Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

hecatonchires266 t1_je91sgv wrote

USA and its allies wasted 20 years in this country and for what? The same evils are back in power and depriving women their fundamental rights.

58

sdforbda t1_je926a9 wrote

Well, we weren't there for women or to make things equal.

31

hecatonchires266 t1_je92b99 wrote

That's not the point I was getting at and you missed it entirely.

−21

sdforbda t1_je937bl wrote

I agree that we were there far too long and for the wrong reasons.

2

hecatonchires266 t1_je93ccr wrote

Precisely there to get rid of the Taliban and they failed miserably. 20 whole years and still the Taliban exists to make lives worse for the people of Afghanistan. Lives of soldiers lost for nothing.

4

sdforbda t1_je93ovm wrote

Yeah, sorry that I wasn't very clear in my original message. I had friends over there, including one that did three tours just being out of the national guard. I hate the whole existence of us being there.

1

sprocketous t1_jebavcb wrote

It wasnt for nothing. Some people made a ton of money. Thats what it was about.

1

EvilxBunny t1_jednc9g wrote

Lol...you think the US actually cares about the people in foreign countries?

The US is like Syndrome from the incredibles.

1

ChristOnFire13 t1_je9315g wrote

The USA was never over there or in any war in the last 70 years for any other reason than to make people like Dick Cheney and the like, wealthy. Period. We go to war for profit. Nothing else.

0

krismasstercant t1_jebfnyi wrote

>We go to war for profit.

Sure some people make money off of war but god damn dude we DUMPED BILLIONS into Afghanistan. It was because of us for those 20 god damn years Afghanistan saw the largest economic growth, women were able to go college and work, schools and hospitals were able to be built in remote villages for the first time, etc. It wasn't wasted, we actually made a generation of Afghans lives somewhat bearable.

14

ChristOnFire13 t1_jebj9cc wrote

I'm not saying there wasn't any good out of it. I'm saying the motivation behind starting it was not for bettering peoples live. The people making the decision to go to war do not care about people at all. The government is not your friend.

2

krismasstercant t1_jebjokx wrote

>I'm saying the motivation behind starting it was not for bettering peoples live.

I mean it literally was, the main reason was to get rid of the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, I'd say that's a very positive reason.

4

ChristOnFire13 t1_jebkcuy wrote

Both of whom were trained and armed by the CIA and put in place.

−4

bearfan15 t1_jec21wa wrote

You're confusing them with the Mujahadeen. Definitely a cause and effect there but "the CIA funded them" isn't accurate.

4

HumorUnable t1_jea0r48 wrote

What a dumb and simplistic take. You probably also think the US invade Iraq for oil? Yeah man, it had nothing at all to do with removing the Talibam after 9/11.

2

ChristOnFire13 t1_jea6toz wrote

The Taliban are in Afghanistan not Iraq. The US invaded Iraq so Dick Cheney and his cronies could make $38 billion. Eisenhower said there are people who want to see the US constantly at war so they can profit and called the Military Industrial Complex.

3

clitoram t1_jeajylw wrote

This article and discussion is on Afghanistan…

6

HumorUnable t1_jean3yd wrote

The argument that "it was all about the money" stopped sounding smart ten years ago. Now it's just dumb shit that hipsters say to try and seem smarter than everyone else, and doesn't at all take into context the historical facts lmao.

The US invaded Iraq because they saw an opportunity to remove Saddam Hussein from power. He was seen at the time as one of the biggest threats to global security - he'd invaded Kuwait just twelve years before, leading to a global military intervention.

On top of that he was a brutal tyrant who killed hundreds of thousands of his own people, and the Bush government legitimately believed that it was just a matter of time before he would develop weapons of mass destruction to ensure he would never be removed from power. So they thought they had to act to remove him while they had the opportunity, and hopefully build a democracy in the Middle East.

Did they fuck it up? Yes. Did they lie about Iraq already having weapons of mass destruction? Also yes?

But did they invade "tO mAke mOneY". Fuck no.

Go back to elementary school if you need to dumb down complex geopolitical decisions to "they wanted da money" you idiot.

3

ChristOnFire13 t1_jeaz8mj wrote

You feel better? Ranting and calling a random stranger an idiot because they have a different opinion than you? Cool story bro.

6

afraid_of_zombies t1_jeaklri wrote

The US did invade Iraq for oil

−3

krismasstercant t1_jebgyko wrote

What oil ? The amount of oil we import from Iraq had pretty much been the same before the war started. Why would we even need to go to war for oil when we're literally the largest producers of oil in the world. HOWEVER Haliburton did make a shit ton off of defense contracts through KBR in the Iraq war and Dick Cheney WAS still getting paid by Haliburton despite no longer being the CEO and was the Vice President of the US at the time. But that's not necessarily the reason why we went to war in the first place.

8

afraid_of_zombies t1_jebljpy wrote

Oil is sold globally. It doesn't matter if we didn't get it directly, just having it on the market lowers the price for all. Additionally we are the biggest producers partially because of all the tech that we have developed to produce that stuff. An Iraq occupied by the US is buying US technology (exactly the type Haliburton and buddies works on) to extract the oil.

Win win really. The American consumer gets lower prices, the American producer sells their expertise to the competitor.

It was always about the oil.

−1

bearfan15 t1_jec2r8z wrote

This argument doesn't make any sense. Iraqi oil was already on the market. In fact Iraqi oil production was decimated because of the war. They only reached pre war levels of production a few years ago. It literally had the opposite affect your claiming. Oil was more expensive for years after the war.

1

Lost_and_wandering_ t1_jeapg2g wrote

My dude. The United States’ CIA founded the Taliban as a means of counterbalancing USSR presence in the region.

Literally the CIA gave the Taliban indoctrination materials. The CIA admits to doing this as well.

−5

krismasstercant t1_jebhp7y wrote

>My dude. The United States’ CIA founded the Taliban as a means of counterbalancing USSR presence in the region.

Lol no they didn't, the Taliban didn't even form until AFTER the berlin wall fell, unless your talking about the Mujahedeen. And it wasn't the CIA that founded the Taliban, it was Pakistan's ISI that radicalized, funded, and armed Afghan refugee's and Pakistani citizens so that way when the Taliban took over Afghanistan in the 90's it would be more favorable for them.

8

Lost_and_wandering_ t1_jecbqh9 wrote

You are going to want to read more thoroughly the details of Operation Cyclone.

Pakistan got the weapons and funding from the United States. Brzezninski admits that the US actions in the region created the taliban.

Read the book Holy Wars Inc. the cia and state department wrote textbooks that encouraged racism and hatred towards non Muslim afghanistans.

The US created the social environment for the Taliban to thrive and also provided their weapons. Almost all of the taliban’s leadership came from leadership positions within the mujahedeen. An organization that was funded and empowered by the US.

−1