What I am saying is this entire conflict was started in order to get OBL in the first place.
US war on terror has killed 500,000 people in Pakistan, Afghanistan and Iraq
- Thread starter MJJ
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik (@Rood) and Jamie (@Vault Dweller) are here to talk about United's dreadful home defeat at the hands of Big Ange's Tottenham Hotspur. Should this have been the end of Ten Hag? How long does he actually have left? And does Nik finally want ETH out?!
This thread confuses me, have we killed too many or not enough?
You have killed enormous amount of civilians along and the enemy is still there and fighting. Which means it has been for nothing. Clear now ?
The primary thrust of the Brown University paper was that the US (and its allies) shouldn't be starting proxy wars, funding insurgents and taking it upon themselves to bestow their brand of democracy on the world, hence the name The Costs of War Project...not just in terms of casualties but ravaging entire regions and economies and creating migrants (who're then targeted with Far Right propaganda as the new scourge threatening civilization). That overarching argument will be deflected by whataboutism and bickering over stats, or arguing that there was no other choice but to murder at an alarming rate. Same things happens over and over again...the Middle East, South and central America with soft power, Africa, parts of the subcontinent, Vietnam where civilian gooks were fecked over:
Colonialism didn't disappear overnight...ultimately, the lives of lesser savages don't matter — imagine the outrage if hundreds of thousands of civilians were massacred in the West by foreign forces in an effort to exterminate far right extremist groups.
Colonialism didn't disappear overnight...ultimately, the lives of lesser savages don't matter — imagine the outrage if hundreds of thousands of civilians were massacred in the West by foreign forces in an effort to exterminate far right extremist groups.
...and Al Qaeda, and the Taliban.
What are we talking about here? I thought this was about the US indiscriminately killing ~500k people in the war on terror.
What’s the topic? Foreign policy, wars that begin 40 years ago for completely different reasons?
Goalposts seem to be moving.
The Taliban became a target once they refused to hand OBL. Otherwise the US wouldn't have cared about them.
That is normally what happens when you bring up scenarios in any discussion. If you want to talk about the origin of Taliban, that blame lies on the US or do you want the rest of us to ignore it? The current middle east fiasco? Again, US. The genocide in Yemen? The saudis are doing it using American weapons but you don't care about that, do you.
They also refused to shut down terrorist bases in their area of control and to hand over AQ terrorists other than OBL.
And Pakistan...
You are correct there, our leaders should not have taken US money and trained the taliban on their behalf. Could have avoided a lot of bloodshed if we had told you guys to feck off back then but I am sure you would have found some other country willing to act as proxies.
Noone is saying they are good guys. But the US set off to defeat them and failed. They still control vast parts of the country . And it was obvious from the start, since the Soviets tried to do something similar 20 years before.
Since you will inevitably will mention 'but Al Qaeda' - yes, they were defeated. ISIS took its place .Don't you see how your constant meddling in the ME is creating even more problems for you and the rest of the world?
There has not been another terror attack on our soil anywhere close to the magnitude of 9/11. For nothing?
That's because you upped your surveillance game and started taking some intelligence seriously. Not because you killed villagers in Afghanistan.
Having read through bpet's posts there isnt much point in engaging him. He has some interesting views on people of colour.
Defending Trump, apparently the grabbing women by the pussy comment is just stupid.
Thanks for the heads up.
You should keep reading - there’s some interesting stuff.
When this all started, they controlled 90% of the country. That was reduced significantly before the Coalition reduced combat forces and handed the war over to the Afghan Army. Since then, the Taliban has had a resurgence, but still doesn’t control near what it used to.
I’d argue that had Bush not diverted resources to Iraq, we would have completely pushed the Taliban out of Afghanistan.
I don’t support American foreign policy during the Cold War, which created most of these problems today. But I do support going into Afghanistan. It isn’t an all or nothing thing.
Are we both talking about the 1990s?
Depends, are we talking about the origin of Taliban or trying to deflect blame? The US created taliban as a short-term solution to defeat the Russians and as all great US plans did not think what would happen with a group of religiously armed fanatics who viewed the west as enemies.
I’m not deflecting blame for anything. I said AND Pakistan. That means I acknowledge the role the US played in the 1970s-1980s.
Look at my response to Firestarter and you’ll see that I don’t support US foreign policy in the Cold War. Getting involved in the Soviet Afghan War was about as useful as getting involved in the French Indochina War, with even worse future ramifications.
That said, I also don’t support the Pakistani ISI helping the Taliban take control over Afghanistan in the 1990s.
Yeah I am equally against the rise of Mullahs and weaponising Islam that our leaders have done in the past, and continue to do so to some extent today. Nothing good comes from raising an army of fanatics who think killing innocents and dying with grant them someplace in paradise.
But I think that was done in part because they believe that they will be able to control Afghanistan through the taliban and to stabilize the region. After Russia was defeated, millions of Afghan refugees entered Pakistan with the west providing very little financial aid. Those people are still living in our country and I think there was some talk of granting them nationality.
Well then. We agree on something.
You’ll find this paper interesting.
https://dataspace.princeton.edu/jspui/bitstream/88435/dsp01q811kn387/1/WhitePaper_No.4(Safi).pdf
Maybe the US could have considered not funding, arming, and joining the Contras in Nicaragua. Then Mexico wouldn't need to drop so many bombs on Dallas, Tuscon and Shreveport.
Iraq never attacked or planned to attack US in their sole.
It was groups from Afghanistan and Saudi Arabia. You destroyed the first country, and sold weapons in value of hundreds of billions to the second one, whom in turn are causing genocide in Yemen with those same weapons.
Thats because I dont defend the actions and consequences of my country blindly.
Let me read it and get back to you.
China sold $6bn of arms to Pakistan between 2008-2017.
Russia sold $1.8bn of arms to India in 2017 alone.
Russia sold $1.8bn of arms to India in 2017 alone.
If there was a terrorist on US soil, they would never use a drone to kill him, due to the risk of civilian casualties. They don't care about civilians lives abroad, Americans are murderous hypocrites
A point you can make about all the 'Great Powers'. If we can still use that term.
We agree on that too
Didn’t we drone strike a US citizen?
At least seven by 2015. I remember there being a lot of debate on the legality of this at the time - do you know if any cases were heard on it in the US courts?
Yeah, a child in Yemen under Nobel Peace Prize Winner Barack Obama. And then Obama's press secretary said "he should have had a more responsible father".
He is saying the US will not use drone stirkes within its territory.
Or the fact that given that’s in on our own soil, we would have immediate ground options that could solve the problem. Hell, our own citizens killed themselves to avoid further loss of life on of the 9/11 planes.
This is a good listen from 2 US ex-soldiers, about the ar in Afghanistan, its current deadly meander with no purpose, and the difference between al-Qaeda and the Taliban at the time of 9/11.
Three, but not in the US of course.
Not sure if serious. I hope to God this is parody. Funding the Taliban...I mean where to beg...
I take it you don't know anyone who has been on the ground in Afghanistan then. There were an awful lot of Pakistanis fighting with the Taliban when the British Army was doing ground operations.