Jump to content

Politics


Christmas Tree
 Share

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, spongebob toonpants said:

 

This article doesn't say much though. The solitary point it makes in defence of withdrawing is that the cost of lives in maintaining the status quo remains significant. And that's fair enough but there's not enough detail given either in this article or in the one it links to, to actually be able to firm up that judgement.

 

The rest of the article is attacking the press - and I'm normally right on board with that, but I'm afraid that Biden having been elected by 83m Americans and being supported by 70% of his country doesn't actually make him right, despite what the article appears to be claiming. It just makes his decision popular. It further claims that we shouldn't trust policy experts and military officials over a civilian generalist, which I find bizarre.

 

I went into that one with an open mind but it's usual guardian style "look at us giving the floor to both sides of this without actually putting a credible argument forward" stuff. You made a better case for this the other day than this article does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/25/blame-afghanistan-war-media-intervention?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
 

there’s no mention of 9/11 in this piece which appears to me to be Monbiot just screeching “LOOK AT ME, I WAS RIGHT AND THE REST OF YOU ARE WANKERS!!” 
 

I tweeted him these precise words and he promptly blocked me :lol:

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/25/blame-afghanistan-war-media-intervention?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
 

there’s no mention of 9/11 in this piece which appears to me to be Monbiot just screeching “LOOK AT ME, I WAS RIGHT AND THE REST OF YOU ARE WANKERS!!” 
 

I tweeted him these precise words and he promptly blocked me :lol:

 

Is there anyone left on twitter who hasn't blocked you yet?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, PaddockLad said:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/aug/25/blame-afghanistan-war-media-intervention?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
 

there’s no mention of 9/11 in this piece which appears to me to be Monbiot just screeching “LOOK AT ME, I WAS RIGHT AND THE REST OF YOU ARE WANKERS!!” 
 

I tweeted him these precise words and he promptly blocked me :lol:

 

How many Afghanis were involved in 9/11?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And what did Iraq have to do with it again? The whole thing was ridiculous, just posturing for the US domestic market. Created ISIS and probably led to thousands of deaths on European soil as a result, America itself being relatively well insulated. Maybe its best the US do give up on this war malarkey, they're not much good at it. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody mentioned Iraq but yeah that was bollocks. Afghanistan wasn’t…..but mission creep, the needs of industrial/military complex, failure to truly understand the tribal nature of the country and how democracy is virtually impossible in such a society, the duality of Pakistan and the abysmally chaotic exit all added to the the utter futility of the 20 year campaign. Going in was in 2001 was required, appropriate and justified though. Pity they didn’t find Bin Laden at that point.  Things could’ve been very different if they had…

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

And invading Afghanistan stopped Al Qaeda did it?


Largely yes. Isis was something different, it was largely Saddam’s B’ath party Generals and militant Sunni militias who’d all been banged up together by the US..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, PaddockLad said:


Largely yes. Isis was something different, it was largely Saddam’s B’ath party Generals and militant Sunni militias who’d all been banged up together by the US..

Not even close to being right it’s still out there waiting, rubbing it’s hands every time America invades somewhere. Saudi Arabia provided most of the 9/11 bombers and 90% of its funding. Afghanistan was seen as an easy target completely wrongly as it turned out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

Not even close to being right it’s still out there waiting, rubbing it’s hands every time America invades somewhere. Saudi Arabia provided most of the 9/11 bombers and 90% of its funding. Afghanistan was seen as an easy target completely wrongly as it turned out.

 

I'm aware of where the 9/11 bombers & bin laden were from, I'm also aware of how Saudi Wahabbism informed their beliefs.  Jihadists still exist under different or no names. Al Qaeda as a functioning group don't. With hindsight it wasn't worth the 20 year occupation but I'm unsure what other choice the US had in 2001 though. If you're suggesting the US should've targeted  the Saudi state then I expect your carer will be in soon...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2001 the Taliban had already made their name being islamist extremists when they destroyed the statues of Barmyan. They were also known to harbour and fund terrorists, including bin Laden and al Qaida, even before 9/11.

The multinational attempt to topple the Taliban and to get hold of bin Laden and al Qaida was just a logical consequence of those terrorist attacks and totally justified in comparison to other actions in the aftermath of 9/11.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Isegrim said:

In 2001 the Taliban had already made their name being islamist extremists when they destroyed the statues of Barmyan. They were also known to harbour and fund terrorists, including bin Laden and al Qaida, even before 9/11.

The multinational attempt to topple the Taliban and to get hold of bin Laden and al Qaida was just a logical consequence of those terrorist attacks and totally justified in comparison to other actions in the aftermath of 9/11.

The Taliban really made their name during the Afghan civil ware when it was supported with AMerican money to impose control over the region and allow America access to the oil in the Caspian sea via a pipeline through Afghanistan with security for the area guaranteed by the Taliban.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

33 minutes ago, Kevin Carr's Gloves said:

The Taliban really made their name during the Afghan civil ware when it was supported with AMerican money to impose control over the region and allow America access to the oil in the Caspian sea via a pipeline through Afghanistan with security for the area guaranteed by the Taliban.

Sure, but in 2001 after 9/11 it was the predominant international opinion that a military intervention was unavoidable. It was a huge discussion here as even a lit of former pacifists like members if the Green Party were in support of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.