3 ms·

Until the full report of the investigation is released to the public, it's pointless to speculate on the decisions made after 9/11. There certainly appears to

by blunte 5y ago

Until the full report of the investigation is released to the public, it's pointless to speculate on the decisions made after 9/11. There certainly appears to be indication that the real people behind it were not targeted for retribution. These days, unless the money trail is followed to its source, you never really know the full story. Yes I'm intionally not naming names/groups/countries, but we probably know who I'm talking about. It would not be the first time that a symbolic gesture was made that would appease the victims while not actually punishing those responsible. [ed-spelling] Actually in this case you have even more interests at play from many sides (since US strength in the middle east - because of oil interests) has been a priority for decades. Nation building seems to be a total ruse.

YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago
>> It would not be the first time that a symbolic gesture was made that would appease the victims while not actually punishing those responsible. [ed-spelling] It's a human universal, unfortunately. https://youtu.be/ikTrjQ3Cdbo?t=78 https://youtu.be/ikTrjQ3Cdbo?t=78
rayiner 5y ago
After 20 years of the US getting jack shit from Afghanistan, you’d think the “we did it for the oil” people would have moved on. But no.
- blunte 5y ago
  It's not about oil from Afghanistan, it's about a more solid presence in the region (and in some cases, about preventing an enemy/competitor from having that presence). Most countries around Afghanistan have oil. If Afghanistan could have been managed (as in, exploited without difficulty or consequence), then the US would have probably been financially wise to attempt what they attempted. But it turns out, after observing two major powers attempt to dominate Afghanistan, that it is just too messy to manage. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23608077 https://www.jstor.org/stable/23608077
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  The US government may have gotten jack shit, but US military contractors like Haliburton have received a nice influx of cash over the last 20 years.
- koheripbal 5y ago
  I don't understand this comment. Afghanistan never had oil, nor do I recall any politician ever saying that over the last 20 years. Am I missing the sarcasm?

by blunte 5y ago

YeGoblynQueenne 5y ago

>> It would not be the first time that a symbolic gesture was made that would appease the victims while not actually punishing those responsible. [ed-spelling] It's a human universal, unfortunately. https://youtu.be/ikTrjQ3Cdbo?t=78 https://youtu.be/ikTrjQ3Cdbo?t=78

rayiner 5y ago

After 20 years of the US getting jack shit from Afghanistan, you’d think the “we did it for the oil” people would have moved on. But no.

blunte 5y ago
It's not about oil from Afghanistan, it's about a more solid presence in the region (and in some cases, about preventing an enemy/competitor from having that presence). Most countries around Afghanistan have oil. If Afghanistan could have been managed (as in, exploited without difficulty or consequence), then the US would have probably been financially wise to attempt what they attempted. But it turns out, after observing two major powers attempt to dominate Afghanistan, that it is just too messy to manage. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23608077 https://www.jstor.org/stable/23608077
AlexandrB 5y ago
The US government may have gotten jack shit, but US military contractors like Haliburton have received a nice influx of cash over the last 20 years.
koheripbal 5y ago
I don't understand this comment. Afghanistan never had oil, nor do I recall any politician ever saying that over the last 20 years. Am I missing the sarcasm?