• IWantToFuckSpez
    link
    fedilink
    23
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    But that’s haram. Tsk tsk tsk. I bet the Taliban thinks as long as they sell it to non-Muslims it’s fine and dandy.

    • @Diplomjodler@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      371 year ago

      Extremists never care about adhering to their own rules. Those are just a tool to oppress and control their victims.

      • IWantToFuckSpez
        link
        fedilink
        81 year ago

        That’s true. But the “as long as you only do it to infidels” is an excuse that has been used by Muslims for centuries and not just the extremist kind.

        • @bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          111 year ago

          Sure bud, it’s literally explicitly haram to make, ship, handle, and sell intoxicants. Doesn’t matter who the end user is. Don’t think for a second that this is something that “Muslims” excuse.

          Relevant Text

              • @cosmicboi@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                41 year ago

                Reddit taught me that correcting people on misinformation on Islam is a waste of time. I remember an argument I had with some dickhead where he called me “bonkers” for being Muslim, citing only the most inhumane behaviors and mindests that could loosely be attributed to the faith

                • @Jax@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  51 year ago

                  In the same sentence they’ll go from acknowledging that muslim != extremist, right back to generalizing about the whole belief system.

                  I just wish they’d fucking internalize some of the lessons they’re given and allow it to temper their bigotry.

          • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            1
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Interesting, but the piece says wine in English, not intoxicants. Is Wine not correct translation?

            • @bingbong@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              31 year ago

              The Arabic term used in that Hadith is ‘Khamr’, which is a catch-all term for intoxicant (defined as something that clouds the mind/judgement in Islam). In that time period, the most common khamr was wine/alcohol which is why it mentions pressing [grapes]. This is further clarified in other Ahadith Like this one. This is a common issue when translating classical Arabic, as a lot of common terms back then are not as specific as our modern terms and cannot easily be translated 1:1.

              • @Buffalox@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                OK, to bad the translation doesn’t reflect that better.

                With religious texts there are often a great deal of interpretation, so whether it is used for good or bad often depends on interpretation.

                Edit:

                OK I see it is in the next paragraph, I just didn’t read on the first time.

  • @yokonzo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    121 year ago

    God damn imagine being cranked in the middle of freaking Afghanistan, I remember one night in my younger years walking out of a club after being om that shit and my literal skin was steaming. Like people were coming up to me and asking if I was okay, I can’t imagine being in that heat on that

  • @TheTimeKnife@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    7
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Afghanistan has used this strategy for a long time to cope with isolation from legitimate parts of the world economy.

  • BNE
    link
    fedilink
    English
    51 year ago

    Is narcoterrorism still considered a thing in current year? This has to be more an export industry thing rather than a geopolitical disabilisation force multiplier thing, right?

  • AutoTL;DRB
    link
    English
    51 year ago

    This is the best summary I could come up with:


    The United Nations’ Office on Drugs and Crimes, which published the report, said meth in Afghanistan is mostly made from legally available substances or extracted from the ephedra plant, which grows in the wild.

    The report called Afghanistan’s meth manufacturing a growing threat to national and regional health and security because it could disrupt the synthetic drug market and fuel addiction.

    Angela Me, the chief of the UNODC’s Research and Trend Analysis Branch, told The Associated Press that making meth, especially in Afghanistan, had several advantages over heroin or cocaine production.

    A spokesperson for the Interior Ministry, Abdul Mateen Qani, told the AP that the Taliban-run government has prohibited the cultivation, production, sale and use of all intoxicants and narcotics in Afghanistan.

    The 2022 report also said that the illicit drug market thrived as Afghanistan’s economy sharply contracted, making people open to illegal cultivation and trafficking for their survival.

    An Afghan health official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak to the media, said around 20,000 people are in hospitals for drug addiction, mostly to crystal meth.


    The original article contains 581 words, the summary contains 182 words. Saved 69%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

        • andyburke
          link
          fedilink
          191 year ago

          I like the idea that life sucks so much that meth makes it better and the answer to that isn’t to try to improve lives but to lock people up so life is even fuckin worse.

            • @nbafantest@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              81 year ago

              I get what you’re saying, but I completely disagree. Making it a illegal limits the amount of people who try meth, which fundamentally limits how many people get addicted to it.

              • @bobman@unilem.org
                link
                fedilink
                English
                3
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Does it really limit the amount of people who try it?

                Looks to me like people resort to drug abuse when their lives are miserable. Seems like the best way to ‘limit’ the people who abuse drugs is to improve their lives without them.

                Seems like all the money spent enforcing drug laws would be better spent improving society. And it’s a lot of money.

                • DaDragon
                  link
                  fedilink
                  11 year ago

                  I do agree with you, but there’s a group of people who have almost anything we as a society place value on, and yet they still go to meth/other drugs. Sure, the average homeless drug addict on the street fits your description well, but even then there’s some who developed addiction due to medical problems, and only then went to street drugs, and the aforementioned ‘depressed rich kid’.

                • @nbafantest@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  -11 year ago

                  Yeah, meth is much much addictive than your average drug.

                  People don’t try it because they’re down or miserable.

                  And trying it is basically how you get addicted

    • @Starb3an@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      121 year ago

      As a recovered addict, making it legal would effect the drug dealers and cartels much more than the users. This would remove some harm from society. I believe the larger solution is to provide help those that abuse it. Legalizing it on top of treatment instead of persecution would be optimal for most drugs, although meth is a hard sell (pun definitely intended).

    • Hank
      link
      fedilink
      5
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      I’m for approaching drug problems with harm reduction and I think that with opiates handing them out for free under controlled circumstances and with access to therapeutic help a lot of the problems caused by them will be negated or vastly reduced but with stims I’m a little more sceptical.
      Safe use is always good but I’m not sure that general access to them will bring more good than bad in this world.

      • @bobman@unilem.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        Good point. I’m not sure either.

        I think the scientific approach would be best applied here. Let’s legalize them so we can experience what it’s like. Right now, we only really have information pertaining to prohibition.

        If I’m wrong, I’d have no problem admitting it. The problem is that all we can do is speculate, because we can’t seem to test any of this.