3 ms·

The Taliban joins the Belt and Road Initiative[0] in 3, 2, 1... [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_an

The Taliban joins the Belt and Road Initiative[0] in 3, 2, 1... [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative

EarthIsHome 5y ago
Better than getting bombed if you ask me.
- anonAndOn 5y ago
  That won't happen again if Chinese interests are now at stake.
ssijak 5y ago
Imagine going to a country by building infrastructure and not with bombs to destroy it..hmm I wonder what would the populace prefer.
- TremendousJudge 5y ago
  That's what both the soviets and the americans where doing in the 70s there... didn't work back then either
  - Popegaf 5y ago
    You mean the Afghan conflict? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_conflict_(1978%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_conflict_(1978%E2%...
    - TremendousJudge 5y ago
      No, the Soviets invaded in 79. During the decades before, both the USA and the USSR were investing money in infrastructure and industry modernization projects in the country, trying to curry favor with the nation. I quote from a humanitarian report[0]: """ Afghanistan‟s economy from the 1950s onward became closely intertwined with the Cold War. From 1953 to 1963 Afghanistan‟s Prime Minister Mohammed Daoud Khan had solicited military and economic assistance from both the United States (US) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), believing that, without rapid growth, Afghanistan would become severely politically fragmented. Often dubbed the “economic Korea”, the country received 50% of its foreign aid from the Soviet Union between 1950 and 1970 and 30% from the United States during that same time span.3 In the early 1960s Soviet investment targeted immense infrastructure projects including the 1964 completion of the Salang tunnel which greatly reduced travel time between northern Afghanistan and Kabul. By 1967 the country had 1,200 miles of paved roads and a 25% increase in power output. """ [0] https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/AB458EBF37B01017852577BC006B45C4-Full_Report.pdf https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/AB...
- sorenn111 5y ago
  Chinese belt and road projects are notoriously opaque but often have China bringing the financing, labor, and infrastructure. Foreign companies are often largely left out. The people benefit very little as the resources and value extracted return to China. The workers themselves are largely Chinese workers. The bribed officials get benefit and some profit is shared with the companies, but the populace largely gets nothing and sees the natural resources just taken. [1]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-bills-its-belt-and-road-as-a-collaboration-but-foreign-companies-feel-left-out-11579172950 https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-bills-its-belt-and-road-a...
  - dotcommand 5y ago
    > Chinese belt and road projects are notoriously opaque but often have China bringing the financing, labor, and infrastructure. It's so opaque that you know who is funding, building, etc? Right. Also, who else is going to bring the financing? And as for infrastructure, hasn't china shown to be the best at it? > Foreign companies are often largely left out. So what? It's a china led project which the west is opposed. What do you expect? > The people benefit very little as the resources and value extracted return to China. That's true for everybody. The people benefit very little. Do you think "the people" benefited from Canada sending timber to the US or Australia selling iron ore to china for decades? Why don't we offer a better deal? So using your logic, afghanistan shouldn't trade with anyone? If china's deal is that awful and afghanistan is choosing them, doesn't it really show how even more for awful everyone else is? Also, I wouldn't take anything by wsj, rupert murdoch owned and controlled propaganda outlet, seriously when it comes to china as his propaganda empire is peddling the most anti-china propaganda. Do you think "the west" cares about afghanistan, africa or any nation involved in BRI? Do you think we are mad because china is ripping them off or that china is actually giving these BRI nations a good deal? My guess is the latter. Or we worried that china is ripping off afghanistan, a nation we invaded and brutalized for decades? Or are you worried because china is giving them the best deal? Be honest. Given how evil we've been for a few centuries now, which do you think?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]

The Taliban joins the Belt and Road Initiative[0] in 3, 2, 1... [0]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belt_and_Road_Initiative

EarthIsHome 5y ago

Better than getting bombed if you ask me.

anonAndOn 5y ago
That won't happen again if Chinese interests are now at stake.

ssijak 5y ago

Imagine going to a country by building infrastructure and not with bombs to destroy it..hmm I wonder what would the populace prefer.

TremendousJudge 5y ago
That's what both the soviets and the americans where doing in the 70s there... didn't work back then either
- Popegaf 5y ago
  You mean the Afghan conflict? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_conflict_(1978%E2%80%93present) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_conflict_(1978%E2%...
  - TremendousJudge 5y ago
    No, the Soviets invaded in 79. During the decades before, both the USA and the USSR were investing money in infrastructure and industry modernization projects in the country, trying to curry favor with the nation. I quote from a humanitarian report[0]: """ Afghanistan‟s economy from the 1950s onward became closely intertwined with the Cold War. From 1953 to 1963 Afghanistan‟s Prime Minister Mohammed Daoud Khan had solicited military and economic assistance from both the United States (US) and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR), believing that, without rapid growth, Afghanistan would become severely politically fragmented. Often dubbed the “economic Korea”, the country received 50% of its foreign aid from the Soviet Union between 1950 and 1970 and 30% from the United States during that same time span.3 In the early 1960s Soviet investment targeted immense infrastructure projects including the 1964 completion of the Salang tunnel which greatly reduced travel time between northern Afghanistan and Kabul. By 1967 the country had 1,200 miles of paved roads and a 25% increase in power output. """ [0] https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/AB458EBF37B01017852577BC006B45C4-Full_Report.pdf https://reliefweb.int/sites/reliefweb.int/files/resources/AB...
sorenn111 5y ago
Chinese belt and road projects are notoriously opaque but often have China bringing the financing, labor, and infrastructure. Foreign companies are often largely left out. The people benefit very little as the resources and value extracted return to China. The workers themselves are largely Chinese workers. The bribed officials get benefit and some profit is shared with the companies, but the populace largely gets nothing and sees the natural resources just taken. [1]: https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-bills-its-belt-and-road-as-a-collaboration-but-foreign-companies-feel-left-out-11579172950 https://www.wsj.com/articles/china-bills-its-belt-and-road-a...
- dotcommand 5y ago
  > Chinese belt and road projects are notoriously opaque but often have China bringing the financing, labor, and infrastructure. It's so opaque that you know who is funding, building, etc? Right. Also, who else is going to bring the financing? And as for infrastructure, hasn't china shown to be the best at it? > Foreign companies are often largely left out. So what? It's a china led project which the west is opposed. What do you expect? > The people benefit very little as the resources and value extracted return to China. That's true for everybody. The people benefit very little. Do you think "the people" benefited from Canada sending timber to the US or Australia selling iron ore to china for decades? Why don't we offer a better deal? So using your logic, afghanistan shouldn't trade with anyone? If china's deal is that awful and afghanistan is choosing them, doesn't it really show how even more for awful everyone else is? Also, I wouldn't take anything by wsj, rupert murdoch owned and controlled propaganda outlet, seriously when it comes to china as his propaganda empire is peddling the most anti-china propaganda. Do you think "the west" cares about afghanistan, africa or any nation involved in BRI? Do you think we are mad because china is ripping them off or that china is actually giving these BRI nations a good deal? My guess is the latter. Or we worried that china is ripping off afghanistan, a nation we invaded and brutalized for decades? Or are you worried because china is giving them the best deal? Be honest. Given how evil we've been for a few centuries now, which do you think?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]