Afghanistan Crisis

[Detournement]

3 minutes ago, virginton said:

 

The outcome of war was determined at the end of the day by the attitudes of the leaders, not public sentiment. Had a more rational set of leaders been in charge 

They were extremely rational. It worked out perfectly for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovitz and their Neocon mates. 

, 

[vikingTON]

5 minutes ago, Detournement said:

They were extremely rational. It worked out perfectly for Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfovitz and their Neocon mates. 

, 

Well no, a genuinely functioning client state - like the one run by the good old Shah himself - would have been better for business than navigating the nick that Iraq and Afghanistan are in now. 

Leaving aside the point that they're supposed to be rational on behalf of state interests of course.

Edited August 18, 2021 by vikingTON

[NotThePars]

I’m glad we’re amplifying the lived experiences of privileged white people living in occupied countries

[Ad Lib]

11 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

I’m glad we’re amplifying the lived experiences of privileged white people living in occupied countries

Says someone who advocates a policy that is going to lead to the widespread forced marriage, rape and murder of Muslim women and girls in a country that until days ago had women in its political cabinet and presiding over court cases.

[Cheese]

Didn't think it would be long until the 'you obviously support the Taliban then' takes arrived.

[Ad Lib]

5 minutes ago, Proposition Joe said:

Didn't think it would be long until the 'you obviously support the Taliban then' takes arrived.

No one here has suggested that anyone else on here supports the Taliban. Learn to read.

[Cheese]

12 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

No one here has suggested that anyone else on here supports the Taliban. Learn to read.

Quote

Says someone who advocates a policy that is going to lead to the widespread forced marriage, rape and murder of Muslim women and girls 

There's not much difference here though is there ?

You'd be better just going back to calling people cretins who disagree with your forever war nonsense m9.

Or, even better, start calling a guy who actually served over there a 'mealy mouthed coward' again.

Edited August 18, 2021 by Proposition Joe

[Thistle_do_nicely]

thought popped into my head - does the US not still have a fairly significant military presence in Iraq that's due to get pulled out soon-ish, think iirc there were news items about that prior to the US presidential election? Won't ISIS just end up sweeping into power once they withdraw from there too?

Edited August 18, 2021 by Thistle_do_nicely

[SANTAN]

It's funny to see just like in any forum type of debate you can almost pinpoint the exact moment when the positions become entrenched, nuance gets thrown out the window and you're either in support of the Talibans inhumane barbarity or in support of Western forces inhumane barbarity, yours truly, a dirty fence-sitting centrist. 

Edited August 18, 2021 by SANTAN

[Fullerene]

1 hour ago, scottsdad said:

Perhaps you're right. Perhaps none of it was required or needed. But the political reality of the time was that, as soon as the towers were hit, war was on. 

Mission creep was the trouble with Bush. Yes, he could have taken out the camps (and indeed, he did) and left it at that. But he went after the Taliban, then Saddam and, if those two had gone smoothly and quickly, would probably have gone after North Korea as well. 

There was no appetite for a "genuine diplomatic effort". It was war. Blood was demanded. 

After the Nazis were defeated, the USA was quite happy with how Western Europe turned out.  Similarly Central Europe after the Berlin Wall came down.  After "winning" the Cold War, a certain utopianism crept in.  Liberate countries from tyranny and they will want to be just like us.  Not actually true.

When Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait Osama Bin Laden offered to organise a force to kick him out.  Instead the Saudis turned to the USA for help.  Bin Laden did not like this nor did he like the idea of infidels on holy soil - i.e. American soldiers on the ground in Saudi Arabia.  That was motivation for 9-11.  Also the USA had just become the world's only superpower and needed to be taken down a peg.

After 9-11, the attitude in America was "let's find whoever did this and whack 'em.  What is the point of having the largest military in the world if we don't use it?"

Afghanistan was an obvious target.  The Taliban were relatively friendless and if it could all be done quickly and easily then everyone would be happy.  Mighty big "if" there.

Iraq was about something else.  A former strongman ally had gone rogue and needed to go. Similar to Marcos or Noreiga.  If nothing else, it detracted from the plans for Afghanistan.

All the same, if Iraq could be sorted out quickly and easily, then soon the people of Iraq will sort themselves out, repeat for other members of the Axis of Evil and suddenly the world is a much better place.  Oh dear, that word "if" again.

 

[supermik]

In the old days the Nazis climbed the Eiffel Tower when they invaded France.

The taliban have other ways of celebrating!

 

[Ad Lib]

51 minutes ago, Proposition Joe said:

There's not much difference here though is there ?

You'd be better just going back to calling people cretins who disagree with your forever war nonsense m9.

Or, even better, start calling a guy who actually served over there a 'mealy mouthed coward' again.

No there's a massive difference.

Accusing someone of failing to recognise the consequences of their preferred policy choices, or deliberately pretending that the link between those policy choices and certain outcomes don't exist, is not the same as accusing them of wanting those outcomes or supporting those who want those outcomes.

It is accusing them of cognitive dissonance. And cowardice not to front up to that being what logically follows from their stance. In other words: being a mealy mouthed coward.

Service in uniform doesn't exempt you from the charge of being a coward if you're happy in your words and policy preferences to leave women and girls to the whims of theocratic regimes on the basis that "well them forins don't share our values".

[Mark Connolly]

1 hour ago, Proposition Joe said:

Didn't think it would be long until the 'you obviously support the Taliban then' takes arrived.

Respect from a Mujahideen season ticket holder

[Ad Lib]

8 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

Respect from a Mujahideen season ticket holder

You get a renewal discount if you broke at least 3 ceasefires in the last year.

[Mark Connolly]

2 minutes ago, Ad Lib said:

You get a renewal discount if you broke at least 3 ceasefires in the last year.

Pitch invasion if we get a result away at Herat

[welshbairn]

45 minutes ago, Fullerene said:

Iraq was about something else.  A former strongman ally had gone rogue and needed to go. Similar to Marcos or Noreiga.  If nothing else, it detracted from the plans for Afghanistan.

Not so, all part of the same thing, teaching the lesson you don't mess with Uncle Sam. Didn't matter that Saddam had nothing to do with 9/11, or that he was no madder than he had been 5 years before. Show the world the might of the American Empire, get revenge for Saddam trying to have Dubya's dad assassinated in a visit to Kuwait, and to keep the neocon pro Israeli wonks happy. Totally messed up whatever plans they had for Afghanistan though, if they had any. 

[Shandon Par]

17 minutes ago, Mark Connolly said:

Pitch invasion if we get a result away at Herat

Misread that as Heriot Watt. What a fixture that would have been. 

[Billy Jean King]

We will take 5000 "in year 1" with thousands more to follow.

What an utter pile of steaming lying shite. The UK (and the rest of the world) has literally days if not hours to get Afghans out of the country and they know it. Talk of X in year 1 is an utter sham. Anyone buying into dross like this is as pathetic as the Govt themselves yet no doubt the lap dog press will lap it up, lord it as an example of GREAT Britain. Boils my piss.

[Detournement]

This is an all timer. 

[Billy Jean King]

This is an all timer. 

It was interesting to see the exiled Taliban leader was flown back to Kabul from Qatar on a Qatari military aircraft. Presumably they were glad to be rid but seems a bit too "generous"