3 ms·
The take-over was fast, orderly, and largely bloodless. The USA has managed to evacuate a large number of Afghans who were directly helping it. To date there ha
by jacobolus 5y ago
The take-over was fast, orderly, and largely bloodless. The USA has managed to evacuate a large number of Afghans who were directly helping it. To date there has been not been any widespread campaign of executions, mass imprisonments of political opponents of the Taliban, or reprisals against the civilian population.
Would a protracted civil war between the Taliban and the US-backed puppet government, ultimately leading to the former’s victory (but with more bloodshed and bad feelings) have really been a better outcome for the people of Afghanistan?
- austhrow743 5y agoThe people of Afghanistan didn't end the war in Afghanistan so I didn't take the question to be asking "Is this the worst possible scenario for the people of Afghanistan?" They appear to be doing quite well.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- jacobolus 5y agoWould a protracted civil war ending in the eventual defeat of the puppet government after many more deaths have been a better outcome for the people of the USA? Seems to me like a swift, relatively non-violent surrender and transfer of power is better for everyone, if the outcome was inevitable anyway.