5 ms·

It's difficult to take your comment seriously when you start off with a falsehood. Afghanistan was not an illegal invasion, they were the aggressor country. To

by jquery 5y ago

It's difficult to take your comment seriously when you start off with a falsehood. Afghanistan was not an illegal invasion, they were the aggressor country. To equivocate ukraine with afghanistan is to support Putin's invasion.

gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
Yugoslavia/Kosovo was illegal, Afghanistan was justified, Iraq was based on a tissue of lies.
- brandmeyer 5y ago
  The intervention in Yugoslavia was possibly most well-justified military campaign in my lifetime, even more-so than the liberation of Kuwait.
  - gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
    It was still illegal, if well justified. So illegal that Russia and Serbia have been pissed off about it for over 20 years.
simiones 5y ago
I am not equivocating Ukraine with Afghanistan. The Ukrainian regime is NOT a quasi-terrorist, fundamentalist, sinister right-wing regime as the Taliban were, for one. Putin had no right to invade Ukraine. However, this does not mean that we should consider the invasion of Afghanistan as "defense" either. No state had been attacked by the state of Afghanistan. That a few afghan civilians conducted a terrorist attack in the USA doesn't mean that Afghanistan attacked the USA. Afghanistan even agreed to consider handing over Osama bin Laden to the USA, as long as they were provided with evidence of his guilt - like any state that is asked to extradite a resident. The USA decided that it didn't care to wait and produce such evidence, so they launched an invasion less than a month after the attack. It is true that this war in particular got acquiessence from the UN security council, so I will admit that it was not technically illegal (unlike the Iraq war).
- type0 5y ago
  Two wrongs don't do another right
  - simiones 5y ago
    Not sure what you're trying to say. Nothing about war is right, with very very few exceptions. My only point was that claiming NATO is a "purely defensive alliance" is not supported by history. This means that some NATO claims about Russia's lack of reasons for fearing NATO expansion are bullshit. But to be very clear again, this doesn't justify Russia's illegal murderous invasion of Ukraine.
adolph 5y ago
> Afghanistan was not an illegal invasion, they were the aggressor country. This is wrong. The country of Afghanistan did not conduct the WTC attacks. The nominally ruling clique in Afghanistan would not extradite OBL. If anything Afghanistan was an area of civil war in which the US intervened. After the Taliban refused to turn over the mastermind of the attacks, Osama Bin Laden, Operation Enduring Freedom officially began 7 October 2001 with American and British bombing strikes against al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan. https://www.history.navy.mil/browse-by-topic/wars-conflicts-and-operations/sept-11-attack.html https://www.history.navy.mil/browse-by-topic/wars-conflicts-...
- mickotron 5y ago
  They should have targeted the Saudis, not Afghanistan.
- int_19h 5y ago
  FWIW Taliban actually offered to put Osama on trial. But they insisted that it be an international tribunal, and that it should be held in some Muslim country.

by jquery 5y ago

gunfighthacksaw 5y ago

Yugoslavia/Kosovo was illegal, Afghanistan was justified, Iraq was based on a tissue of lies.

brandmeyer 5y ago
The intervention in Yugoslavia was possibly most well-justified military campaign in my lifetime, even more-so than the liberation of Kuwait.
- gunfighthacksaw 5y ago
  It was still illegal, if well justified. So illegal that Russia and Serbia have been pissed off about it for over 20 years.

simiones 5y ago

I am not equivocating Ukraine with Afghanistan. The Ukrainian regime is NOT a quasi-terrorist, fundamentalist, sinister right-wing regime as the Taliban were, for one. Putin had no right to invade Ukraine. However, this does not mean that we should consider the invasion of Afghanistan as "defense" either. No state had been attacked by the state of Afghanistan. That a few afghan civilians conducted a terrorist attack in the USA doesn't mean that Afghanistan attacked the USA. Afghanistan even agreed to consider handing over Osama bin Laden to the USA, as long as they were provided with evidence of his guilt - like any state that is asked to extradite a resident. The USA decided that it didn't care to wait and produce such evidence, so they launched an invasion less than a month after the attack. It is true that this war in particular got acquiessence from the UN security council, so I will admit that it was not technically illegal (unlike the Iraq war).

type0 5y ago
Two wrongs don't do another right
- simiones 5y ago
  Not sure what you're trying to say. Nothing about war is right, with very very few exceptions. My only point was that claiming NATO is a "purely defensive alliance" is not supported by history. This means that some NATO claims about Russia's lack of reasons for fearing NATO expansion are bullshit. But to be very clear again, this doesn't justify Russia's illegal murderous invasion of Ukraine.

adolph 5y ago

> Afghanistan was not an illegal invasion, they were the aggressor country. This is wrong. The country of Afghanistan did not conduct the WTC attacks. The nominally ruling clique in Afghanistan would not extradite OBL. If anything Afghanistan was an area of civil war in which the US intervened. After the Taliban refused to turn over the mastermind of the attacks, Osama Bin Laden, Operation Enduring Freedom officially began 7 October 2001 with American and British bombing strikes against al Qaeda and Taliban forces in Afghanistan. https://www.history.navy.mil/browse-by-topic/wars-conflicts-and-operations/sept-11-attack.html https://www.history.navy.mil/browse-by-topic/wars-conflicts-...

mickotron 5y ago
They should have targeted the Saudis, not Afghanistan.
int_19h 5y ago
FWIW Taliban actually offered to put Osama on trial. But they insisted that it be an international tribunal, and that it should be held in some Muslim country.