[TV] O/T Beginning of Afghanistan War

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

And Iran. And Guatemala. And British Guiana. And Iraq. And Cambodia. And Laos. And Ecuador. And Congo. And Brazil. And Dominican Republic. And Bolivia. And Indonesia. And Ghana. And Chile. And Australia. And Portugal. And Jamaica. And Chad. And Grenada. And Fiji. And Nicaragua. And Panama. And Bulgaria. And Albania. And Yugoslavia. And Venezuela. And Haiti. And Somalia. And Honduras. And Libya.

All of these countries have had their governments overthrown by the United States since the second World War. Most often these countries turned into chaos. Almost as if it was the intention all along...



Because people dont want US appointed warlords as their government. The Western idea that a Western appointed government is any better is a purely Western idea.

I'm sure the people of Kabul preferred the yank appointed government, less sure others did, hence no resistance and plenty of people joining the Taliban forces.

I largely agree with you that America has interfered but, by Christ, they are and always have been incompetent nincompoops. They 'won' in Korea, but they ****ed up in Vietnam and thereafter blundered about like a fat boy who had overdone the fizzy drink.

As for Australia, when did they 'win' there?

The US 'intelligence' is and always was pathetic. Read 'Spycatcher'. The CIA was described as a mob in an over-scrubbed building that reeked of an unclean mind (or somesuch).

I agree with your point about Afghans rejecting imported styles of government. They wunt be druv. Leave them to stew for another 100 years and they may give their heads a wobble. That said, in the meantime China will supply them with tech in exchange for opium (exported to the west). My, how the Chinese will laugh about the irony of that. It is easy to win when you have no morals. America had precious few, but China has none.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

but the manner of the withdrawal is because the Afgan's gave up. thats why i ask the question, as only way this could have been different is by not leaving.

Yr post is noteform and not entierly followable. As only way different by not leaving not possible as only course action was leaving.

Happy to upgrade the quality of my reply if you upgrade your syntax

 

[Hampster Gull]

On R5 now, live.

I can't really argue with him. What is to be gained by creating a puppet state, gifted equipment, training and a bespoke political system, who when left to defend their country against the zealots simply run away?

I assume this now formally ends the idea of America as the 'world policeman'. Removing heads of state for being hostile to America (the conceit). A policeman with as much idea as the nobs who fitted up the Birmingham six, and hob nobbed with Kenneth Noye. World policeman....my arse.

China, with little concern for human rights abuses (Afghani women in this case) has already stepped in.

Damned if you do, but I see that Biden has little choice. 'Not in our national security interest; not what our troops deserve'.

A pity they didn't realise the same after Korea. And Vietnam. Flat track bullies......

The alt right are already after Biden, albeit Trump planned the withdrawal to have happened back in May.

Trump, Biden, both have failed here. America has taken a fairly large step towards losing its power to China, inevitable anyway but closer now

 

[Swansman]

I didn't see thousands fleeing the capital in terror when NATO forces were keeping the peace, not to mention the horrifying sight of young men trying to stow away on the outside of departing planes.

And there is mainly two reasons for that: the people of Kabul (4,6m people) were fine with the Western appointed government. But a lot of the other 27 million Afghanis were less impressed. You may not have seen thousands fleeing but here where ca 1% of the population is from Afghanistan, its a different story, particularly for those of us who volunteered to help 40 000+ Afghan refugees in 2015.

The other reason is that its a lot better for the Western propaganda machine to pretend that NATO delivers the peace, freedom and equality things they horseshit about rather than chaos, control of resources and the ousting of any movement or organisation who does not want to collaborate with the greedy, neo-colonialistic bloodsucking governments of the West.

 

[jackanada]

What is hard to understand is how the people of Afghanistan didn't defend the freedoms they were given, or put pressure on the government to reduce the Taliban threat.

Factions will emerge with a more liberal viewpoint then the Taliban. Low bar I know.
The history of Afghanistan is of not being conquered. They have out lasted, out suffered and out persisted occupation by Britain when it was a genuine world power, by peak Soviet Union and now by the USA.
This is a source of great pride, in fact it pretty much defines the diffuse tribes into a country.

Now do you really think many proud Afghans are going to fight to prop up an American imposed puppet leader? It would not matter if a utopia had been built for them before anything else can happen the country must be purged of the occupation.
Left to its own devices it may yet become a relatively peaceful and liberal country. It has before. But first there must be blood.

 

[Pavilionaire]

And there is mainly two reasons for that: the people of Kabul (4,6m people) were fine with the Western appointed government. But a lot of the other 27 million Afghanis were less impressed. You may not have seen thousands fleeing but here where ca 1% of the population is from Afghanistan, its a different story, particularly for those of us who volunteered to help 40 000+ Afghan refugees in 2015.

The other reason is that its a lot better for the Western propaganda machine to pretend that NATO delivers the peace, freedom and equality things they horseshit about rather than chaos, control of resources and the ousting of any movement or organisation who does not want to collaborate with the greedy, neo-colonialistic bloodsucking governments of the West.

I get that the people of the Middle East are particularly resistant to Western interference, but the warlords on whom the governance of the country appears to hinge have been there for decades and there is no reasoning with these people. Their failure to sort out their own tribal differences hasn't helped.

I don't think there are many left in the West that want to be involved in this theatre of conflict. If we can do business with China with their terrible record of human rights abuses then I believe we will be learn to live with the Taliban governing Afghanistan in their own uniquely cruel way. Foisting regime change on these people doesn't work and a new approach is required.

 

[Swansman]

I largely agree with you that America has interfered but, by Christ, they are and always have been incompetent nincompoops. They 'won' in Korea, but they ****ed up in Vietnam and thereafter blundered about like a fat boy who had overdone the fizzy drink.

As for Australia, when did they 'win' there?

The US 'intelligence' is and always was pathetic. Read 'Spycatcher'. The CIA was described as a mob in an over-scrubbed building that reeked of an unclean mind (or somesuch).

I agree with your point about Afghans rejecting imported styles of government. They wunt be druv. Leave them to stew for another 100 years and they may give their heads a wobble. That said, in the meantime China will supply them with tech in exchange for opium (exported to the west). My, how the Chinese will laugh about the irony of that. It is easy to win when you have no morals. America had precious few, but China has none.

They are not incompetent. Rather the opposite, which is why we've all been in their pockets for a long while. There is no way of holding such enormous amounts of power for such a long time unless you know what you're doing. Of course they are not flawless, they make a lot of mistakes as has been pointed out by several whistleblowers from the Intelligence community, but all in all they know what they are doing and they have the nice backing from the US finance oligarchy. Unfortunately.

Australia:

In the 70s when Whitlam (the prime minister) was removed from his role by one single individual (the "Governor-General"). Their first "leftist" prime minister in years, who made some interesting decisions the US didnt agree with such as calling home Australians from the Vietnam War, halting conscription and recognising North Vietnam as well as speaking up about the bombing of Hanoi etc. Whitlam and his government called Nixon "corrupt maniacs" and "mass murderers". It was not popular. The Australian intelligence service, deeply in bed with CIA, didnt like it either and were caught red-handed trying to hide information from their own government (which is a normal practice among intelligence services). Unlike a lot of other governments, the Whitlam Labor government didnt like it.

Gough Whitlam decided to let the police raid the ASIO and CIA in return tried to convince the ASIO head to release a false statement that Whitlam had lied about the raid in the parliament, but the ASIO boss refused to do so.

The Labor government got to know about all the shit CIA had installed in the country, from naval centres to NSA surveillance centers, and were not happy about it. However, they were not willing to cut the ties with the Western world (which is what you do if you **** with the CIA) so there was not a lot they could do about it.
In 1975 things finally went overboard. Whitlam kicked out the ASIO and ASIS heads that had been spying on Australian politicans for decades and because they were secretly co-operating with the CIA in East Timor. It was also revealed that the CIA had offered unlimited resources to help the opposition win the 1974 election, which they failed to do. But...

Ok so this is getting awfully long and its just beginning, and though nothing fascinates me as the powers that be, I have to sleep... short answer: ca 1973-1975.

 

[Swansman]

I get that the people of the Middle East are particularly resistant to Western interference, but the warlords on whom the governance of the country appears to hinge have been there for decades and there is no reasoning with these people. Their failure to sort out their own tribal differences hasn't helped.

I don't think there are many left in the West that want to be involved in this theatre of conflict. If we can do business with China with their terrible record of human rights abuses then I believe we will be learn to live with the Taliban governing Afghanistan in their own uniquely cruel way. Foisting regime change on these people doesn't work and a new approach is required.

They've had various "warlords"/warlords.

The Soviet took over Afghanistan in the 70s and with that also got full control over the very profitable opium market. The Americans didnt like it but had no intention of going to war themselves in a country that reminds more about Soviet than anything else, so they trained and equipped the Mujahideen and they fought for years and years. Once Soviet fell, things got
a lot easier and when the US supported Mujahideens won the civil war against the old Soviet communist regime, a few of the Mujahideen who were closest to the US/CIA were given power over the country.

As they were warriors and criminals with no knowledge and probably no interest in governance, Afghanistan turned completely lawless and the new rulers turned out to be even more shite than the old Soviet-installed one. Plenty of Mujahideens as well as people from the old Soviet government separeted from the US Mujahideens that had won the war, and created their on faction - the Taliban, who thought all the greed and corruption was shit and wanted to make a revolution and create a government based on other (islamic) ideas.

It took until 1996 until they took power of the country (with the old US appointed government fleeing the country), they restored some kind of order (not a very nice one but still) and the US didnt bother to reverse it as they still controlled a lot of the opium production (or rather the export) through the Northern Alliance separatists. In 2000, the Taliban leader Mohammed Omar said that a Muslim country shouldnt produce opium. In just months, 99% of the opium production had ceased (it restarted once the US took control in 2002) making some people and some countries very unhappy.

So the yanks invented some half-arsed reason to invade Afghanistan and appointed the same people that had been ousted by the Talibans in the 90s while refusing to negotiate with Omar and his government in late 2001. The not very competent - but culturally rooted and seemingly more ideologically fundamentalist than corrupt - Talibans were removed and the bunch of completely incompetent and greedy old US allies got installed again.

No shit it turned into this. The main reason there was no "reasoning" with Mohammed Omar might have been because no one tried, which is very unfortunate for most people in this chaos.

 

[lasvegan]

It's not though is it. The exit strategy was laid out by the previous administration.

But by 24 May, he [UK Defence Secretary] told Parliament that it was a "regret for most of the Nato allies" that the US chose not to make the peace agreement "conditions-based at the end".

Last Friday Mr Wallace described the Doha deal as a "rotten deal", and today clarified he believed the "die was cast when the deal was done by Donald Trump".

"President Biden inherited a momentum that had been given to the Taliban because they felt they had now won," he said.

It is though, isn’t it. Do you honestly believe this shitshow was the exit strategy laid out by the Trump administration? Why didn’t he just nullify the agreement like he has reversed every other Trump policy by executive order?

Read the article…Mr Trump added. "If bad things happen, we'll go back with a force like no-one's ever seen."

I bet the the Taliban are currently quaking in their boots.

This article just about sums up this idiot. Never been a scarier time to live in the US.

https://thenationalpulse.com/analys...irst-months-have-been-some-of-americas-worst/

 

[KeegansHairPiece]

It is though, isn’t it. Do you honestly believe this shitshow was the exit strategy laid out by the Trump administration? Why didn’t he just nullify the agreement like he has reversed every other Trump policy by executive order?

Read the article…Mr Trump added. "If bad things happen, we'll go back with a force like no-one's ever seen."

I bet the the Taliban are currently quaking in their boots.

This article just about sums up this idiot. Never been a scarier time to live in the US.

https://thenationalpulse.com/analys...irst-months-have-been-some-of-americas-worst/

Quoting the National Pulse pretty much confirms the bias you bring to the debate.

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

Bin laden went to Pakistan in 2002….personally tonight was all about America first second third and forth,,,I thought it was Trump speaking

Yes, because he'd been run out of Afganistan.

This all goes back to Bin Laden. We should have withdrawn once he was killed. Mission accomplished.

We are now seeing more tragic consequences and victims of his attack in 2001.

 

[Swansman]

Yes, because he'd been run out of Afganistan.

This all goes back to Bin Laden. We should have withdrawn once he was killed. Mission accomplished.

We are now seeing more tragic consequences and victims of his attack in 2001.

If he did anything. The evidence is not exactly compelling. Its only "he said he did" and apparently the FBI got a lot of evidence "but it is classified".

I built the pyramids in Egypt because I say so and I have plenty to back it up but unfortunately I've classified all the evidence.

 

[Machiavelli]

Yes, because he'd been run out of Afganistan.

This all goes back to Bin Laden. We should have withdrawn once he was killed. Mission accomplished.

We are now seeing more tragic consequences and victims of his attack in 2001.

I'm somewhat agnostic on your position re US/UK/non-Afghan involvement in Afghanistan, but think you're badly wrong on the tragic consequences. The tragic consequences haven't come from the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, whereas they've been off the scale in terms of the invasion and occupation of Iraq. ISIS didn't appear in Afghanistan, it appeared in Iraq and Syria.

 

[Randy McNob]

[tweet]1427394730887811074[/tweet]

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

They are not incompetent. Rather the opposite, which is why we've all been in their pockets for a long while. There is no way of holding such enormous amounts of power for such a long time unless you know what you're doing. Of course they are not flawless, they make a lot of mistakes as has been pointed out by several whistleblowers from the Intelligence community, but all in all they know what they are doing and they have the nice backing from the US finance oligarchy. Unfortunately.

Australia:

In the 70s when Whitlam (the prime minister) was removed from his role by one single individual (the "Governor-General"). Their first "leftist" prime minister in years, who made some interesting decisions the US didnt agree with such as calling home Australians from the Vietnam War, halting conscription and recognising North Vietnam as well as speaking up about the bombing of Hanoi etc. Whitlam and his government called Nixon "corrupt maniacs" and "mass murderers". It was not popular. The Australian intelligence service, deeply in bed with CIA, didnt like it either and were caught red-handed trying to hide information from their own government (which is a normal practice among intelligence services). Unlike a lot of other governments, the Whitlam Labor government didnt like it.

Gough Whitlam decided to let the police raid the ASIO and CIA in return tried to convince the ASIO head to release a false statement that Whitlam had lied about the raid in the parliament, but the ASIO boss refused to do so.

The Labor government got to know about all the shit CIA had installed in the country, from naval centres to NSA surveillance centers, and were not happy about it. However, they were not willing to cut the ties with the Western world (which is what you do if you **** with the CIA) so there was not a lot they could do about it.
In 1975 things finally went overboard. Whitlam kicked out the ASIO and ASIS heads that had been spying on Australian politicans for decades and because they were secretly co-operating with the CIA in East Timor. It was also revealed that the CIA had offered unlimited resources to help the opposition win the 1974 election, which they failed to do. But...

Ok so this is getting awfully long and its just beginning, and though nothing fascinates me as the powers that be, I have to sleep... short answer: ca 1973-1975.

Oh yes, Whitlam. Interesting times.

I maintain that the American military are flat track bullies who are serial cock up artists. Yes, of course they have great power and potential reach, but that's due to eye watering amounts of money the government rinses through their labarynth. The military-industrial complex - a mechanism for taking public money and putting it in the hands of carpetbaggers. A massive waste of resources. And decisions to act around the world based on an unholy mix of anti-communism, racism and god. And when it all goes tits up they flounce - like they have just done in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile the UK runs behind, holding Sam's coat tails because our media (Murdoch and others) created a mindset (hard to shift, even today, albeit Trump may have unwittingly turned our tide) that 'we' are either 'with' America or against them (and, god forbid, with the Franch and other untrustworthy Europeans. Italians. Greeks.). The latter is why Blair joined with Bush - it was that or hand over the keys to number ten to Michael Howard and his weird pipple.

Back to US intelligence, they never saw 9/11 coming. They had little idea about militant Islam. Despite more than 100 years of failed attempts by the Brits and others to 'tame' Afghanistan, America still thought it could barge in, set up a load of placemen in power (like they did in Japan after the war, Korea and South Vietnam), and step back and watch baseball become the national game (it worked in Japan, but I cannot imagine a national psyche any further from Japan than Afghanistan, and vice versa). Utter, utter, arrogant, brainlessness; and they had already seen the folly of waging a war in a country where the local headbangers have sufficient support to resist Americanization, in Vietnam. Unfortunately, Americans appear to have decided to ignore Santayana (those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it) and instead favour Henry Ford (history is bunk). Who knew?

 

[Neville's Breakfast]

People seem to be seeing current events through a prism of ‘its Trump’s fault’ or ‘it’s Biden’s fault’ or someone else from the past. A lot of issues get taken this way as they become tools in a broader and perpetual argument that resembles people arguing over football. Trump was actually a past master at this as everything was down to Hilary’s ‘corruption.’ Regardless of fault though, there are decisions that can be taken right now that can make the situation better or worse.

 

[herecomesaregular]

Oh yes, Whitlam. Interesting times.

I maintain that the American military are flat track bullies who are serial cock up artists. Yes, of course they have great power and potential reach, but that's due to eye watering amounts of money the government rinses through their labarynth. The military-industrial complex - a mechanism for taking public money and putting it in the hands of carpetbaggers. A massive waste of resources. And decisions to act around the world based on an unholy mix of anti-communism, racism and god. And when it all goes tits up they flounce - like they have just done in Afghanistan.

Meanwhile the UK runs behind, holding Sam's coat tails because our media (Murdoch and others) created a mindset (hard to shift, even today, albeit Trump may have unwittingly turned our tide) that 'we' are either 'with' America or against them (and, god forbid, with the Franch and other untrustworthy Europeans. Italians. Greeks.). The latter is why Blair joined with Bush - it was that or hand over the keys to number ten to Michael Howard and his weird pipple.

Back to US intelligence, they never saw 9/11 coming. They had little idea about militant Islam. Despite more than 100 years of failed attempts by the Brits and others to 'tame' Afghanistan, America still thought it could barge in, set up a load of placemen in power (like they did in Japan after the war, Korea and South Vietnam), and step back and watch baseball become the national game (it worked in Japan, but I cannot imagine a national psyche any further from Japan than Afghanistan, and vice versa). Utter, utter, arrogant, brainlessness; and they had already seen the folly of waging a war in a country where the local headbangers have sufficient support to resist Amercianization, in Vietnam. Unfortunately, Americans appear to have decided to ignore Santayana (those who ignore history are doomed to repeat it) and instead favour Henry Ford (history is bunk). Who knew?

For someone so keen to ridicule other people's spelling and grammar you'll be disappointed with yourself here?

 

[Tyrone Biggums]

In the end you just can't help some people. So best to leave them to their own devices.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

For someone so keen to ridicule other people's spelling and grammar you'll be disappointed with yourself here?

Edit: I don't see that

I'm a terrible poofreader.

 

[The Clamp]

In the end you just can't help some people. So best to leave them to their own devices.

Leave women to be executed or made into sex slaves because they are educated? Leave children to be raped and executed? We just can’t help them?
Much of Afghanistan is made up of thriving, cosmopolitan cities like Kabul. With educated, bright people going about their lives. It’s not some third world hole.
And then people like you complain when they make their way to your shores as refugees. Not one to think things through are you, really.

Well anyway, we have left them to their own devices so you’ll be happy.