What is the primary--in my view, the only--objective of the U.S. Government at this moment?
It is, or should be, the evacuation of all Americans and their dependents now in South Vietnam, mostly in Saigon. The exact number is not known, but it totals several thousand.
But the bill complicates the matter of the evacuation; first, because it would also authorize the evacuation of "endangered foreign nationals" unspecified as to numbers and identity.
I do not believe the UNited States has an obligation, moral or otherwise, to evacuate foreign nationals--other than perhaps an estimated 1800 diplomatic personnel assigned to foreign embassies in Saiyan.
The United States has no obligation to evacuate 1, or 100,001, South Vietnamese.
A decade ago, Biden suggested that a withdrawal from Afghanistan that left allies feeling betrayed was a reasonable outcome, drawing a comparison to the end of Vietnam.
In a private conversation with Richard Holbrooke, who was President Barack Obama’s special envoy to Afghanistan and Pakistan, Biden argued that the United States does not have an obligation to Afghans who trusted the United States, according to “Our Man,” a biography of Holbrooke by George Packer.
“We don’t have to worry about that,” Biden told Holbrooke, according to the book. “We did it in Vietnam. Nixon and Kissinger got away with it,” he said, referring to President Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger, who was secretary of state to Nixon and Ford.
In the same conversation, Biden also reportedly pushed back on the argument that America had a moral obligation to women in Afghanistan.
“I am not sending my boy back there to risk his life on behalf of women’s rights!” Biden said, according the book’s account. “It just won’t work — that’s not what they’re there for.”
I also direct your attention to the refugees attempting to claim asylum at the border from decades of the US fuckery.
The idea of "A moral obligation to the women of Afghanistan" is just the White Mans Burden if Kipling had taken Women's Studies. And exactly the kind of never ending scope creep and after the fact justification that would keep us involved forever, in potentially dozens of conflicts.
So what's the takeaway here? That women gaining greater rights was bad because it was only tenable under US occupation? I guess it's true you can't be sad about losing rights if you never had them in the first place.
When stuff like this gets discussed in foreign policy, it's not like we talk about it here as an action neutral-ish lament. It's made as an argument(normally) for staying, because we have an obligation to women, an ethnic minority, veterans, etc to continue until some vague outcome is achieved.
Eg: We can't leave, because we need to honor their sacrifices(read wage this war indefinitely).
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place, an organization well known for their violence towards women, that has now retaken power will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss because I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
I'm not saying they will accept it. I'm saying that women having greater rights for 20 years (and many of them never knowing a time before women had those rights) only for it to be taken away will generate more resistance, and that literacy is a tool of change that prior to US occupation most of the people of Afghanistan (women especially) did not have (most still don't have it, but a little over 40% is better than 8%).
Even if it was hypothetically the right thing for the U.S. to leave now, changes happened during the past 20 years that grant a possibility for future positive change when previously there was none.
Hexmage-PA on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place, an organization well known for their violence towards women, that has now retaken power will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss because I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
I'm not saying they will accept it. I'm saying that having something for 20 years only for it to be taken away will generate more resistance, and that literacy is a tool of change that prior to US occupation most of the people of Afghanistan (women especially) did not have (most still don't have it, but a little over 40% is better than 8%).
And resistance will meet bullets.
I’m not saying it’s hopeless, but I am saying a lot of people may die due to our influence.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place, an organization well known for their violence towards women, that has now retaken power will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss because I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
I'm not saying they will accept it. I'm saying that having something for 20 years only for it to be taken away will generate more resistance, and that literacy is a tool of change that prior to US occupation most of the people of Afghanistan (women especially) did not have (most still don't have it, but a little over 40% is better than 8%).
And resistance will meet bullets.
I’m not saying it’s hopeless, but I am saying a lot of people may die due to our influence.
I mean, underline that for everything related to this venture.
We cannot occupy every country that doesn’t share our values and force them upon them.
I think it should be made clear that the values that were forced upon Afghanistan during the time period included women's rights, education, and access to clean drinking water.
It doesn’t matter. We should not be cheering on imperialistic changes that require the threat of a bomb or a gun barrel, because those changes are short lived unless you engage on some heinous colonialism and massacre.
We have more than enough history of this shit falling apart as soon as the occupier leaves or just centuries of torture, killing, and mass human rights violations and war crimes.
So you're trading quick death by air strike for slow death by poverty?
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place, an organization well known for their violence towards women, that has now retaken power will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss because I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
I'm not saying they will accept it. I'm saying that having something for 20 years only for it to be taken away will generate more resistance, and that literacy is a tool of change that prior to US occupation most of the people of Afghanistan (women especially) did not have (most still don't have it, but a little over 40% is better than 8%).
And resistance will meet bullets.
I’m not saying it’s hopeless, but I am saying a lot of people may die due to our influence.
Specific changes brought about due to U.S. influence (education, literacy, and the knowledge of greater freedoms women can have) may also improve people's lives in the long term.
Hexmage-PA on
+2
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
It’s not a contest on who got fucked the most because of this because a whole lot of people got fucked up.
And I know a few of those vets, one checked herself into a hospital and had to have her husband watch the kids.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
We cannot occupy every country that doesn’t share our values and force them upon them.
I think it should be made clear that the values that were forced upon Afghanistan during the time period included women's rights, education, and access to clean drinking water.
It doesn’t matter. We should not be cheering on imperialistic changes that require the threat of a bomb or a gun barrel, because those changes are short lived unless you engage on some heinous colonialism and massacre.
We have more than enough history of this shit falling apart as soon as the occupier leaves or just centuries of torture, killing, and mass human rights violations and war crimes.
So you're trading quick death by air strike for slow death by poverty?
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
With that said, had an increase in literacy, women's rights, clean drinking water, life expectancy, etc. not occurred during the time the U.S. was present then it would have definitely all been for nothing. These factors are often disregarded to make it seem as if the presence of the U.S. was wholly negative and ignore the impact of education and literacy on spreading alternative ideas.
Hexmage-PA on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so. The King James Version of the Bible was created thanks to his influence.
I'm not a Christian myself, but this example serves to show how even a powerful organization of religious zealots can be challenged by the ability of the common people to read and write.
Hexmage-PA on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
We cannot occupy every country that doesn’t share our values and force them upon them.
I think it should be made clear that the values that were forced upon Afghanistan during the time period included women's rights, education, and access to clean drinking water.
It doesn’t matter. We should not be cheering on imperialistic changes that require the threat of a bomb or a gun barrel, because those changes are short lived unless you engage on some heinous colonialism and massacre.
We have more than enough history of this shit falling apart as soon as the occupier leaves or just centuries of torture, killing, and mass human rights violations and war crimes.
So you're trading quick death by air strike for slow death by poverty?
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
Hexmage-PA on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
We cannot occupy every country that doesn’t share our values and force them upon them.
I think it should be made clear that the values that were forced upon Afghanistan during the time period included women's rights, education, and access to clean drinking water.
It doesn’t matter. We should not be cheering on imperialistic changes that require the threat of a bomb or a gun barrel, because those changes are short lived unless you engage on some heinous colonialism and massacre.
We have more than enough history of this shit falling apart as soon as the occupier leaves or just centuries of torture, killing, and mass human rights violations and war crimes.
So you're trading quick death by air strike for slow death by poverty?
No.
I see it otherwise.
Okay
jungleroomx on
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
After what happened to the Kurds I'm not expecting a good ending to this.
+17
Options
ButtersA glass of some milksRegistered Userregular
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
Vets have been telling me "there is no reason for us to be there" for over a decade now. If any demographic learned the sheer pointlessness of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq first, its the vets of those boondoggles.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
No one here is arguing for this.
You're arguing against national sovereignty which is a short pier to be walking down.
Meanwhile, russia isn't planning to even close their embassy, is "in contact with the new authorities" and guard duty around the russian embassy is being done by the taliban..
+8
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
We basically came to the "rescue" of someone in an abusive relationship, told off the abusive spouse, asked that person if they were okay, then shoved them back into the house and left.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
Biden should get credit for being one of the only people in DC to actually fucking learn anything and end this misbegotten nightmare. Which was always going to end like this unless we did some McCain/Graham hardcore permanent imperialism.
Biden should get credit for being one of the only people in DC to actually fucking learn anything and end this misbegotten nightmare. Which was always going to end like this unless we did some McCain/Graham hardcore permanent imperialism.
Yeah, also it gets really annoying that anytime we have a political thread where a politician does learn. People tend to be absolute geese about it and then said people wonder why so many politicians double down on stupid shit. Well when it's damned if you do and damned if you don't, it does make it easier for ego to win out; especially, if that is less likely to result in you getting railroaded out of office than admitting you were wrong.
Some of them don't deserve the credit. In Biden's case, he changed his tune on Afghanistan early on, spent a considerable amount of time publicly pointing out all the ways things were going badly, and by the time he was in the White House as a VP was the few people sounding off against the troop surge. And so far as president, it also means ending the war they all started.
There's the other version of this where the politician learning is them saying "uh, sorry about the dead people or whatever, now that I'm running for a new office and it's the most convenient thing to say." That doesn't mean shit to me.
We basically came to the "rescue" of someone in an abusive relationship, told off the abusive spouse, asked that person if they were okay, then shoved them back into the house and left.
And your alternative is that we should always mind our own business and let abusive relationships play out. At least in that analogy there was a reprieve from the abuse.
Its good Biden is pulling us out. Its inexcusable that theyre doing so with such a poor plan for dealing with Afghanis trying to escape the Taliban.
My guess on the piss poor planning is that Biden, who's been almost entirely focused on his domestic agenda and fighting COVID, delegated it to his generals who then royally dropped the ball.
They didn't drop the ball, they probably actively sabotaged it to make Biden look bad.
Can't forget the real victim on this: Joe Biden.
Come on man, he's the President, even if the brass was both opposed and too incompetent, he simply cannot dodge his responsability.
Plus, without any evidence to suggest the sort of malfeasance that enlightenedbum suggests, it's just a groundless conspiracy theory.
The Pentagon has used retired military brass posing as military analysts on TV in order to advocate for pro-War-on-Terror policies. Just as one of the obvious times they got caught. The tweet thread from a few pages back highlighted stories from the Obama years on how they undermined the White House to push their agenda. The US Military has always been very involved with the direct support for the way on terror against the civilian government.
Trying to influence the public opinion via propaganda statements and rhetoric, or pressuring politicians, isn't the same as intentionally sabotaging an evacuation effort. Not even in the same ballpark.
But I'm not even saying that the latter is impossible. Just that there is no evidence to support the claim, and that saying it "probably" happened is unjustified.
+1
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
We basically came to the "rescue" of someone in an abusive relationship, told off the abusive spouse, asked that person if they were okay, then shoved them back into the house and left.
And your alternative is that we should always mind our own business and let abusive relationships work themselves out.
see what's great about america being the world police is that 40% of the police-
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
I don't think anybody is ignoring them
if you want to argue that the U.S. should indefinitely continue to prop up an at-least-relatively-egalitarian society in afghan cities at the point of the bayonet (or the drone, as the case may be) then fair enough. I don't think it's irrelevant that the U.S.' values are better than our British and Soviet predecessors in-theater, either. But that sort of benevolent colonialism was considered a bridge too far even for the Bush administration, not least because it's really hard to make the case without sounding like Winston Churchill.
it was the smallest on the list but
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
Well I guess it was wrong to let women in Afghanistan have freedoms, then. At least if they've never had them they wouldn't be able to lose them, I guess.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
We basically came to the "rescue" of someone in an abusive relationship, told off the abusive spouse, asked that person if they were okay, then shoved them back into the house and left.
And your alternative is that we should always mind our own business and let abusive relationships play out.
It's more like a group of cops went into a home 2 towns over without a warrant, busted in, killed the family dog and forced the husband to start paying the cops, who now live there, extortion money. Yes the abusive husband stopped beating his wife, but the new situation is not exactly healthy either.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
We basically came to the "rescue" of someone in an abusive relationship, told off the abusive spouse, asked that person if they were okay, then shoved them back into the house and left.
And your alternative is that we should always mind our own business and let abusive relationships play out. At least in that analogy there was a reprieve from the abuse.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
Well I guess it was wrong to let women in Afghanistan have freedoms, then. At least if they've never had them they wouldn't be able to lose them, I guess.
Can you please stop building these strawmen? This is why sarcasm doesn't work very well for discourse in general, much less Interwebs discourse. This is 3 times in one page, c'mon.
Yes, we improved lives for some people, but we still should have gotten the fuck out. The overwhelming consensus in this thread is that we should have gotten the fuck out, but we shouldn't have left everyone who supported us (translators, etc) to die there, and we should have fast-laned refugees the fuck outta there while we still had a military presence.
And yet that consensus has nothing to do with complete interventionism vs. complete isolationism as a whole, and nobody here is arguing for the former nor the latter, unless you'd like to step up to the plate.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
I don't think anybody is ignoring them
if you want to argue that the U.S. should indefinitely continue to prop up an at-least-relatively-egalitarian society in afghan cities at the point of the bayonet (or the drone, as the case may be) then fair enough. I don't think it's irrelevant that the U.S.' values are better than our British and Soviet predecessors in-theater, either. But that sort of benevolent colonialism was considered a bridge too far even for the Bush administration, not least because it's really hard to make the case without sounding like Winston Churchill.
The two major sides I see regarding the current situation are 1) the U.S. is abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban, who will be enforcing their brand of oppression upon the populace and 2) the U.S. should have never been in Afghanistan in the first place and should have let whatever happened play out.
The decision to go to Aghanistan was made 20 years ago, and the lives of many of the people of Afghanistan (especially women) significantly improved as a consequence of the U.S. presence. The best we can hope for now is that the gains in literacy and the 20 years of greater freedoms for women help inspire resistance against the Taliban by the people of Afghanistan.
Personally, I feel it was irresponsible to leave without a means to ensure that the progress the people of Afghanistan had benefited from during the U.S. presence couldn't be easily taken away. This was a betrayal and an abandonment of responsibility.
lol CNN. That being said, this played completely in favor of the Trumpists. "Trump delayed the troop withdrawal to make Biden look bad". Wrong, Democrats, together with Liz Cheney, blocked the withdrawal as much as they could on Congress. Result: A complete own goal in favor of Trump.
If you’re going to tel me the primary reason for women not being educated in the first place (an organization well known for their violence towards women) that has now retaken power and will suddenly accept women who were educated in their absence, then i don’t think there’s anything here to discuss. I feel like this is absurdly optimistic, to put it as nicely as possible.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
I don't think anybody is ignoring them
if you want to argue that the U.S. should indefinitely continue to prop up an at-least-relatively-egalitarian society in afghan cities at the point of the bayonet (or the drone, as the case may be) then fair enough. I don't think it's irrelevant that the U.S.' values are better than our British and Soviet predecessors in-theater, either. But that sort of benevolent colonialism was considered a bridge too far even for the Bush administration, not least because it's really hard to make the case without sounding like Winston Churchill.
The two major sides I see regarding the current situation are 1) the U.S. is abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban, who will be enforcing their brand of oppression upon the populace and 2) the U.S. should have never been in Afghanistan in the first place and should have let whatever happened play out.
The decision to go to Aghanistan in was made 20 years ago, and the lives of many of the people of Afghanistan improved as a consequence of the U.S. presence. The best we can hope for now is that the gains in literacy and the 20 years of greater freedoms for women help inspire resistance against the Taliban by the people of Afghanistan.
Personally, I feel it was irresponsible to leave without a means to ensure that the progress the people of Afghanistan had benefited from during the U.S. presence couldn't be easily taken away.
And how, exactly, were we supposed to do that, when we couldn't in 20 years? As people have pointed out, your argument - no matter how good intentioned it might be - ultimately is an argument for indefinite occupation.
I don’t really know what the US practically could have done for women more than what was done over the long term? Taking and evacuating more refugees would be great but unless you are going to somehow move millions of refugees out some good people were going to get left behind regardless. No excuse for not trying harder, of course, but still…
I mean they could have sent 50,000 American soldiers in to establish a perimeter around Kabul, deposed the existing corrupt and useless Afghan government in favor of direct US territorial rule, and then seized local farms and water supplies expelling local Taliban friendly farmers and resettling with friendly refugees from the rest of the country. That is what would have been done 100 years ago. Would it have worked or made anything better for anyone? Probably not.
Or they could have done another surge and supported a corrupt government (with all its drug kingpins and child rapists) through another cycle of repressing the Taliban only to have them pop up in 5 or 10 years, and repeated the same bloody cycle every few years. Would that help anything over the long run? Probably not either.
Posts
When stuff like this gets discussed in foreign policy, it's not like we talk about it here as an action neutral-ish lament. It's made as an argument(normally) for staying, because we have an obligation to women, an ethnic minority, veterans, etc to continue until some vague outcome is achieved.
Eg: We can't leave, because we need to honor their sacrifices(read wage this war indefinitely).
I'm not saying they will accept it. I'm saying that women having greater rights for 20 years (and many of them never knowing a time before women had those rights) only for it to be taken away will generate more resistance, and that literacy is a tool of change that prior to US occupation most of the people of Afghanistan (women especially) did not have (most still don't have it, but a little over 40% is better than 8%).
Even if it was hypothetically the right thing for the U.S. to leave now, changes happened during the past 20 years that grant a possibility for future positive change when previously there was none.
And resistance will meet bullets.
I’m not saying it’s hopeless, but I am saying a lot of people may die due to our influence.
The alternative so far is the bunch of borderline suicidal posts coming from vets on Twitter about the sheer pointless of it all. The "grim happiness" essay making the rounds.
I mean, underline that for everything related to this venture.
PSN: ShogunGunshow
Origin: ShogunGunshow
So you're trading quick death by air strike for slow death by poverty?
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Specific changes brought about due to U.S. influence (education, literacy, and the knowledge of greater freedoms women can have) may also improve people's lives in the long term.
The only alternative to withdrawal is occupation.
It’s not a contest on who got fucked the most because of this because a whole lot of people got fucked up.
And I know a few of those vets, one checked herself into a hospital and had to have her husband watch the kids.
No.
I'm saying that even with this withdrawal some of the changes that occurred during occupation thanks to the oppressive force of the Taliban being curtailed, at least for a time, could lead to better outcomes in the future than had occupation never happened at all.
With that said, had an increase in literacy, women's rights, clean drinking water, life expectancy, etc. not occurred during the time the U.S. was present then it would have definitely all been for nothing. These factors are often disregarded to make it seem as if the presence of the U.S. was wholly negative and ignore the impact of education and literacy on spreading alternative ideas.
I guess we'll see.
I don't put a whole lot of faith in religious zealots to be cool about it.
Religious zealots didn't like it when the printing press and rising literacy rates made it possible for laypeople to read the Bible for themselves. The first guy to translate the Bible into English was in fact betrayed and executed as a heretic, but the genie couldn't be put back in the bottle despite attempts by religious zealots to do so. The King James Version of the Bible was created thanks to his influence.
I'm not a Christian myself, but this example serves to show how even a powerful organization of religious zealots can be challenged by the ability of the common people to read and write.
I mean sure
But also the ME was fairly modern in the 1960s
So it kind of looks like you absolutely can put that genie back in.
I see it otherwise.
http://www.fallout3nexus.com/downloads/file.php?id=16534
Well then I guess it was all pointless and the people who oppose oppression should just give up and submit to their rule.
Okay
It wasn't pontless.
A lot of people made a lot of money off of a lot of suffering, and now they left the country to rot.
After what happened to the Kurds I'm not expecting a good ending to this.
Vets have been telling me "there is no reason for us to be there" for over a decade now. If any demographic learned the sheer pointlessness of the war in Afghanistan and Iraq first, its the vets of those boondoggles.
No one here is arguing for this.
You're arguing against national sovereignty which is a short pier to be walking down.
The literacy rate went from 8% to 43%, a generation of women grew up knowing greater freedoms, maternal mortality halved, life expectancy increased, access to clean drinking water went from 16% to 89% in cities, etc. You can't just ignore all those things because they're inconvenient to the narrative that the U.S. presence was entirely negative.
Some of them don't deserve the credit. In Biden's case, he changed his tune on Afghanistan early on, spent a considerable amount of time publicly pointing out all the ways things were going badly, and by the time he was in the White House as a VP was the few people sounding off against the troop surge. And so far as president, it also means ending the war they all started.
There's the other version of this where the politician learning is them saying "uh, sorry about the dead people or whatever, now that I'm running for a new office and it's the most convenient thing to say." That doesn't mean shit to me.
And your alternative is that we should always mind our own business and let abusive relationships play out. At least in that analogy there was a reprieve from the abuse.
But I'm not even saying that the latter is impossible. Just that there is no evidence to support the claim, and that saying it "probably" happened is unjustified.
Looks like they've already started the torture and executions.
see what's great about america being the world police is that 40% of the police-
I don't think anybody is ignoring them
if you want to argue that the U.S. should indefinitely continue to prop up an at-least-relatively-egalitarian society in afghan cities at the point of the bayonet (or the drone, as the case may be) then fair enough. I don't think it's irrelevant that the U.S.' values are better than our British and Soviet predecessors in-theater, either. But that sort of benevolent colonialism was considered a bridge too far even for the Bush administration, not least because it's really hard to make the case without sounding like Winston Churchill.
Pluto was a planet and I'll never forget
Well I guess it was wrong to let women in Afghanistan have freedoms, then. At least if they've never had them they wouldn't be able to lose them, I guess.
Jesus Christ, lay off with the strawmen already.
I don't understand your point.
Are you saying this is fine? Or we should've remained indefinitely as a colonial missionary spreading the good word of America?
It's more like a group of cops went into a home 2 towns over without a warrant, busted in, killed the family dog and forced the husband to start paying the cops, who now live there, extortion money. Yes the abusive husband stopped beating his wife, but the new situation is not exactly healthy either.
Can you please stop building these strawmen? This is why sarcasm doesn't work very well for discourse in general, much less Interwebs discourse. This is 3 times in one page, c'mon.
Yes, we improved lives for some people, but we still should have gotten the fuck out. The overwhelming consensus in this thread is that we should have gotten the fuck out, but we shouldn't have left everyone who supported us (translators, etc) to die there, and we should have fast-laned refugees the fuck outta there while we still had a military presence.
And yet that consensus has nothing to do with complete interventionism vs. complete isolationism as a whole, and nobody here is arguing for the former nor the latter, unless you'd like to step up to the plate.
The two major sides I see regarding the current situation are 1) the U.S. is abandoning Afghanistan to the Taliban, who will be enforcing their brand of oppression upon the populace and 2) the U.S. should have never been in Afghanistan in the first place and should have let whatever happened play out.
The decision to go to Aghanistan was made 20 years ago, and the lives of many of the people of Afghanistan (especially women) significantly improved as a consequence of the U.S. presence. The best we can hope for now is that the gains in literacy and the 20 years of greater freedoms for women help inspire resistance against the Taliban by the people of Afghanistan.
Personally, I feel it was irresponsible to leave without a means to ensure that the progress the people of Afghanistan had benefited from during the U.S. presence couldn't be easily taken away. This was a betrayal and an abandonment of responsibility.
lol CNN. That being said, this played completely in favor of the Trumpists. "Trump delayed the troop withdrawal to make Biden look bad". Wrong, Democrats, together with Liz Cheney, blocked the withdrawal as much as they could on Congress. Result: A complete own goal in favor of Trump.
And how, exactly, were we supposed to do that, when we couldn't in 20 years? As people have pointed out, your argument - no matter how good intentioned it might be - ultimately is an argument for indefinite occupation.
When would have been the optimal time to leave?
I mean they could have sent 50,000 American soldiers in to establish a perimeter around Kabul, deposed the existing corrupt and useless Afghan government in favor of direct US territorial rule, and then seized local farms and water supplies expelling local Taliban friendly farmers and resettling with friendly refugees from the rest of the country. That is what would have been done 100 years ago. Would it have worked or made anything better for anyone? Probably not.
Or they could have done another surge and supported a corrupt government (with all its drug kingpins and child rapists) through another cycle of repressing the Taliban only to have them pop up in 5 or 10 years, and repeated the same bloody cycle every few years. Would that help anything over the long run? Probably not either.