5 ms·

Why are we there? What’s the threat, again? I forgot.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
CapricornNoble 7y ago
>>>Why are we there? 1. So the CIA can smuggle heroin to big pharma, and fund black projects. (largely unsubstantiated position) 2. To occupy overland energy routes, disrupting the ability of China to build infrastructure linking to Iran. The whole One Belt/One Road thing is intended to construct an alternative to China's very vulnerable maritime lines of communication, reducing the risk of a resource import blockade by the US Navy. They can't get a oil or gas pipeline from Iran if the A-stan government is in the back pocket of the US, and US military bases sit astride the route. 3. To present the risk of a 2nd front (1st front = Iraq, Persian Gulf), boxing in Iran. Not a major jump-off point for a land invasion (due to logistical constraints) but could serve as basing for aviation assets and special operations raids into the parts of Iran on the eastern side of the Zagros Mountains. Personally, I don't think any of those reasons is valid for staying there. >>>What’s the threat, again? I forgot. Basically we've spent decades playing whack-a-mole, attacking symptoms instead of root causes. And one of those root causes is....our mole-whacking kills far too many innocent civilians.
- deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
discordance 7y ago
"We were always at war with Eurasia"
- yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
  While I appreciate the reference, I don't think it applies here.
whiddershins 7y ago
The anniversary of 9/11 is a week ago and you forget?
- Roboprog 7y ago
  Have they given up Bin Laden yet? Isn’t it just a little ironic that one of our “allies” was harboring OBL? Lesson learned: nukes are a VERY effective deterrent to foreign invasion. That’s what we’re teaching countries in the Middle East.
- istjohn 7y ago
  Will that line suffice in 100 years? In my opinion, that justification's sell-by date was a decade ago.

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

>>>Why are we there? 1. So the CIA can smuggle heroin to big pharma, and fund black projects. (largely unsubstantiated position) 2. To occupy overland energy routes, disrupting the ability of China to build infrastructure linking to Iran. The whole One Belt/One Road thing is intended to construct an alternative to China's very vulnerable maritime lines of communication, reducing the risk of a resource import blockade by the US Navy. They can't get a oil or gas pipeline from Iran if the A-stan government is in the back pocket of the US, and US military bases sit astride the route. 3. To present the risk of a 2nd front (1st front = Iraq, Persian Gulf), boxing in Iran. Not a major jump-off point for a land invasion (due to logistical constraints) but could serve as basing for aviation assets and special operations raids into the parts of Iran on the eastern side of the Zagros Mountains. Personally, I don't think any of those reasons is valid for staying there. >>>What’s the threat, again? I forgot. Basically we've spent decades playing whack-a-mole, attacking symptoms instead of root causes. And one of those root causes is....our mole-whacking kills far too many innocent civilians.

deleted 7y ago
[deleted]

discordance 7y ago

"We were always at war with Eurasia"

yakshaving_jgt 7y ago
While I appreciate the reference, I don't think it applies here.

whiddershins 7y ago

The anniversary of 9/11 is a week ago and you forget?

Roboprog 7y ago
Have they given up Bin Laden yet? Isn’t it just a little ironic that one of our “allies” was harboring OBL? Lesson learned: nukes are a VERY effective deterrent to foreign invasion. That’s what we’re teaching countries in the Middle East.
istjohn 7y ago
Will that line suffice in 100 years? In my opinion, that justification's sell-by date was a decade ago.