppression in the topic. Make up your mind.

Boru

Yes, the topic is not "Saudi Arabia's culture".

The topic is "what the G-20 should do concerning the Saudi terrible locking of female activists behind bars, torturing them and even raping them.

For speaking about Saudi culture, you can open other topics that discuss the issue.
You have been told this in so many replies by me, so please respect the [serious] sign and enough deviating the topic more. I will not respond to you if you keep your attitude.

[Deesse23]

These women are in prison, the Saudi regime is oppressive and led by lunatics that require a response from the G-20.

If your regime is oppressive, do something, for fucks sake.

Look at Eastern Germany and the whole fucking Warsaw pact in the late 80s / early 90s. Look at the same countries in 1953, 1956 and 1968. Look at Belarus right now.
Just open your fucking eyes for a change.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

The topic is "what the G-20 should do concerning the Saudi terrible locking of female activists behind bars, torturing them and even raping them.

And that's exactly what Saudi culture is.  How can we discuss the treatment of these activists without discussing the culture that is responsible for that treatment?

Discussing Saudi culture in the context of these imprisoned women IS on topic, it's EXACTLY on topic - to discuss one without the other would be incoherent.  Asking what the G20 can or should do about the treatment of these women is precisely the same as asking what the G20 can or should do to change Saudi culture.

Boru

[WinterHold]

The topic is "what the G-20 should do concerning the Saudi terrible locking of female activists behind bars, torturing them and even raping them.

And that's exactly what Saudi culture is.  How can we discuss the treatment of these activists without discussing the culture that is responsible for that treatment?

Discussing Saudi culture in the context of these imprisoned women IS on topic, it's EXACTLY on topic - to discuss one without the other would be incoherent.  Asking what the G20 can or should do about the treatment of these women is precisely the same as asking what the G20 can or should do to change Saudi culture.

Boru

It's not about changing Saudi culture; the G20 is in no position to enforce its laws on anybody -that would be a form of invasion-.

The G20 is simply asked to not shake hands with the Sauds or take money from them until they free these women, and stop terrorism as means of dealing with criticism.

The whole article in the op is focused on this single demand: if the G20 acts vigilant against the Sauds they can lead to a drastic change in how the country deals with human rights. But instead of acting vigilant; they allow the Sauds to join their meetings instead of boycotting their government and enforce strong economical sanctions against the kingdom.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

And that's exactly what Saudi culture is.  How can we discuss the treatment of these activists without discussing the culture that is responsible for that treatment?

Discussing Saudi culture in the context of these imprisoned women IS on topic, it's EXACTLY on topic - to discuss one without the other would be incoherent.  Asking what the G20 can or should do about the treatment of these women is precisely the same as asking what the G20 can or should do to change Saudi culture.

Boru

It's not about changing Saudi culture; the G20 is in no position to enforce its laws on anybody -that would be a form of invasion-.

The G20 is simply asked to not shake hands with the Sauds or take money from them until they free these women, and stop terrorism as means of dealing with criticism.

The whole article in the op is focused on this single demand: if the G20 acts vigilant against the Sauds they can lead to a drastic change in how the country deals with human rights. But instead of acting vigilant; they allow the Sauds to join their meetings instead of boycotting their government and enforce strong economical sanctions against the kingdom.

But the Saudi treatment of women, use of terrorism (both direct and indirect), and disregard for human rights ARE part of Saudi culture. Boycotts and sanctions would be an attempt to change that culture.

You say that the G20 are in no position to enforce their laws on anybody, but then you call for them to enforce sanctions. Sanctions have the force of law.

What else ya got?

Boru

[WinterHold]

It's not about changing Saudi culture; the G20 is in no position to enforce its laws on anybody -that would be a form of invasion-.

The G20 is simply asked to not shake hands with the Sauds or take money from them until they free these women, and stop terrorism as means of dealing with criticism.

The whole article in the op is focused on this single demand: if the G20 acts vigilant against the Sauds they can lead to a drastic change in how the country deals with human rights. But instead of acting vigilant; they allow the Sauds to join their meetings instead of boycotting their government and enforce strong economical sanctions against the kingdom.

But the Saudi treatment of women, use of terrorism (both direct and indirect), and disregard for human rights ARE part of Saudi culture. Boycotts and sanctions would be an attempt to change that culture.

You say that the G20 are in no position to enforce their laws on anybody, but then you call for them to enforce sanctions. Sanctions have the force of law.

What else ya got?

Boru

Yes. The G20 is in no position to change the culture of any country.
But it is in position to set rules that govern who joins it.

Saudi Arabia should never be allowed to join their meetings before having a clean human rights record.
That -as you see- is not changing of culture: that is enforcing a term for dealing with the kingdom -or any other country-,

[The Grand Nudger]

Why, do the members of the g20 have clean human rights records? Who certifies the cleanliness of any given country in that regard? If a country -isn't- in your alliance, pact, or agreement, what incentives and what legal recourse do you (or they) have to compel their (or your) actions?

This may expose a fundamental difference of opinion. We in the west generally tend to believe that our political ideals will win out in a direct competition for hearts an minds. We don't want to exclude people to make them comply, we prefer to include them, and once they're in, apply pressure from all sides. There are pragmatic benefits to dealing with the authorities of a country as they are, rather than regime changing our way to what we want in every instance.

[BrianSoddingBoru4]

But the Saudi treatment of women, use of terrorism (both direct and indirect), and disregard for human rights ARE part of Saudi culture. Boycotts and sanctions would be an attempt to change that culture.

You say that the G20 are in no position to enforce their laws on anybody, but then you call for them to enforce sanctions. Sanctions have the force of law.

What else ya got?

Boru

Yes. The G20 is in no position to change the culture of any country.
But it is in position to set rules that govern who joins it.

Saudi Arabia should never be allowed to join their meetings before having a clean human rights record.
That -as you see- is not changing of culture: that is enforcing a term for dealing with the kingdom -or any other country-,

If a clean human rights record is the standard, there would BE no G20.

I find it both amusing and sad that you want a gaggle of countries who - without exception - have blemished records on human rights (some of them countries which you persistently rail against for that very reason) to correct human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia.

Boru

[The Grand Nudger]

Anything and everything that helps to push all of his own problems onto others as their responsibility in creation and solution is preferable to conceding that something just -might- be wrong with his culture. That, if we want to see change in those regions, it's going to require a change in culture.

Just as it did with our own identical issues and their own identical justifications for being terrible.

You want help, Atlas? Take a lesson from our history. Or...if you prefer, you can be the guy who invites a snake into your living room and then complains when it bites you.