I think people are getting a little too myopic in their analysis here. The American people care very little about foreign policy, much less about the welfare of foreigners. And that's the main thing at stake here.
In a month, this isn't going to be a big story. Much less a year, for the midterms. Much less 2024. If anything, pulling out now prevents Afghanistan from being much of a story at those dates. To the extent that Afghanistan will be a story on those dates now, imo, it's way more likely to be a "thank goodness we got out" sentiment for a swing voter.
Biden's numbers are also tracking a pretty typical post-honeymoon decline.
I think people are getting a little too myopic in their analysis here. The American people care very little about foreign policy, much less about the welfare of foreigners. And that's the main thing at stake here.
In a month, this isn't going to be a big story. Much less a year, for the midterms. Much less 2024. If anything, pulling out now prevents Afghanistan from being much of a story at those dates. To the extent that Afghanistan will be a story on those dates now, imo, it's way more likely to be a "thank goodness we got out" sentiment for a swing voter.
Biden's numbers are also tracking a pretty typical post-honeymoon decline.
It's the only thing at stake, as there is no evidence a single American is going to lose their life over this withdrawal. Not one. And many of the people screaming about interpreters and our allies are the same people who are watching Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson basically frame any refugees as potential sleeper cells. It would be my suspicion that the dip in support is mostly among people who supported getting out when Trump was advocating it, and now don't because the other guy followed through, and are all repeating the EXACT same phrase, which is "I agree with getting out but not how it was done", which has about as much depth behind it as a puddle after a 5 minute sprinkle of rain, as if anyone saying this has the first clue what goes into ending a 2 decade military occupation with a guerilla army waiting to take over the city. They don't like seeing photos and video that make the US "look bad". The faux concern for our Afghan allies is mostly disingenuous bullshit. Because 99% of people talking about it haven't given the first thought to those folks in 15 years. Or, indeed, when our actual military actions the last 2 decades were killing innocent people left and right.
I'm one of those people who are glad to finally be out, but I am also concerned for refugees and allies left over. That being said, I've railed against drone strikes in the Middle East since Bush jr., and I WAS conservative back then.
I'm one of those people who are glad to finally be out, but I am also concerned for refugees and allies left over. That being said, I've railed against drone strikes in the Middle East since Bush jr., and I WAS conservative back then.
The people suggesting Trump would have initiated a more orderly exit and done more to help refugees have some real stones on them, I have to say. It takes some real hutzpah to make that statement with a straight face. Of course, we wouldn't have had to find out, because when the time came to do this, he would have just gotten rolled by the Generals again because he would have been afraid of having these images associated with him. He never would have followed through.
I'm one of those people who are glad to finally be out, but I am also concerned for refugees and allies left over. That being said, I've railed against drone strikes in the Middle East since Bush jr., and I WAS conservative back then.
The people suggesting Trump would have initiated a more orderly exit and done more to help refugees have some real stones on them, I have to say. It takes some real hutzpah to make that statement with a straight face. Of course, we wouldn't have had to find out, because when the time came to do this, he would have just gotten rolled by the Generals again because he would have been afraid of having these images associated with him. He never would have followed through.
Trump already has these images attached to him with Syria. But that happened in 2019, two years ago, not two days ago so it’s forgotten news.
The fact that phrases like "he lost Afghanistan" or "he lost Vietnam" even exist points to a sickness in American culture. This idea that we can drop our military anywhere in the world and claim ownership of a country with no repercussions. It was never ours to begin with. And as America has proven in Afghanistan, Iraq, and with our own pandemic response, we aren't really "exceptional" at anything, much less the best. We just have the most guns.
Having grown up during Junior's administration, I can sincerely say I don't know if there's ever been a point in my life where there wasn't some sort of rift between the intelligence community and elected officials and their advisors.
Gotta start to wonder why we have these agencies if we never intend to actually listen to them.
Having grown up during Junior's administration, I can sincerely say I don't know if there's ever been a point in my life where there wasn't some sort of rift between the intelligence community and elected officials and their advisors.
Gotta start to wonder why we have these agencies if we never intend to actually listen to them.
I mean, Rumsfeld was demanding links to Iraq be found before the fire was even put out at the Pentagon. They were literally instructed to work backwards from a decision that had already been made within hours of the planes hitting. Afghanistan was just a tune-up for the public. The Bush Administration wasn't GIVEN bad intelligence, they DEMANDED it.
The general public doesn't seem aware of this, but the Taliban offered Bin Laden on a silver platter. We had him dead to rights at Tora Bora. We turned down the offer and didn't push to get him when he was cornered like a rat. Because they wanted him out there as a spectre. Because the goal was war and regime change as far as the eye could see. If Iraq hadn't have fallen apart the way it did, they would have marched on Tehran. People just don't seem to have any conception of how deep the lies and deception were.
To the American public at the time, the religious and cultural differences between countries, regions and, especially, Sunni and Shite were meaningless, even though even a cursory examination of them would reveal that invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein because of, SPECIFICALLY, 9/11, was absurd. But the goalposts kept moving every time the previous justification was proven wrong, and the public ate it up for 4 or 5 years. I still get furious talking about it 15 years later.
"Operational tied to Al Qaeda" became "yellow cake in Niger" became "don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud" became "weapons of mass destruction" became "sustainable democracy in the Middle East". Need I go on?? The phrases are burned in my memory. Mind you, pointing this stuff out at the time would get you labeled as a pinko commie traitor by people who LOVED you, much less complete strangers.
I thought that under Carter and Bush Sr, the mujaheddin and thereby the Taliban subgroup was given billions of USD worth of weaponry to fight the Soviets. Isn't the Afghan situation sort of caused by the cold war fear of the communist expansion at the time, and the current wish to break from that past?
Again, I’m sure Biden’s poll numbers will do fine. Meanwhile Biden’s administration is being judged quite harshly in many countries for the manner of its withdrawal from Afghanistan, and for his willingness to claim that Afghan forces are not willing to fight. About 20 Americans have died each year since 2015, compared to close to 10,000 Afghan soldiers each year. There were many options here, one doesn’t just need to think in binary terms. If the US had left in a gradual manner while maintaining airpower support, or planned for the worst by establishing a humanitarian corridor then things might being going better for the Afghans who worked with western forces, and believed that America might be able to leave behind a lasting and productive legacy. Those Afghans will not have enjoyed Biden’s speech.
This is not only on America of course though, other western countries who participated in the great crusade must also once again realise that they are essentially dependent upon the US. This is particularly bitter for the UK, which has spent the last few years alienating itself from Europe only to realise that the Special Relationship isn’t all that. UK government is getting roasted for its own incompetence again:
Again, I’m sure Biden’s poll numbers will do fine. Meanwhile Biden’s administration is being judged quite harshly in many countries for the manner of its withdrawal from Afghanistan, and for his willingness to claim that Afghan forces are not willing to fight. About 20 Americans have died each year since 2015, compared to close to 10,000 Afghan soldiers each year. There were many options here, one doesn’t just need to think in binary terms. If the US had left in a gradual manner while maintaining airpower support, or planned for the worst by establishing a humanitarian corridor then things might being going better for the Afghans who worked with western forces, and believed that America might be able to leave behind a lasting and productive legacy. Those Afghans will not have enjoyed Biden’s speech.
This is not only on America of course though, other western countries who participated in the great crusade must also once again realise that they are essentially dependent upon the US. This is particularly bitter for the UK, which has spent the last few years alienating itself from Europe only to realise that the Special Relationship isn’t all that. UK government is getting roasted for its own incompetence again:
Biden is fundamentally different than all other recent US Presidents, in that he had a child who served in one of the recent theaters in the Middle East. I honestly believe he views his obligation to American troops and families as one of his core priorities. He clearly wants to know if there are American interests at stake worth having to call a parent to inform them of their child being killed.
It's a legitimate argument if you say he isn't allowed to take that kind of view once he takes this job, but he is the President of the United States, and thousands of American troops have died or been maimed to accomplish literally nothing that can be sustained without MORE of them suffering the same fate.
It's really harsh to say this, but he isn't the President of the women of Afghanistan. Again, you can argue that shouldn't matter, but realize he then has to justify to American voters why someone's son needs to die so they won't be oppressed.
The cold reality of the last two decades is that we can't just fix things at the barrel of a gun. We have to come to grips with the fact that heinous shit is happening everywhere and we can't stop it all. We can't permanently solve these problems. Hell, we can't even solve our own.
If the combination of Great Britain and the US haven't finally figured out where imperialism ends up, then literally no one will ever learn. America seems to be slowly coming to the realization the UK did in the late '40s
This has all been folly. The two great conflicts of modern times were primarily European in origin. NATO and the European Union have, for the most part, ended that threat. The Soviet Union collapsed. China is immensely powerful but has no interest in an armed conflict with the US. There are no militaristic threats that justify this reckless adventurism.adventures.
You know who IS going to reap the rewards in Afghanistan?? Russia and China. And they will do it with massive investment in infrastructure, not raining death from the sky. The US doesn't even seem to understand the concept of a carrot, only a stick. Well, we did in regards to Iran. But someone decided to destroy that in one afternoon.
I thought that under Carter and Bush Sr, the mujaheddin and thereby the Taliban subgroup was given billions of USD worth of weaponry to fight the Soviets. Isn't the Afghan situation sort of caused by the cold war fear of the communist expansion at the time, and the current wish to break from that past?
This is all factually true, but again, this still makes the US far too large of a protagonist. The US armed the mujahideen because they were the only legitimate opposition to the Soviets. So that reveals an already present religious ideology. The US didn't create them out of nothing.
Moreover, the US has now been fighting them for 20 years. That would seem to erase, imo, whatever gains they got from a 30+ year old weapons deal.
So, I don't think it's right to credit the fact that Afghanistan is now going to be a religious theocracy to the US. It's far too solipsistic of a view. This region has been dominated by religious conservatism for centuries.
It's really harsh to say this, but he isn't the President of the women of Afghanistan. Again, you can argue that shouldn't matter, but realize he then has to justify to American voters why someone's son needs to die so they won't be oppressed.
Strongly agreed. If you're gonna be against the US getting involved in "forever wars" you have to cop to this reality.
I do think if you take a big step back, you can see that the world overall is a much, much better place for the average human than it was 50 years ago. So we shouldn't lose sight of that. But a serious antiwar commitment ought to admit to the downsides too.
Russia has been conducting military exercises with Tajik and Uzbek troops and will be desperately hoping that the Taliban can hold itself and the country together. The last thing Russia wants is a stream of refugees, anarchy, and radicalisation unsettling its southern flank. The only bit of infrastructure building it will do for now is bunging cash to that most essential building block- favoured warlords. At least the Taliban are actually guarding the Russian embassy for now,
I thought that under Carter and Bush Sr, the mujaheddin and thereby the Taliban subgroup was given billions of USD worth of weaponry to fight the Soviets. Isn't the Afghan situation sort of caused by the cold war fear of the communist expansion at the time, and the current wish to break from that past?
This is all factually true, but again, this still makes the US far too large of a protagonist. The US armed the mujahideen because they were the only legitimate opposition to the Soviets. So that reveals an already present religious ideology. The US didn't create them out of nothing.
Moreover, the US has now been fighting them for 20 years. That would seem to erase, imo, whatever gains they got from a 30+ year old weapons deal.
So, I don't think it's right to credit the fact that Afghanistan is now going to be a religious theocracy to the US. It's far too solipsistic of a view. This region has been dominated by religious conservatism for centuries.
I am not so sure about that last proposal.
In the 80s the US armed the mujaheddin which they knew was a large collection of people with different ideologies who were allied against the Soviets.
After they expelled the oppression, it started a civil war where the various splinter parties vied for the crown so to say. Could it have been expected that 30 years further down the line one of the less successful splinter parties would then gain the upper hand?
What could have been their plan for the current age?
This morning we are seeing example #1679 of how it's like pulling teeth to get the media to utter the word "terrorism" when the perpetrator is non-Muslim even if the guy is literally a suicide bomber making demands of Joe Biden live on Facebook. And yet, media reports still call his motives "unclear" and authorities once again lead with how he's been having a "rough time" in his life. Even if you admit you're willing to blow up two city blocks, your story gets white-washed. Pun absolutely intended.
This morning we are seeing example #1679 of how it's like pulling teeth to get the media to utter the word "terrorism" when the perpetrator is non-Muslim even if the guy is literally a suicide bomber making demands of Joe Biden live on Facebook. And yet, media reports still call his motives "unclear" and authorities once again lead with how he's been having a "rough time" in his life. Even if you admit you're willing to blow up two city blocks, your story gets white-washed. Pun absolutely intended.
Terrorism requires a 'terror' factor. Nobody's really afraid of these home-grown dipshits because we all know people like this. The only difference between these guys and your weird uncle is the will to take that extra step down the rabbit hole...
Some info about the DC bomb-scare guy. Heavy.com is pretty good at being able to get tidbits off of social media before they're taken down by law enforcement. They were able to do the same thing with the social media websites of the Dayton shooter a few years ago. Needless to say, this guy is quite a few cards short of a full deck...
Some info about the DC bomb-scare guy. Heavy.com is pretty good at being able to get tidbits off of social media before they're taken down by law enforcement. They were able to do the same thing with the social media websites of the Dayton shooter a few years ago. Needless to say, this guy is quite a few cards short of a full deck...
The guy's grievances were almost comically predictable based on his media consumption. He has a legitimate financial health crisis because his insurance company won't cover his wife's skin cancer treatment, but he votes for the party that quite literally doesn't think his wife should be able to get insurance AT ALL (pre-existing conditions) and thinks the reason he's in dire straights is because "all the money" is going to minorities. This is the bog standard end goal conservative media wants to implant in the minds of it's viewers/listeners.
No one is arguing these guys aren't almost comically inept. But one day, one of them is going to be just competent enough. A sitting Representative (Mo Brooks, who just coincidentally happened to be prepared enough on January 6 to be wearing body armor underneath his clothes) released a statement that essentially said "this guy has some good points". And, of course, another cross-section of the right reverted to "false flag".
This morning we are seeing example #1679 of how it's like pulling teeth to get the media to utter the word "terrorism" when the perpetrator is non-Muslim even if the guy is literally a suicide bomber making demands of Joe Biden live on Facebook. And yet, media reports still call his motives "unclear" and authorities once again lead with how he's been having a "rough time" in his life. Even if you admit you're willing to blow up two city blocks, your story gets white-washed. Pun absolutely intended.
Terrorism requires a 'terror' factor. Nobody's really afraid of these home-grown dipshits because we all know people like this. The only difference between these guys and your weird uncle is the will to take that extra step down the rabbit hole...
It seems a bit odd to me not to be afraid of someone willing to kill you ...
The UK recently had its worst mass shooting since 2010, perpetrated by a misogynist who had been involved in the incel internet movement. What I find depressing about that is it illustrates the extent to which the internet can dominate someone's life and facilitate cult behavior. I suspect that guy would always have been a misfit and uncomfortable in mainstream society, but I'm not convinced that he would have gone in for that sort of violence without the positive reinforcement of other people with similar views.
This morning we are seeing example #1679 of how it's like pulling teeth to get the media to utter the word "terrorism" when the perpetrator is non-Muslim even if the guy is literally a suicide bomber making demands of Joe Biden live on Facebook. And yet, media reports still call his motives "unclear" and authorities once again lead with how he's been having a "rough time" in his life. Even if you admit you're willing to blow up two city blocks, your story gets white-washed. Pun absolutely intended.
Terrorism requires a 'terror' factor. Nobody's really afraid of these home-grown dipshits because we all know people like this. The only difference between these guys and your weird uncle is the will to take that extra step down the rabbit hole...
It seems a bit odd to me not to be afraid of someone willing to kill you ...
The UK recently had its worst mass shooting since 2010, perpetrated by a misogynist who had been involved in the incel internet movement. What I find depressing about that is it illustrates the extent to which the internet can dominate someone's life and facilitate cult behavior. I suspect that guy would always have been a misfit and uncomfortable in mainstream society, but I'm not convinced that he would have gone in for that sort of violence without the positive reinforcement of other people with similar views.
When you've been around enough of these kinds of people over the years you realize that it's all talk. You have no fear of them because you start to pity them. The outliers are still scary, of course, but not the run of the mill anti-government nutjobs. The white-supremacist, incel homeboys though, they're way more scary imho...
Didn't "run of the mill" anti-government nutjobs take over a national park recently? There's also all the armed nut-jobs taking to the streets around the beginning of the US epidemic.
This morning we are seeing example #1679 of how it's like pulling teeth to get the media to utter the word "terrorism" when the perpetrator is non-Muslim even if the guy is literally a suicide bomber making demands of Joe Biden live on Facebook. And yet, media reports still call his motives "unclear" and authorities once again lead with how he's been having a "rough time" in his life. Even if you admit you're willing to blow up two city blocks, your story gets white-washed. Pun absolutely intended.
Terrorism requires a 'terror' factor. Nobody's really afraid of these home-grown dipshits because we all know people like this. The only difference between these guys and your weird uncle is the will to take that extra step down the rabbit hole...
It seems a bit odd to me not to be afraid of someone willing to kill you ...
The UK recently had its worst mass shooting since 2010, perpetrated by a misogynist who had been involved in the incel internet movement. What I find depressing about that is it illustrates the extent to which the internet can dominate someone's life and facilitate cult behavior. I suspect that guy would always have been a misfit and uncomfortable in mainstream society, but I'm not convinced that he would have gone in for that sort of violence without the positive reinforcement of other people with similar views.
When you've been around enough of these kinds of people over the years you realize that it's all talk. You have no fear of them because you start to pity them. The outliers are still scary, of course, but not the run of the mill anti-government nutjobs. The white-supremacist, incel homeboys though, they're way more scary imho...
One of them blew himself up in Nashville not long ago too (along with few city blocks). Covid has certainly stirred up the crazies. The homicide rates have went up in the inner cities too though, so it's not just the right-wingnuts that are overheating. This has been a very trying year and a half to say the least.
While I'm not a big fan of bringing up personal identities, I do think it's relevant here. I think the idea that rightwing radicals seem mostly harmless may be a product of belonging to a certain group. And thus not feeling like you're ever going to be a direct target of their ire. If you're the kind of person that "belongs in America" according the worldview of those folks, then yeah, it's understandable that you don't see them as a compelling threat. But you ought not universalize that experience.
While I'm not a big fan of bringing up personal identities, I do think it's relevant here. I think the idea that rightwing radicals seem mostly harmless may be a product of belonging to a certain group. And thus not feeling like you're ever going to be a direct target of their ire. If you're the kind of person that "belongs in America" according the worldview of those folks, then yeah, it's understandable that you don't see them as a compelling threat. But you ought not universalize that experience.
To tell the truth, I'm just not prone to fear much at all. I'm not afraid of Antifa, the Anti-Christ, ghosts, UFO's, coyotes, right wingers, left wingers, Covid or any of the myriad of things I'm told I'm supposed to be afraid of. I've been around the block way too long now. Fuck the fear-mongers. Law of the Mackerel...
This morning we are seeing example #1679 of how it's like pulling teeth to get the media to utter the word "terrorism" when the perpetrator is non-Muslim even if the guy is literally a suicide bomber making demands of Joe Biden live on Facebook. And yet, media reports still call his motives "unclear" and authorities once again lead with how he's been having a "rough time" in his life. Even if you admit you're willing to blow up two city blocks, your story gets white-washed. Pun absolutely intended.
Terrorism requires a 'terror' factor. Nobody's really afraid of these home-grown dipshits because we all know people like this. The only difference between these guys and your weird uncle is the will to take that extra step down the rabbit hole...
It seems a bit odd to me not to be afraid of someone willing to kill you ...
The UK recently had its worst mass shooting since 2010, perpetrated by a misogynist who had been involved in the incel internet movement. What I find depressing about that is it illustrates the extent to which the internet can dominate someone's life and facilitate cult behavior. I suspect that guy would always have been a misfit and uncomfortable in mainstream society, but I'm not convinced that he would have gone in for that sort of violence without the positive reinforcement of other people with similar views.
When you've been around enough of these kinds of people over the years you realize that it's all talk. You have no fear of them because you start to pity them. The outliers are still scary, of course, but not the run of the mill anti-government nutjobs. The white-supremacist, incel homeboys though, they're way more scary imho...
Like the mass shootings a couple of years ago, actions like the one this person did will create copycat acts that will just continue to escalate in severity as these people attempt to out do each other as they broadcast their message over social media.
This guy might have been harmless, but he showed what can be done. Facebook (and the police) allowing him to broadcast the incident has the potential to make things much worse.
This morning we are seeing example #1679 of how it's like pulling teeth to get the media to utter the word "terrorism" when the perpetrator is non-Muslim even if the guy is literally a suicide bomber making demands of Joe Biden live on Facebook. And yet, media reports still call his motives "unclear" and authorities once again lead with how he's been having a "rough time" in his life. Even if you admit you're willing to blow up two city blocks, your story gets white-washed. Pun absolutely intended.
Terrorism requires a 'terror' factor. Nobody's really afraid of these home-grown dipshits because we all know people like this. The only difference between these guys and your weird uncle is the will to take that extra step down the rabbit hole...
It seems a bit odd to me not to be afraid of someone willing to kill you ...
The UK recently had its worst mass shooting since 2010, perpetrated by a misogynist who had been involved in the incel internet movement. What I find depressing about that is it illustrates the extent to which the internet can dominate someone's life and facilitate cult behavior. I suspect that guy would always have been a misfit and uncomfortable in mainstream society, but I'm not convinced that he would have gone in for that sort of violence without the positive reinforcement of other people with similar views.
When you've been around enough of these kinds of people over the years you realize that it's all talk. You have no fear of them because you start to pity them. The outliers are still scary, of course, but not the run of the mill anti-government nutjobs. The white-supremacist, incel homeboys though, they're way more scary imho...
Like the mass shootings a couple of years ago, actions like the one this person did will create copycat acts that will just continue to escalate in severity as these people attempt to out do each other as they broadcast their message over social media.
This guy might have been harmless, but he showed what can be done. Facebook (and the police) allowing him to broadcast the incident has the potential to make things much worse.
I always hear about this fear of copycat killers, but why does it seem like it seldom happens? We like to think we can somehow 'control the narrative' by doing 'x' or not doing 'x', but is there any evidence that this works? It's like that Stephen King novel, Rage, about a kid with a gun shooting up his classroom being in the room of a kid who did just that. Was the novel the cause of the kid wigging out? Truth is, if you want to find somebody evil to copy, it's really not that difficult. I'm not arguing with you, just wondering what your take on that is.
Comments
In a month, this isn't going to be a big story. Much less a year, for the midterms. Much less 2024. If anything, pulling out now prevents Afghanistan from being much of a story at those dates. To the extent that Afghanistan will be a story on those dates now, imo, it's way more likely to be a "thank goodness we got out" sentiment for a swing voter.
Biden's numbers are also tracking a pretty typical post-honeymoon decline.
It's the only thing at stake, as there is no evidence a single American is going to lose their life over this withdrawal. Not one. And many of the people screaming about interpreters and our allies are the same people who are watching Laura Ingraham and Tucker Carlson basically frame any refugees as potential sleeper cells. It would be my suspicion that the dip in support is mostly among people who supported getting out when Trump was advocating it, and now don't because the other guy followed through, and are all repeating the EXACT same phrase, which is "I agree with getting out but not how it was done", which has about as much depth behind it as a puddle after a 5 minute sprinkle of rain, as if anyone saying this has the first clue what goes into ending a 2 decade military occupation with a guerilla army waiting to take over the city. They don't like seeing photos and video that make the US "look bad". The faux concern for our Afghan allies is mostly disingenuous bullshit. Because 99% of people talking about it haven't given the first thought to those folks in 15 years. Or, indeed, when our actual military actions the last 2 decades were killing innocent people left and right.
The people suggesting Trump would have initiated a more orderly exit and done more to help refugees have some real stones on them, I have to say. It takes some real hutzpah to make that statement with a straight face. Of course, we wouldn't have had to find out, because when the time came to do this, he would have just gotten rolled by the Generals again because he would have been afraid of having these images associated with him. He never would have followed through.
Trump already has these images attached to him with Syria. But that happened in 2019, two years ago, not two days ago so it’s forgotten news.
Having grown up during Junior's administration, I can sincerely say I don't know if there's ever been a point in my life where there wasn't some sort of rift between the intelligence community and elected officials and their advisors.
Gotta start to wonder why we have these agencies if we never intend to actually listen to them.
(Context)
I mean, Rumsfeld was demanding links to Iraq be found before the fire was even put out at the Pentagon. They were literally instructed to work backwards from a decision that had already been made within hours of the planes hitting. Afghanistan was just a tune-up for the public. The Bush Administration wasn't GIVEN bad intelligence, they DEMANDED it.
The general public doesn't seem aware of this, but the Taliban offered Bin Laden on a silver platter. We had him dead to rights at Tora Bora. We turned down the offer and didn't push to get him when he was cornered like a rat. Because they wanted him out there as a spectre. Because the goal was war and regime change as far as the eye could see. If Iraq hadn't have fallen apart the way it did, they would have marched on Tehran. People just don't seem to have any conception of how deep the lies and deception were.
To the American public at the time, the religious and cultural differences between countries, regions and, especially, Sunni and Shite were meaningless, even though even a cursory examination of them would reveal that invading Iraq and removing Saddam Hussein because of, SPECIFICALLY, 9/11, was absurd. But the goalposts kept moving every time the previous justification was proven wrong, and the public ate it up for 4 or 5 years. I still get furious talking about it 15 years later.
"Operational tied to Al Qaeda" became "yellow cake in Niger" became "don't want the smoking gun to be a mushroom cloud" became "weapons of mass destruction" became "sustainable democracy in the Middle East". Need I go on?? The phrases are burned in my memory. Mind you, pointing this stuff out at the time would get you labeled as a pinko commie traitor by people who LOVED you, much less complete strangers.
https://www.cnn.com/2021/08/18/world/meanwhile-in-america-august-18-intl/index.html
Et tu, CNN?
This is not only on America of course though, other western countries who participated in the great crusade must also once again realise that they are essentially dependent upon the US. This is particularly bitter for the UK, which has spent the last few years alienating itself from Europe only to realise that the Special Relationship isn’t all that. UK government is getting roasted for its own incompetence again:
https://inews.co.uk/opinion/tory-mps-enraged-and-on-the-verge-of-tears-in-parliament-know-afghanistan-is-a-world-defining-moment-1157058?ito=twitter_share_article-top
Biden is fundamentally different than all other recent US Presidents, in that he had a child who served in one of the recent theaters in the Middle East. I honestly believe he views his obligation to American troops and families as one of his core priorities. He clearly wants to know if there are American interests at stake worth having to call a parent to inform them of their child being killed.
It's a legitimate argument if you say he isn't allowed to take that kind of view once he takes this job, but he is the President of the United States, and thousands of American troops have died or been maimed to accomplish literally nothing that can be sustained without MORE of them suffering the same fate.
It's really harsh to say this, but he isn't the President of the women of Afghanistan. Again, you can argue that shouldn't matter, but realize he then has to justify to American voters why someone's son needs to die so they won't be oppressed.
The cold reality of the last two decades is that we can't just fix things at the barrel of a gun. We have to come to grips with the fact that heinous shit is happening everywhere and we can't stop it all. We can't permanently solve these problems. Hell, we can't even solve our own.
If the combination of Great Britain and the US haven't finally figured out where imperialism ends up, then literally no one will ever learn. America seems to be slowly coming to the realization the UK did in the late '40s
This has all been folly. The two great conflicts of modern times were primarily European in origin. NATO and the European Union have, for the most part, ended that threat. The Soviet Union collapsed. China is immensely powerful but has no interest in an armed conflict with the US. There are no militaristic threats that justify this reckless adventurism.adventures.
You know who IS going to reap the rewards in Afghanistan?? Russia and China. And they will do it with massive investment in infrastructure, not raining death from the sky. The US doesn't even seem to understand the concept of a carrot, only a stick. Well, we did in regards to Iran. But someone decided to destroy that in one afternoon.
This is all factually true, but again, this still makes the US far too large of a protagonist. The US armed the mujahideen because they were the only legitimate opposition to the Soviets. So that reveals an already present religious ideology. The US didn't create them out of nothing.
Moreover, the US has now been fighting them for 20 years. That would seem to erase, imo, whatever gains they got from a 30+ year old weapons deal.
So, I don't think it's right to credit the fact that Afghanistan is now going to be a religious theocracy to the US. It's far too solipsistic of a view. This region has been dominated by religious conservatism for centuries.
Strongly agreed. If you're gonna be against the US getting involved in "forever wars" you have to cop to this reality.
I do think if you take a big step back, you can see that the world overall is a much, much better place for the average human than it was 50 years ago. So we shouldn't lose sight of that. But a serious antiwar commitment ought to admit to the downsides too.
In the 80s the US armed the mujaheddin which they knew was a large collection of people with different ideologies who were allied against the Soviets.
After they expelled the oppression, it started a civil war where the various splinter parties vied for the crown so to say. Could it have been expected that 30 years further down the line one of the less successful splinter parties would then gain the upper hand?
What could have been their plan for the current age?
I think you'll like the answer ... er no
Terrorism requires a 'terror' factor. Nobody's really afraid of these home-grown dipshits because we all know people like this. The only difference between these guys and your weird uncle is the will to take that extra step down the rabbit hole...
https://www.salon.com/2021/08/19/why-americans-cant-have-nice-things-we-squandered-our-nations-wealth-on-pointless-wars_partner/
https://heavy.com/news/ray-roseberry/
The guy's grievances were almost comically predictable based on his media consumption. He has a legitimate financial health crisis because his insurance company won't cover his wife's skin cancer treatment, but he votes for the party that quite literally doesn't think his wife should be able to get insurance AT ALL (pre-existing conditions) and thinks the reason he's in dire straights is because "all the money" is going to minorities. This is the bog standard end goal conservative media wants to implant in the minds of it's viewers/listeners.
No one is arguing these guys aren't almost comically inept. But one day, one of them is going to be just competent enough. A sitting Representative (Mo Brooks, who just coincidentally happened to be prepared enough on January 6 to be wearing body armor underneath his clothes) released a statement that essentially said "this guy has some good points". And, of course, another cross-section of the right reverted to "false flag".
It seems a bit odd to me not to be afraid of someone willing to kill you ...
The UK recently had its worst mass shooting since 2010, perpetrated by a misogynist who had been involved in the incel internet movement. What I find depressing about that is it illustrates the extent to which the internet can dominate someone's life and facilitate cult behavior. I suspect that guy would always have been a misfit and uncomfortable in mainstream society, but I'm not convinced that he would have gone in for that sort of violence without the positive reinforcement of other people with similar views.
When you've been around enough of these kinds of people over the years you realize that it's all talk. You have no fear of them because you start to pity them. The outliers are still scary, of course, but not the run of the mill anti-government nutjobs. The white-supremacist, incel homeboys though, they're way more scary imho...
One of them blew himself up in Nashville not long ago too (along with few city blocks). Covid has certainly stirred up the crazies. The homicide rates have went up in the inner cities too though, so it's not just the right-wingnuts that are overheating. This has been a very trying year and a half to say the least.
To tell the truth, I'm just not prone to fear much at all. I'm not afraid of Antifa, the Anti-Christ, ghosts, UFO's, coyotes, right wingers, left wingers, Covid or any of the myriad of things I'm told I'm supposed to be afraid of. I've been around the block way too long now. Fuck the fear-mongers. Law of the Mackerel...
Like the mass shootings a couple of years ago, actions like the one this person did will create copycat acts that will just continue to escalate in severity as these people attempt to out do each other as they broadcast their message over social media.
This guy might have been harmless, but he showed what can be done. Facebook (and the police) allowing him to broadcast the incident has the potential to make things much worse.
I always hear about this fear of copycat killers, but why does it seem like it seldom happens? We like to think we can somehow 'control the narrative' by doing 'x' or not doing 'x', but is there any evidence that this works? It's like that Stephen King novel, Rage, about a kid with a gun shooting up his classroom being in the room of a kid who did just that. Was the novel the cause of the kid wigging out? Truth is, if you want to find somebody evil to copy, it's really not that difficult. I'm not arguing with you, just wondering what your take on that is.