3 ms·

Which sort of begs the question: why the hell are we over there, now? Originally, I guess we went to hunt OBL and punish the Taliban, but then there was the wh

Which sort of begs the question: why the hell are we over there, now? Originally, I guess we went to hunt OBL and punish the Taliban, but then there was the whole oil question (they have it, we want it, etc.). But we failed to stop the Taliban (Mission Definitely Not Completed), which just shows we failed to learn anything from the Russians and/or the British. So, why are we there now? Anyone? Bueller? Sure, we can burn billions of dollars per year doing whatever the hell it is we're doing over there now, but, as history shows, it won't really change anything. Freedom and democracy is a great thing, but if they're not interested in it at all, then maybe we should just stop trying to cram it down their throats.

tsotha 11y ago
>But we failed to stop the Taliban (Mission Definitely Not Completed), which just shows we failed to learn anything from the Russians and/or the British. That's why the Taliban are comfortably ensconced in Kabul, right? >So, why are we there now? Anyone? Bueller? We've withdrawn all but a token force. There are less than ten thousand US troops in Afghanistan.
- tim333 11y ago
  >failed to learn anything from the Russians I chatted to some exiles from Afganistan and they thought the Russian period was the best in terms of economic growth, human rights and the like. It only really ended with the US arming people like Bin Laden to overthrow them and didn't that work out well.