8 ms·
Come on - it was not to enact "revenge". That is hyperbolic editorialization. It was because the Taliban had consistently been harboring Islamic fundamentalist
by throwawaysea 5y ago
Come on - it was not to enact "revenge". That is hyperbolic editorialization. It was because the Taliban had consistently been harboring Islamic fundamentalist terrorists, had close ties with Al Qaeda (who attacked the US), and they would have granted those same terrorists safe harbor again if left alone. The Taliban continues to maintain close ties with Al Qaeda today (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/taliban-keep-close-ties-al-qaeda-despite-promise-u-s-n1258033 https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/national-security/taliban-k...), which is why handing them back Afghanistan is an incredible failure of leadership for the US. The rest of your alleged oil-motivated acts all have other motives as well, so I remain unconvinced by your overall argument.
- jessaustin 5y agoBush the Lesser specifically emphasized revenge in his famous petulant rant from "ground zero". Did you somehow miss this great modern American oration to which we are subjected on every 9/11 anniversary?