5 ms·

Not to mention the reputational damage around the world and the lasting legacy of hatred that will be felt for generations of Afghan people towards the US. That

Not to mention the reputational damage around the world and the lasting legacy of hatred that will be felt for generations of Afghan people towards the US. That kind of thing can take more than century to forget. The Chinese still hate the Japanese for the Rape of Nanjing in 1938 (there are probably better examples but I'm not a historian).

wbl 7y ago
Reputational damage? Are you forgetting that the Taliban were utter bastards who banned female education, were unrecognized by most countries and murdered 3,000 US civilians one fine fall day? The reputational damage is done because we didn't kill them all when we had the chance. This deal is capitulation. Only this time there won't be refugees grasping at the skies of helicopters. We'll just lock them out and watch the Taliban kill every educated woman in the country.
- strken 7y ago
  The Northern Alliance, which the US sided with, also contained its fair share of bastards: they've been accused of summarily executing thousands of Taliban POWs, murdering civilians in raids on villages, and profiting from the opium trade, among other things. Despite fighting alongside Al-Qaeda and despite harbouring bin Laden, the Taliban aren't Al-Qaeda.
- smt1 7y ago
  For what it's worth, the Taliban had by 2001, brought relative peace and stability to a country that had two decades of civil war, including the Soviets and lawless warlords and humanitarian crises, and wonton destruction/chaos that existed in the '90s. The Taliban itself was not directly involved with 9/11 (and I don't think they had any interest outside of Afghanistan), however, they had some complicity since they allowed OBL and Al Qaeda to train in Afghanistan (how about the responsibility of say, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia?). Yes, the tradeoff was that they had a puritanical interpretation of Islam and had a horrible human rights record.
BalinKing 7y ago
Independent of the morality, etc. of America’s involvement: equating it to the Rape of Nanking, and drawing conclusions from there, is absurd.
- hrdwdmrbl 7y ago
  Perhaps I should have just said "Japanese occupation". I did also say my example probably wasn't great as I know very little history.

wbl 7y ago

Reputational damage? Are you forgetting that the Taliban were utter bastards who banned female education, were unrecognized by most countries and murdered 3,000 US civilians one fine fall day? The reputational damage is done because we didn't kill them all when we had the chance. This deal is capitulation. Only this time there won't be refugees grasping at the skies of helicopters. We'll just lock them out and watch the Taliban kill every educated woman in the country.

strken 7y ago
The Northern Alliance, which the US sided with, also contained its fair share of bastards: they've been accused of summarily executing thousands of Taliban POWs, murdering civilians in raids on villages, and profiting from the opium trade, among other things. Despite fighting alongside Al-Qaeda and despite harbouring bin Laden, the Taliban aren't Al-Qaeda.
smt1 7y ago
For what it's worth, the Taliban had by 2001, brought relative peace and stability to a country that had two decades of civil war, including the Soviets and lawless warlords and humanitarian crises, and wonton destruction/chaos that existed in the '90s. The Taliban itself was not directly involved with 9/11 (and I don't think they had any interest outside of Afghanistan), however, they had some complicity since they allowed OBL and Al Qaeda to train in Afghanistan (how about the responsibility of say, Pakistan or Saudi Arabia?). Yes, the tradeoff was that they had a puritanical interpretation of Islam and had a horrible human rights record.

BalinKing 7y ago

Independent of the morality, etc. of America’s involvement: equating it to the Rape of Nanking, and drawing conclusions from there, is absurd.

hrdwdmrbl 7y ago
Perhaps I should have just said "Japanese occupation". I did also say my example probably wasn't great as I know very little history.