The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
Genocide enthusiasts reveling in the violence they see. People up were being brutalized, and losing eyes to bullets in the face, and they’re singing to celebrate it.
And I feel cowardly for being this damn old and not sticking to this simple principle, but not a single fucking vote for anyone supporting/funding ethnic cleansing. Go eat shit.
Man, how crappy do you have to be to cheer and dance and celebrate and sing about your country bombing children.
0
HonkHonk is this poster.Registered User, __BANNED USERSregular
On the news saw Blinken saying both sides needs to stop the violence, then cut to a Palestinian with a literal slingshot staring down 30 IDF soldiers with machine guns.
It really is disgusting to see apartheid and genocide happen and for the world powers to say "yeah okay" not even cursory denouncement without action just yep this racial and religious genocide is acceptable
Israel has nukes and is a major US ally. The Palestinians will never be a consideration to a D or R US government because they have no power to offer. The US needs to stop electing imperialists that dont give a shit about civilians. Biden just massively increased the bombing campaign in Afghanistan, I dont know why anyone would think he'd have a problem with Israel bombing Palestinians. Fuck Joe Biden and his warmongering
Is the bolded true? I've been following Afghanistan news pretty closely lately and haven't seen that. It would be an odd move given the withdrawal.
Israel has nukes and is a major US ally. The Palestinians will never be a consideration to a D or R US government because they have no power to offer. The US needs to stop electing imperialists that dont give a shit about civilians. Biden just massively increased the bombing campaign in Afghanistan, I dont know why anyone would think he'd have a problem with Israel bombing Palestinians. Fuck Joe Biden and his warmongering
Israel is not and has never been a US ally in any way whatsoever. They are motivated exclusively by their own self interests. The Israeli government has never pretended otherwise.
America gives Israel $billions of aid every year. America receives nothing in exchange.
The so-called alliance between America and Israel exists solely due to two factors:
1. A small minority of jewish americans, such as Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson are able to use their considerable money to bribe politicians in the pay-to-win system that is US politics.
2. "Evangelical Christians", which is very rapidly becoming a euphemism for "neo-nazi White supremacists" see Israel as some sort of modern day crusader state and want to use Israel as a tool which they can use to conquer Jerusalem for "Judeo-Christians" and wipe out the inconvenient majority muslim population.
Israel has nukes and is a major US ally. The Palestinians will never be a consideration to a D or R US government because they have no power to offer. The US needs to stop electing imperialists that dont give a shit about civilians. Biden just massively increased the bombing campaign in Afghanistan, I dont know why anyone would think he'd have a problem with Israel bombing Palestinians. Fuck Joe Biden and his warmongering
Is the bolded true? I've been following Afghanistan news pretty closely lately and haven't seen that. It would be an odd move given the withdrawal.
Withdrawal isn't till the fall. And it's a good guess that a part of that is because it lets the US stick around for another "fighting season" (which would be happening now) and help prop up the government. So the US still fighting the Taliban doesn't seem out of line.
Israel has nukes and is a major US ally. The Palestinians will never be a consideration to a D or R US government because they have no power to offer. The US needs to stop electing imperialists that dont give a shit about civilians. Biden just massively increased the bombing campaign in Afghanistan, I dont know why anyone would think he'd have a problem with Israel bombing Palestinians. Fuck Joe Biden and his warmongering
Israel is not and has never been a US ally in any way whatsoever. They are motivated exclusively by their own self interests. The Israeli government has never pretended otherwise.
America gives Israel $billions of aid every year. America receives nothing in exchange.
The so-called alliance between America and Israel exists solely due to two factors:
1. A small minority of jewish americans, such as Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson are able to use their considerable money to bribe politicians in the pay-to-win system that is US politics.
2. "Evangelical Christians", which is very rapidly becoming a euphemism for "neo-nazi White supremacists" see Israel as some sort of modern day crusader state and want to use Israel as a tool which they can use to conquer Jerusalem for "Judeo-Christians" and wipe out the inconvenient majority muslim population.
This misses the larger cultural forces at work. The US has created a culture where support for Israel is both the default and an enforced political orthodoxy. And it's not just top down or only from one particular voting block. It's pervasive. And it's only weakening a bit very recently. Like in the last decade or so.
Israel, of course, has always taken advantage of this because, I mean, who wouldn't?
Biden just massively increased the bombing campaign in Afghanistan
Do you have a source for this?
I just did some cursory Google'ing and I'm not seeing anything resembling this statement. Maybe that's a failure in my Google-fu, so I figured I'd ask.
Edit: I see that this was addressed like 2 posts down, nvm.
Forar on
First they came for the Muslims, and we said NOT TODAY, MOTHERFUCKER!
Israel has nukes and is a major US ally. The Palestinians will never be a consideration to a D or R US government because they have no power to offer. The US needs to stop electing imperialists that dont give a shit about civilians. Biden just massively increased the bombing campaign in Afghanistan, I dont know why anyone would think he'd have a problem with Israel bombing Palestinians. Fuck Joe Biden and his warmongering
Is the bolded true? I've been following Afghanistan news pretty closely lately and haven't seen that. It would be an odd move given the withdrawal.
Withdrawal isn't till the fall. And it's a good guess that a part of that is because it lets the US stick around for another "fighting season" (which would be happening now) and help prop up the government. So the US still fighting the Taliban doesn't seem out of line.
Biden is essentially doing Nixon's strategy of massively increasing the bombing campaign by sending more warplanes while doing so as under the radar from the press and public as possible, to try and achieve an 'honorable withdrawal'. What it really means is massive increases in death, civilian suffering, and an escalation of the war.
People saying the US needs to stick around for the fighting season really need to step back for a minute and consider how fucking shitty that stance is
Israel has nukes and is a major US ally. The Palestinians will never be a consideration to a D or R US government because they have no power to offer. The US needs to stop electing imperialists that dont give a shit about civilians. Biden just massively increased the bombing campaign in Afghanistan, I dont know why anyone would think he'd have a problem with Israel bombing Palestinians. Fuck Joe Biden and his warmongering
Is the bolded true? I've been following Afghanistan news pretty closely lately and haven't seen that. It would be an odd move given the withdrawal.
Withdrawal isn't till the fall. And it's a good guess that a part of that is because it lets the US stick around for another "fighting season" (which would be happening now) and help prop up the government. So the US still fighting the Taliban doesn't seem out of line.
Biden is essentially doing Nixon's strategy of massively increasing the bombing campaign by sending more warplanes while doing so as under the radar from the press and public as possible, to try and achieve an 'honorable withdrawal'. What it really means is massive increases in death, civilian suffering, and an escalation of the war.
People saying the US needs to stick around for the fighting season really need to step back for a minute and consider how fucking shitty that stance is
Taking the position that we’ve lost, are in over our heads, and have trouble telling friends from foes, so we need to blow up as many people as possible on the way out, is probably going to stir some resentment.
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that’s what is happening based solely on the evidence presented. Absolutely wouldn’t be a shock, but one statement from one anonymous (but then named in the article?) official isn’t sufficient.
‘Sticking around for the fighting season’ is a pretty bad reason to stay. ‘Sticking around to provide support during the period when the Afghan government would be under the most military pressure, hopefully allowing for at least a brief period for negotiations before fighting starts again in earnest’ sounds a little better, but I’m hesitant to believe it’ll make a meaningful difference. It’s not like our results have been inconsistent in this arena.
OneAngryPossum on
+3
daveNYCWhy universe hate Waspinator?Registered Userregular
Taking the position that we’ve lost, are in over our heads, and have trouble telling friends from foes, so we need to blow up as many people as possible on the way out, is probably going to stir some resentment.
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that’s what is happening based solely on the evidence presented. Absolutely wouldn’t be a shock, but one statement from one anonymous (but then named in the article?) official isn’t sufficient.
‘Sticking around for the fighting season’ is a pretty bad reason to stay. ‘Sticking around to provide support during the period when the Afghan government would be under the most military pressure, hopefully allowing for at least a brief period for negotiations before fighting starts again in earnest’ sounds a little better, but I’m hesitant to believe it’ll make a meaningful difference. It’s not like our results have been inconsistent in this arena.
There won't be negotiations, at least not ones that will work out well for the central government. They're barely holding it together even with American support, once we're gone the only thing keeping them in place will be infighting on the other side.
Now if we were sticking around in order to organize and evacuate all the people who've worked for us there, along with anyone else who doesn't want to hang around and find out what the Taliban 2.0 government will be like, then I'd be OK with that.
Shut up, Mr. Burton! You were not brought upon this world to get it!
After over a decade of fighting this final "Fighting season"(ghoulish) will bring the Taliban to heel.
I don't think that's the point of what is going on. It's just going to prop the government up for another spring so it all doesn't immediately collapse the second the US pulls out.
Genocide enthusiasts reveling in the violence they see. People up were being brutalized, and losing eyes to bullets in the face, and they’re singing to celebrate it.
And I feel cowardly for being this damn old and not sticking to this simple principle, but not a single fucking vote for anyone supporting/funding ethnic cleansing. Go eat shit.
Aren't they actually celebrating Jerusalem Day (the liberation of Jerusalem during the Six Day War)?
Looking around it appears they're chanting/singing passages from the Book of Judges, specifically the parts about Samson and the Philistines
Taking the position that we’ve lost, are in over our heads, and have trouble telling friends from foes, so we need to blow up as many people as possible on the way out, is probably going to stir some resentment.
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that’s what is happening based solely on the evidence presented. Absolutely wouldn’t be a shock, but one statement from one anonymous (but then named in the article?) official isn’t sufficient.
‘Sticking around for the fighting season’ is a pretty bad reason to stay. ‘Sticking around to provide support during the period when the Afghan government would be under the most military pressure, hopefully allowing for at least a brief period for negotiations before fighting starts again in earnest’ sounds a little better, but I’m hesitant to believe it’ll make a meaningful difference. It’s not like our results have been inconsistent in this arena.
Even from the reports Zavian is linking, it's not "let's just bomb the fuck out of everything for whatever reason". It's "the US armed forced are supporting Afghanistan's security forces with bombing". Which seems to be the same thing they've been doing before.
I'm not yet convinced that what that article describes is evidence of an overall escalation in bombing. The US was trying to prevent the fall of Helmand Province's capital to a large Taliban assault. We've seen the same thing in previous instances of the Taliban coming close to conquering a city, as in Kunduz or Ghazni. Articles I've read quoting ANSF commanders have given me the impression that they are having an increasingly difficult time getting support from US air power.
It's possible that the US will try to compensate for the Afghan government's worsening position with an escalation in bombing. I hope that is not the case, as it would be a needlessly violent exercise in futility. It's also possible that the Biden administration wants to avoid embarrassing headlines like "Lashkar Gah falls to the Taliban" while the US in the midst of its gradual withdrawal. This would essentially consist of bombing the country for domestic political reasons and would also be worthy of condemnation. But it's also possible that this was just the US military leadership in Afghanistan doing what it usually does, and using its air power to stop the Taliban from taking an important provincial capital. Unless future reports describe a continued increase in bombing, I think the latter is the safer assumption. This isn't really meant to defend US policy toward Afghanistan, which has been terrible in different ways for 40 years straight; just to caution against assuming that Washington has decided on a policy of increased air strikes, since I don't think we have evidence to support that. The secretary of defense's recent comments on the subject also suggest that this is the case, although of course we should not take the statements of US government officials at face value.
On Thursday, Defense Secretary Lloyd J. Austin III suggested that it would be up to Gen. Austin S. Miller, the top American commander in Afghanistan, to decide when to turn off the spigot [of air strikes, gross word choice here NYT].
“In terms of when he does what, there’s a reason he’s a four-star commander,” Mr. Austin said during a news conference.
The article also notes that there is some unfortunate ambiguity as to whether the withdrawal means that the US will no longer bomb the Taliban.
The United States, Mr. Austin said, will continue to support the Afghan military and government with financial aid and what the Pentagon calls “over the horizon” support — a military term for drone strikes and other efforts launched from aircraft carriers or warplanes from distant ground bases.
But the Biden administration has insisted in recent weeks that such strikes will be limited to advancing American counterterrorism aims. While the administration could say that providing air support from a distance for Afghan forces fighting the Taliban furthers those aims, that is not how the administration has presented the Afghanistan withdrawal to the American public.
That said, while I am not a military expert, I think providing effective air support for the ANSF from that far away would be somewhat impractical.
And one last noteworthy quote:
As part of the withdrawal effort, F/A-18 jets, AC-130 gunships, drones, F-16s and hulking B-52 Cold War-era bombers based in Qatar have all been brought to bear to provide cover as U.S. forces shut down the dozen or so remaining bases in the country.
"Provide cover" is NYT's phrasing here, not the US government's. So whether this array of planes will be used to bomb the Taliban during its clashes with the ANSF or whether it is meant to provide a more limited function of responding to any attacks on US forces is unclear.
I've been advocating ending the US war in Afghanistan for like fifteen years. Now that it's happening I can't even be happy about it. I still think it's the right choice, since I believe that the US military's presence in that country essentially condemns it to war without end. Afghanistan has been at war for 40 years, and it's no coincidence that 30 of those years have been under varying degrees of foreign occupation. But the horrible situation isn't going to get any better when US forces leave, at least in the short term, and it may even grow worse in the coming months and years. So despite Washington finally pursuing the policy I've long desired, I feel no relief or joy.
While we're discussing Afghanistan, I think the horrific bombing of the Afghan girls' school, mainly consisting of girls from the Hazara minority, should be mentioned. Over 80 people were killed and far more injured, most of them little girls leaving school. The bombs were apparently timed to go off when girls were leaving school in order to ensure the largest kill count. The government blames the Taliban, who have denied responsibility. Personally I think it fits ISIS's modus operandi more closely, and they've launched numerous similar attacks in recent years, but either group could plausibly be responsible. Acts of indiscriminate mass violence are a regular occurrence in Afghanistan, but this one managed to really shock and horrify me nonetheless.
We could definitely keep up a "the Taliban can rule Afganistan, but they'll have to do their governing from undisclosed caves" policy as long as we want.
I've been advocating ending the US war in Afghanistan for like fifteen years. Now that it's happening I can't even be happy about it. I still think it's the right choice, since I believe that the US military's presence in that country essentially condemns it to war without end. Afghanistan has been at war for 40 years, and it's no coincidence that 30 of those years have been under varying degrees of foreign occupation. But the horrible situation isn't going to get any better when US forces leave, at least in the short term, and it may even grow worse in the coming months and years. So despite Washington finally pursuing the policy I've long desired, I feel no relief or joy.
It's quite the thing to see the government finally make the announcement after all of these years, I know that there are undeniable terrible aspects to it but overall it's a relief to me. Our tax dollars have been in a constant state of murder for too long, and while I appreciate an inclination to help, it's hard to be happy and proud of who you are when your government does so much killing over such a long time. At some point it's time to stop, and it's hard to know who can really be trusted after things like lies about the WMDs. I believe there is such as a thing as a good fight to be fought sometimes, but it's hard to believe that the government behind the Epstien assassination should be the ones to be trusted to take the helm on this kind of thing, at least until this hopelessly corrupt generation of politicians finally kicks the bucket.
I'd love nothing better than to see my government turn to a more peaceful way of life, naïve as that may sound. I used to be extremely militarily isolationist in all aspects, but I find myself increasingly appreciating the need to not just rip the carpet out from allies all across the world, too; I'm sorry about some of the overly isolationist posts I used to make here and there years back. It's hard not to have strong feelings on this topic and sometimes that combines with toxic sentiment in terrible ways and posts. It mostly came from embarrassment about this constant state of war, as opposed to actual anger at allies.
It's nice to see the government's take on Afghanistan turn more peaceful, it is at the very least a confirmation that someone in DC is listening to our war exhaustion, at least sometimes. There is no joy to be had in being "the super murder-y people."
Taking the position that we’ve lost, are in over our heads, and have trouble telling friends from foes, so we need to blow up as many people as possible on the way out, is probably going to stir some resentment.
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that’s what is happening based solely on the evidence presented. Absolutely wouldn’t be a shock, but one statement from one anonymous (but then named in the article?) official isn’t sufficient.
‘Sticking around for the fighting season’ is a pretty bad reason to stay. ‘Sticking around to provide support during the period when the Afghan government would be under the most military pressure, hopefully allowing for at least a brief period for negotiations before fighting starts again in earnest’ sounds a little better, but I’m hesitant to believe it’ll make a meaningful difference. It’s not like our results have been inconsistent in this arena.
Even from the reports Zavian is linking, it's not "let's just bomb the fuck out of everything for whatever reason". It's "the US armed forced are supporting Afghanistan's security forces with bombing". Which seems to be the same thing they've been doing before.
"The same thing they've been doing before" is I believe the root of the problem
Taking the position that we’ve lost, are in over our heads, and have trouble telling friends from foes, so we need to blow up as many people as possible on the way out, is probably going to stir some resentment.
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that’s what is happening based solely on the evidence presented. Absolutely wouldn’t be a shock, but one statement from one anonymous (but then named in the article?) official isn’t sufficient.
‘Sticking around for the fighting season’ is a pretty bad reason to stay. ‘Sticking around to provide support during the period when the Afghan government would be under the most military pressure, hopefully allowing for at least a brief period for negotiations before fighting starts again in earnest’ sounds a little better, but I’m hesitant to believe it’ll make a meaningful difference. It’s not like our results have been inconsistent in this arena.
Even from the reports Zavian is linking, it's not "let's just bomb the fuck out of everything for whatever reason". It's "the US armed forced are supporting Afghanistan's security forces with bombing". Which seems to be the same thing they've been doing before.
"The same thing they've been doing before" is I believe the root of the problem
No the root of the problem is much deeper and you could argue goes back generations. Different things have been tried and havent worked.
If not to or beyond the modern era, but Afganistan has been a hot mess since well before I was born and as much as I like to think it, I'm not young.
Bombing is rarely the right situation, but if you accept there are some good and some bad guys (and if you don't accept ISIS / Taliban as bad...dunno what to say then) it comes down to mitigation strategies.
Probably the best bet would be to hope that Afghanistan does a Vietnam and manages to rebuild itself on it's own into some kind of a stable place in spite of all indications.
Ultimately though if a convoy of openly ISIS / Taliban militants want to join up to attack the government of Afghanistan, that is much different than dropping a hellfire on the family of some guy whose sim card once belonged to a random Taliban courier.
Taking the position that we’ve lost, are in over our heads, and have trouble telling friends from foes, so we need to blow up as many people as possible on the way out, is probably going to stir some resentment.
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that’s what is happening based solely on the evidence presented. Absolutely wouldn’t be a shock, but one statement from one anonymous (but then named in the article?) official isn’t sufficient.
‘Sticking around for the fighting season’ is a pretty bad reason to stay. ‘Sticking around to provide support during the period when the Afghan government would be under the most military pressure, hopefully allowing for at least a brief period for negotiations before fighting starts again in earnest’ sounds a little better, but I’m hesitant to believe it’ll make a meaningful difference. It’s not like our results have been inconsistent in this arena.
Even from the reports Zavian is linking, it's not "let's just bomb the fuck out of everything for whatever reason". It's "the US armed forced are supporting Afghanistan's security forces with bombing". Which seems to be the same thing they've been doing before.
"The same thing they've been doing before" is I believe the root of the problem
That's not what the comment I was responding to was talking about.
Well the Israel-Palestine developments seem like they could easily sweep out of control. Mass activity/conflict across numerous cities all at once signals a grassroots boiling point
Eddy on
"and the morning stars I have seen
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin
Posts
Man, how crappy do you have to be to cheer and dance and celebrate and sing about your country bombing children.
America gives Israel $billions of aid every year. America receives nothing in exchange.
The so-called alliance between America and Israel exists solely due to two factors:
1. A small minority of jewish americans, such as Haim Saban and Sheldon Adelson are able to use their considerable money to bribe politicians in the pay-to-win system that is US politics.
2. "Evangelical Christians", which is very rapidly becoming a euphemism for "neo-nazi White supremacists" see Israel as some sort of modern day crusader state and want to use Israel as a tool which they can use to conquer Jerusalem for "Judeo-Christians" and wipe out the inconvenient majority muslim population.
Withdrawal isn't till the fall. And it's a good guess that a part of that is because it lets the US stick around for another "fighting season" (which would be happening now) and help prop up the government. So the US still fighting the Taliban doesn't seem out of line.
Has the Israeli government ever provided the US with assistance in any matter which did not directly benefit Israel?
This misses the larger cultural forces at work. The US has created a culture where support for Israel is both the default and an enforced political orthodoxy. And it's not just top down or only from one particular voting block. It's pervasive. And it's only weakening a bit very recently. Like in the last decade or so.
Israel, of course, has always taken advantage of this because, I mean, who wouldn't?
Do you have a source for this?
I just did some cursory Google'ing and I'm not seeing anything resembling this statement. Maybe that's a failure in my Google-fu, so I figured I'd ask.
Edit: I see that this was addressed like 2 posts down, nvm.
What's your problem with that stance exactly? Like, I'm not clear why this would be any different from any other part of the war.
I rhink he doesnt like bombing Afghanistan Shryke
That said, I’m not entirely convinced that’s what is happening based solely on the evidence presented. Absolutely wouldn’t be a shock, but one statement from one anonymous (but then named in the article?) official isn’t sufficient.
‘Sticking around for the fighting season’ is a pretty bad reason to stay. ‘Sticking around to provide support during the period when the Afghan government would be under the most military pressure, hopefully allowing for at least a brief period for negotiations before fighting starts again in earnest’ sounds a little better, but I’m hesitant to believe it’ll make a meaningful difference. It’s not like our results have been inconsistent in this arena.
There won't be negotiations, at least not ones that will work out well for the central government. They're barely holding it together even with American support, once we're gone the only thing keeping them in place will be infighting on the other side.
Now if we were sticking around in order to organize and evacuate all the people who've worked for us there, along with anyone else who doesn't want to hang around and find out what the Taliban 2.0 government will be like, then I'd be OK with that.
I don't think that's the point of what is going on. It's just going to prop the government up for another spring so it all doesn't immediately collapse the second the US pulls out.
Looking around it appears they're chanting/singing passages from the Book of Judges, specifically the parts about Samson and the Philistines
Even from the reports Zavian is linking, it's not "let's just bomb the fuck out of everything for whatever reason". It's "the US armed forced are supporting Afghanistan's security forces with bombing". Which seems to be the same thing they've been doing before.
It's possible that the US will try to compensate for the Afghan government's worsening position with an escalation in bombing. I hope that is not the case, as it would be a needlessly violent exercise in futility. It's also possible that the Biden administration wants to avoid embarrassing headlines like "Lashkar Gah falls to the Taliban" while the US in the midst of its gradual withdrawal. This would essentially consist of bombing the country for domestic political reasons and would also be worthy of condemnation. But it's also possible that this was just the US military leadership in Afghanistan doing what it usually does, and using its air power to stop the Taliban from taking an important provincial capital. Unless future reports describe a continued increase in bombing, I think the latter is the safer assumption. This isn't really meant to defend US policy toward Afghanistan, which has been terrible in different ways for 40 years straight; just to caution against assuming that Washington has decided on a policy of increased air strikes, since I don't think we have evidence to support that. The secretary of defense's recent comments on the subject also suggest that this is the case, although of course we should not take the statements of US government officials at face value.
The article also notes that there is some unfortunate ambiguity as to whether the withdrawal means that the US will no longer bomb the Taliban.
That said, while I am not a military expert, I think providing effective air support for the ANSF from that far away would be somewhat impractical.
And one last noteworthy quote:
"Provide cover" is NYT's phrasing here, not the US government's. So whether this array of planes will be used to bomb the Taliban during its clashes with the ANSF or whether it is meant to provide a more limited function of responding to any attacks on US forces is unclear.
I've been advocating ending the US war in Afghanistan for like fifteen years. Now that it's happening I can't even be happy about it. I still think it's the right choice, since I believe that the US military's presence in that country essentially condemns it to war without end. Afghanistan has been at war for 40 years, and it's no coincidence that 30 of those years have been under varying degrees of foreign occupation. But the horrible situation isn't going to get any better when US forces leave, at least in the short term, and it may even grow worse in the coming months and years. So despite Washington finally pursuing the policy I've long desired, I feel no relief or joy.
While we're discussing Afghanistan, I think the horrific bombing of the Afghan girls' school, mainly consisting of girls from the Hazara minority, should be mentioned. Over 80 people were killed and far more injured, most of them little girls leaving school. The bombs were apparently timed to go off when girls were leaving school in order to ensure the largest kill count. The government blames the Taliban, who have denied responsibility. Personally I think it fits ISIS's modus operandi more closely, and they've launched numerous similar attacks in recent years, but either group could plausibly be responsible. Acts of indiscriminate mass violence are a regular occurrence in Afghanistan, but this one managed to really shock and horrify me nonetheless.
edit - realized I didn't link the article I was pulling quotes from:
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/06/us/politics/afghanistan-withdrawal-biden-milley-austin.html
Simultaneously both true, and also the history of Afghanistan for the past 42 years.
I'd love nothing better than to see my government turn to a more peaceful way of life, naïve as that may sound. I used to be extremely militarily isolationist in all aspects, but I find myself increasingly appreciating the need to not just rip the carpet out from allies all across the world, too; I'm sorry about some of the overly isolationist posts I used to make here and there years back. It's hard not to have strong feelings on this topic and sometimes that combines with toxic sentiment in terrible ways and posts. It mostly came from embarrassment about this constant state of war, as opposed to actual anger at allies.
It's nice to see the government's take on Afghanistan turn more peaceful, it is at the very least a confirmation that someone in DC is listening to our war exhaustion, at least sometimes. There is no joy to be had in being "the super murder-y people."
"The same thing they've been doing before" is I believe the root of the problem
No the root of the problem is much deeper and you could argue goes back generations. Different things have been tried and havent worked.
If not to or beyond the modern era, but Afganistan has been a hot mess since well before I was born and as much as I like to think it, I'm not young.
Bombing is rarely the right situation, but if you accept there are some good and some bad guys (and if you don't accept ISIS / Taliban as bad...dunno what to say then) it comes down to mitigation strategies.
Probably the best bet would be to hope that Afghanistan does a Vietnam and manages to rebuild itself on it's own into some kind of a stable place in spite of all indications.
Ultimately though if a convoy of openly ISIS / Taliban militants want to join up to attack the government of Afghanistan, that is much different than dropping a hellfire on the family of some guy whose sim card once belonged to a random Taliban courier.
That's not what the comment I was responding to was talking about.
A violent mob walking through the neighborhood of the oppressed group, breaking glass and assaulting who they can get their hands on.
I don’t have to desire to watch them all or even most of them, but there’s been a ton of these videos on tv whenever I bothered to watch today.
:bigfrown:
and the gengars who are guiding me" -- W.S. Merwin