4 ms·
I believe there should be criticism on the current withdrawal. It is definitely a catastrophe in many ways. However, I remember the chorus of opposition when t
by nicoffeine 5y ago
I believe there should be criticism on the current withdrawal. It is definitely a catastrophe in many ways.
However, I remember the chorus of opposition when the Bush administration decided to send half a million troops to Iraq instead of Afghanistan. Rumsfeld wanted to try invading Afghanistan on the cheap so the US could afford two wars, and because Iraq had a legitimate military and “all the good targets.” They were so delusional they thought both would be over in months. Here we are twenty years later, with the same problems and 10 trillion dollars missing from the treasury. We tortured people and imprisoned them without trial or due process. We debased ourselves on so many levels and we have nothing to show for it.
Dig into the origins of the Taliban, and you’ll find US and Saudi Arabian meddling in the 70s and the 80s exploiting that extremism to counter Russia and communism. Saudi Arabia needed a way to rid themselves of radical theocrats, and the US was looking for soldiers to counter Russian influence. So we helped them fund and train militants by building madrassas in Pakistan and Afghanistan. With haunting irony, Russia was trying to impose similar reforms by invading: gender equality, secularism, and their version of political freedom.
Do you want to know why the second Bush Administration never investigated Saudi Arabia after 9/11? They were all the same people from the first Bush and Reagan administrations, and they knew the paper trail would lead right back to themselves.
Meddling in the affairs of foreign nations always has unintended consequences. Democracy spreads through attraction, not enforcement. I sincerely hope the lesson we learn is not to blame the people who finally accept it, but the people who always think that this time will be different.
- ikerdanzel 5y agoThe problem would easily solved if they do what a typical conqueror would do: wiping fighting forces and re-education. USA successfully did that with Japan and to some extend Korea. But boy, absolutely shitted themselves with Vietnam, Iraq, Syria and Agfhan. Look at China and Rome past history how they subjugated their enemy. Look at Carthage, Xinjiang and Warring States. When USA invaded, they should have start depopulation, segragating the sheep and Talibans. Then proceed to hunt them like dogs and genocide them. Next, massive re-education to something like Jedi or Buddhism. When my friends asked USA is strongest and able to take on Russian and China easily, I reminded them, USA can win battles. USA won every battles in Vietnam. But when it comes to war, especially the #1 weakness of unable to sustain long term war, Russian and China handily will wipe USA 100% in every wars. Yup, the goat f*ckers just prove it by bringing USA to his knees.
- rich_sasha 5y agoWhat is stunning about the wars in Afghanistan is that they are all exactly the same. British in 19th century, Russians in 1970s, NATO now. Each war is initially “won” very quickly, then the occupant struggles to find allies, reliable new political elites, and frankly purpose. It all turns sour, things go from awkward to deadly, and there is a disastrous and embarrassing retreat and that’s that.