3 ms·

These devices, like most of the equipment the Taliban captured, was in the hands of ANA troops and was abandoned during their surrender/retreat[0]. This equipm

• Shacklz 5y ago
  > This equipment was purchased by Afghanistan from the US (using US funds, obviously) As someone with a slightly pacifist streak and a very strong dislike of the military industrial complex, this statement, as obvious as it is, somehow still makes me furious... I often wonder how people working in these circles or supporting politics in this direction sleep at night. It's so obviously pointless, so obviously destructive, so obviously detrimental to humanity as a whole... I don't know. Maybe I'm just too naive, but I just can't decide if I should feel sad or angry about it. (sorry for the somewhat unrelated rant)
  • bruce343434 5y ago
    They like money!
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • luckylion 5y ago
    My guess is they figure it's better to have a military industrial complex than letting the Taliban conquer the world.
  • the-dude 5y ago
    Are you aware of the strings attached to 'development aid' ?
  • dangerface 5y ago
    If some one starts a fight with you, you need to defend yourself. If some one starts a fight with some one innocent you should probably help defend them. > It's so obviously pointless, so obviously destructive, so obviously detrimental to humanity as a whole Pacifism is a nice ideal and easy to defend when talking about an unjustified war like Iraq. But when I see Afghans so desperate to leave they are clinging onto airplanes I think it's obvious that pacifism is just as pointless and detrimental. No one sleeps easy.
    • notsureaboutpg 5y ago
      What are you talking about? How did we help them by fighting a pointless war for 20 years and killing a quarter of a million people? The Taliban were ready to negotiate in 2001 in 2002 and in 2003. The Taliban were ready to hand over Bin Laden after 2001 provided the US would work with them (because they were desperate for legitimacy on the world stage). Rather than offer them that and use that influence to better the world for Afghan people in a gradual, lasting, meaningful way, we fought a 2 decade war, destroyed their economy, caused massive brain drain, kept literacy from rising (still only 30% of Afghans are literate, Iran, another pariah state managed to basically make its entire population educated and literate in 20 years), and forced a people who mostly can't read or write to mimic Western style society and "freedoms" without actually understanding what the reasons for them are, all but ensuring they would disappear when the Taliban eventually came back to rule. We were never going to make Afghanistan a US colony. They are clinging to planes because we destroyed their country and are now escaping back to our nice, developed homeland. If we had never gone in the first place, it might have been a better place now (and it might not have but it certainly isn't better because we invaded).
    • raziel2p 5y ago
      On the other hand, NATO etc. have been exercising the non-pacifist option in Afghanistan for the last 20 years or so, with very few results to show for it.
      • zarzavat 5y ago
        Pacifism is different from non-interventionism or neutrality. Non-intervention means "if you attack someone else, I will not help them" Pacifism = "if you attack me, I will not stop you"
• johnchristopher 5y ago
  Was it paid in full or is it a monthly payment the Taliban government now has to reimburse ? /s
• lp0_on_fire 5y ago
  Churchill didn't have a right to destroy the french fleet after France fell during WW2, either. But he did it because he wasn't a fool.