|
Terminal autist posted:Civil wars following the pull out of colonial powers are historically pretty horrifying and just casually wanting a wartorn country to keep fighting is a real weird take It's not a weird take to a person who imagines their own human rights were on the line. I'd rather be dead than give up social secularism, and occupied Afghanistan wasn't even socially secular as much as just not extremist.
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:50 |
|
|
How are u posted:No, I am not. Don't put those words in my mouth. you put them there yourself. Your juvenile fantasy born of western comfort and chauvinism is exactly why things are like that in the region. it's a good opportunity for you to wake up to that.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:It's not a weird take to a person who imagines their own human rights were on the line. I'd rather be dead than give up social secularism, and occupied Afghanistan wasn't even socially secular as much as just not extremist. Put a gun to people's heads and most would pretty clearly not make that choice. Maybe you're built different, idk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:28
|
|
|
If the Taliban fails people will suffer. And, just not from the standpoint of civil war. The Taliban are the government, they are the administrators. They are in charge of protecting their populace. They are now in charge of making sure that electricity and water works, in charge of people's welfare. If they fail at that, people will suffer whether there is an uprising or war or not.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:30
|
|
|
Doctor Butts posted:If the Taliban fails people will suffer. And, just not from the standpoint of civil war. The Taliban are the government, they are the administrators. They are in charge of protecting their populace. They are now in charge of making sure that electricity and water works, in charge of people's welfare. Exactly. If they gently caress it up the responsibility is theirs and theirs alone. I'm not rooting for them to succeed in oppressing the vulnerable. Afghanistan deserves better than the Taliban.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:33
|
|
|
What is the "better" alternative to the Taliban? Realistically, who's gonna do better for Afghanistan than the Taliban? Sure as gently caress wasn't the people we worked with, a bunch of child rapists, thieves and grifters.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:38
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:What is the "better" alternative to the Taliban? Realistically, who's gonna do better for Afghanistan than the Taliban? There are two Afghanistan's, Kabul and the countryside. The Taliban will be terrible for Kabul and mostly better for the countryside as the people out there are fine following their rules in exchange for not being murdered by drones and helicopters randomly in the night like the Soviets and USA did.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:41
|
|
|
Regardless of the actual intent behind hoping the Taliban succeed in governing, it seems odd that people can't reconcile both their desire to see the Taliban succeed against the fact that the Taliban succeeding, also means the suppression or elimination of significant human rights for a significant amount of the population under their control. I mean, what are some of you hoping, that over time there is some form of liberalization and the Taliban becomes less oppressive? Just curious, not trying to be antagonistic, because it seems like hoping that the Taliban succeeds ends up being paradoxial to the goal of improved human rights and freedom.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:43
|
|
|
OctaMurk posted:What is the "better" alternative to the Taliban? Realistically, who's gonna do better for Afghanistan than the Taliban? It doesn't seem like there is a better alternative right now. I hope that one develops in the future. That happening depends on how the Taliban rule.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:44
|
|
|
Can we make a distinction between wanting a leader/faction to be politically unsuccessful while wanting them to be successful at running their country to prevent death and suffering? At the risk of putting forth a lovely metaphor, I never want a GOP president to be politically successful, but I do want them to be able to run the country without totally screwing it up. (That's assuming they want to do the bare minimum, of course, which W and Trump have definitely shown is not something we can take for granted.) I don't want the Taliban to last forever. Ideally, they would have to make way for someone kinder to the population there. No matter what, however, I do want Afghanistan to have a steady government so that people stop dying from war-related violence and if that means the Taliban having to get their way for a while, then I don't feel entitled to say my preferences are worth the life and welfare of people in Afghanistan.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:45
|
|
|
Eric Cantonese posted:
That's pretty much my position. May the Taliban be consigned to history as soon as possible.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:49
|
|
|
SourKraut posted:I mean, what are some of you hoping, that over time there is some form of liberalization and the Taliban becomes less oppressive? People are hoping that the Taliban have a desire to engage in geopolitics and become something closer to Iran (which remains a post-industrial country despite theocracy and being on our shitlist), and that the need to forge alliances with countries beyond just Pakistan like the Mullah Omar days will make it an inch more liberal than it used to be. "They don't want to look bad in front of China!" Yeah well China tolerates the Kim dynasty, and doesn't want the middle east to see their treatment of Uyghurs as equivalent to our pushing Palestinians to Israeli submission.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:50
|
|
|
Personally, I'd love for Afghanistan to not be governed by ultra-fundamentalists, but in thirty years of trying, they're the only ones who've gotten anywhere near governing the country on their own, and therefore the alternative is going back to warlords fighting over scraps of the country while shelling Kabul just to deny it to their foes. If there was any comfortably secular option competent enough to maintain control over Afghanistan, they would have shown up by now. The US has spent twenty years searching for a secular local partner capable of maintaining a stable administration without constant American handholding. And before that, the Taliban spent five-ish years fighting their way to dominance in the late stages of the Afghan Civil War. If there were any serious alternative to the Taliban left, we'd have heard of them long ago. I don't think it's right to wish for further civil war to happen, just for the remote possibility that a Taliban-rivaling secular group will suddenly materialize out of the defeated scraps of the failed warlords' armies. Afghanistan as a whole has been in conflict for nearly half a century. Sure, you can nitpick that different regions were more or less affected by violence at various times, but generally speaking, a clear Taliban victory and the final defeat of the warlords could potentially mark the first time in several decades that armed groups weren't blowing each other up somewhere in Afghanistan in a bloody fight for control.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 18:59
|
|
|
I think the real thrust of the article was, basically: does the oppression of the Taliban matter in any real sense when the alternative is being trapped in the middle of a war? I think it's fair to say: yeah, the Taliban is poo poo and I wish they were a lot different. On the other hand, if the reality was that the alternative to the Taliban for most of the Afghan people was "random killings and chaos" then I do understand why even the Taliban is considered preferable to that by a lot of those people. I would hazard a guess that most people posting here have never had to choose between two choices that were so terrible. It's very alien to the way we have experienced the world. But that doesn't mean it's irrational.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 19:13
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:Then you are wishing for millions more to die Considering how common the sentiment on this forum is that electoralism is a useless dead end, which comes with the implied (or sometimes spoken) addendum that only revolutionary action (which will inevitably result in millions of deaths GLOBALLY because of the world-wide chaos) has any hope of producing positive change in America, I don't think anyone ought to throw stones at someone for hoping for positive change by whatever means in other countries. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 19:21
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Considering how common the sentiment on this forum is that electoralism is a useless dead end, which comes with the implied (or sometimes spoken) addendum that only revolutionary action (which will inevitably result in millions of deaths GLOBALLY because of the world-wide chaos) has any hope of producing positive change in America, I don't think anyone ought to throw stones at someone for hoping for positive change by whatever means in other countries. That is not my hope. History and human societies do not function like that. Revolutions aren't spontaneous and don't occur due to a desire. They are responses to material conditions. If a revolution happens in America, it will be because conditions on the ground are so bad people will be willing to risk death in a civil war over the status quo. That is what was happening in Afghanistan, to the point that the soliders of the ANA saw no benefit to continuing to uphold the government; even to the people directly benefiting and being paid by the Afghan government, the Taliban take over seemed worth the risk. But even your framing betrays your biases; you, like most people on this forum, assume changes in America will automatically reverberate everywhere, that if we undergo instability, well, the whole world must be going to poo poo, obviously! The next step in the world order is going to be multi polar. US retreats and forced to make concessions to regional and rising powers. The rout in Afghanistan will be the moment people point to, the moment the world stopped believing the US was the de facto superpower in control of everything. This shift is going to change things, in some places for the worse, in others for the better, but the most important element is a new formation of power will open up possibilities in both domestic and international politics, ones that were impossible while the US was comfortably on its perch. Which goes hand in hand with the middle east, because our undue influence on things like the spread of wahabism and the power of theocratic reactionaries are the primary source of strife in the region. Will Taliban remain theocratic hardliners? Maybe, but even the Saudis had to start relaxing things as development necessitated education for their citizens which always leads to demands for loosening restrictions. We don't know what will happen with the Taliban, we can only really be sure of what will happen if they collapse in the near future, failing to stabilize things. We can't know for sure what happens next or what we should do. But it won't be business as usual. So I'll choose to remain hopeful that new possibilities will give us new avenues to a better world. Ron Paul Atreides fucked around with this message at 19:42 on Sep 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 19:37
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:But even your framing betrays your biases; you, like most people on this forum, assume changes in America will automatically reverberate everywhere, that if we undergo instability, well, the whole world must be going to poo poo, obviously! Unless the shifts to the global political/diplomatic status quo you're talking about, which I agree are inevitable, come with SEISMIC changes to the global economic and military status quo, revolutionary change in America WOULD reverberate everywhere and our instability WOULD cause gigantic problems to everyone else, including those rising regional powers we're going to be making concessions to. Saying anything otherwise is fantasyland talk.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 19:41
|
|
|
Sanguinia posted:Unless the shifts to the global political/diplomatic status quo you're talking about come with SEISMIC changes to the global economic and military status quo, revolutionary change in America WILL reverberate everywhere and our instability WILL cause gigantic problems to everyone else. Saying anything otherwise is fantasyland talk. The EU is already talking about starting its own army, China is already the manufacturing center of the globe. Yes, shifts here would cause ripples out there, but we are no longer the center of the universe. Our collapse would prompt realignments, and those wouldn't be without pain but it wouldn't automatically mean chaos everywhere; besides which, for a collapse to happen, our influence will have to have waned much more than it is at present. Like I said, revolutions are a matter of material reality for the people, and the US is not there yet, but shifts away from us abroad could bring us there. Personally I doubt US collapse is in the cards, anyway. We will balkanize long before that, as we see the federal government lose legitimacy being unable to respond to crisies. But it's also possible something sweeps in to take over from. the government and just forces a shift, a military government maybe. It could even just be the collapse of the 2 party system and new possibilities there, though I admit that the current trajectory there makes that feel very unlikely.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 19:49
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:The next step in the world order is going to be multi polar. US retreats and forced to make concessions to regional and rising powers. The rout in Afghanistan will be the moment people point to, the moment the world stopped believing the US was the de facto superpower in control of the world. This shift is going to change things, in some places for the worse, in others for the better, but the most important element is a new formation of power will open up possibilities in both domestic and international politics, ones that were impossible while the US was comfortably on its perch. I don't particularly agree with a lot of the rest of the post either (the stuff about material conditions determining whether or not a revolution takes place seems flat out wrong to me since there are plenty of people eating poo poo at the hands of brutally repressive governments), but this stands out as especially misguided to me. You know people said everything you're saying about the US being a failing power when we left Vietnam and Iraq too right? Like we are headed to a multi-polar world in some ways, or at least China's certainly becoming a near-peer competitor to the US faster than most Americans would have hoped, but predicting doom for American power and influence because we got out of a stupid war in a strategically unimportant location at least ten years too late seems kind of bonkers. It's the same credibility gap stuff neocons talk about, where if we don't fight war everywhere all the time people will lose their faith in America, but there's very little evidence to back that up. I do think American soft power is on the wane in some ways (while potentially being on the rise in others as countries bordering China look for balancing opportunities), but economically there's no question that the US generally and the Federal Reserve specifically are still incredibly important in the world. Dr Kool-AIDS fucked around with this message at 19:57 on Sep 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 19:55
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:I don't particularly agree with a lot of the rest of the post either (the stuff about material conditions determining whether or not a revolution takes place seems flat out wrong to me since there are plenty of people eating poo poo at the hands of brutally repressive governments), but this stands out as especially misguided to me. You know people said everything you're saying about the US being a failing power when we left Vietnam and Iraq too right? Like we are headed to a multi-polar world in some ways, or at least China's certainly becoming a near-peer competitor to the US faster than most Americans would have hoped, but predicting doom for American power and influence because we got out of a stupid war in a strategically unimportant location at least ten years too late seems kind of bonkers. It's the same credibility gap,stuff neocons talk about, where if we don't fight war everywhere all the time people will lose their faith in America, but there's very little evidence to back that up. I do think American soft power is on the wane in some ways (while potentially being on the rise in others as countries bordering China look for balancing opportunities), but economically there's no question that the US generally and the Federal Reserve specifically are still incredibly important in the world. and again. Talking about a US retreat and a new alignment of power is doom. The US bias is clear, if we are pushed back its chaos for everyone. Can't be helped I guess. Bye
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 20:27
|
|
|
If we're going to talk unrealistic solutions, I wish we could go back in time and prevent the US from arming and training the mujahideen, hopefully culminating in a secular, left-leaning Afghanistan on par with what Iran was on track for before our meddling. If we're going to talk reality, though, I hope the Taliban are successful, that their deals with China bear fruit, that Afghanistan enjoys peace for the first time in half a century, and that the Taliban take a devolved approach to governance that allows these villages to organically modernize as they become interconnected through trade, roads, and cultural exchange with the urbanized parts of the country.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 20:33
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:If we're going to talk unrealistic solutions, I wish we could go back in time and prevent the US from arming and training the mujahideen, hopefully culminating in a secular, left-leaning Afghanistan on par with what Iran was on track for before our meddling. That's not happening regardless of what the US does.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 20:59
|
|
|
Ron Paul Atreides posted:and again. Talking about a US retreat and a new alignment of power is doom. The US bias is clear, if we are pushed back its chaos for everyone. The US isn't actually being pushed back all that hard, but have no fear, the genocidal Chinese government is still an up and coming power!
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 21:06
|
|
|
Yeah, what. The DRA was in big trouble for years before foreign aid to the rebeles started coming, and never managed much control beyond repression over the countryside, then the Soviets come in and in 10 years kill between 1 and 2 million people, scorch the countryside and litter mines and UXO everwhere and basically did way more damage to the country and its people than anything that came after (partly because whatever that was would be fighting over rubble). e: The Soviets would have lost in Afghanistan with or without US support for the mujahideen (and even without the US doing that it's likely Pakitan and Saudi Arabia would have done so on their own anyway, Pakistan even was doing so before KSA and the America got involved), whether that means that less Russians would have died in exchange for more Afghans we'll never know, but it would not have resulted in a secular, left-leaning Afghanistan being created as the fruits of a near-genocidal counter-insurgency campaign. Jesus loving christ. Randarkman fucked around with this message at 21:14 on Sep 7, 2021 |
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 21:08
|
|
|
Neurolimal posted:If we're going to talk unrealistic solutions, I wish we could go back in time and prevent the US from arming and training the mujahideen, hopefully culminating in a secular, left-leaning Afghanistan on par with what Iran was on track for before our meddling. USA going as far as to disseminate terrorist-branded jihad textbooks in the school systems there was probably the peak of hypocrisy in that period. Going all out to rewire the populace, starting from childhood, to be religious extremists is when someone in a dusty office room somewhere should've started asking themselves "are we the baddies?"
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 21:46
|
|
|
How are u posted:No, I am not. Don't put those words in my mouth. Pretending that some deus ex machina will happen is the same fundamental mistake that everyone has been making for at least 20 years. You don't have to like your options or be happy about them. But you do need to be honest about what they are. Not talking about reality adds nothing to this conversation.
|
|
#
?
Sep 7, 2021 22:21
|
|
|
One major takeaway from that article is that your enemy's enemy is not necessarily your friend. The Northern Alliance was popularly depicted in the west as some sort of secular freedom fighters, when in reality they were a mix of islamists and warlords of various stripes, like Amir Dado. Ironically, modern Americans would most likely had found the values of the communists of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan, whom the US spent a lot of money fighting by proxy, most aligned with their own. The whole process of picking the next "good guy" reminds me of the Bolivian tree lizard eradication plan on the Simpsons, except without the winter that kills the gorillas. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P9yruQM1ggc
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 00:10
|
|
|
Craptacular! posted:I guess I should emphasize I'm not trying to be like "yay let's restart a war because a piano got wrecked" but it was sort of an amusing moment to see people who have for whatever reason been speaking of the Taliban taking with an almost celebratory tone realize that they won't tolerate some drums. The thing that bothers me about it is that the Taliban blamed the destruction of the Buddhas in Bamiyan on Al Qaeda and OBL in particular, taking a real "naw bro that ain't me" line. It's not good that they're taking it to arts and culture; that's the kind of thing that has led countries like the United States to say "ehh well there's not much of value to lose in having a war here and besides which survivors will be free to act human again." The reality of America's war is that we have surrendered the moral high ground to the actual Taliban. It is a moral good that the Taliban have regained control of Afghanistan over America, not due to any virtue on their part, but just due to the absolutely monstrous depravity of America and its actors
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 00:28
|
|
|
Jasper Tin Neck posted:Ironically, modern Americans would most likely had found the values of the communists of the People's Democratic Party of Afghanistan, whom the US spent a lot of money fighting by proxy, most aligned with their own. Yeah, they were pretty clear about "we think we should impose our values by force, and also: we will do so." It didn't work much better, which is why I don't think the US should've done that. That article, which honestly is just superb, convinced me that the issue in Afghanistan is largely structural, and if you live in an industrialized country whether it's the Soviet Union or the US or any of the countries that were involved in "supporting the Afghan government" then, realistically, you don't know what the gently caress you're talking about because you have no idea what the structure of Afghanistan is like. We can all discuss the issues based on what we know, but honestly, it's completely different from anything we've experienced. I grew up in a small village in Canada that was isolated by western standards, but obviously we'd still go to cities, fly to other countries, we know how to read, and we're aware of world events. There was, probably about a decade ago now, a television program that followed people in Afghanistan going around with photos from 9/11 saying "what is this?" Most people did not know what it was. We lack the context to understand a society in that condition. This is not to say their society is irreparably flawed or damaged somehow; they are just people living within their own experience, shaped by the world around them as they know it. We don't have to agree with the conclusions that they reach, but god knows we have to understand them in order to accomplish anything, and that's where the west failed.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 00:53
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:The reality of America's war is that we have surrendered the moral high ground to the actual Taliban. It is a moral good that the Taliban have regained control of Afghanistan over America, not due to any virtue on their part, but just due to the absolutely monstrous depravity of America and its actors I would be really, really careful with this type of moral-absolutist thinking. The Taliban do not suddenly become Good or Just because they fought Americans. If you adhere to this type of thinking it can take you down some really dark roads.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 01:39
|
|
|
Anti-imperialists and conservatives both are discovering a strange new respect for the Taliban. https://twitter.com/EyesOnTheRight/status/1435313328826589189
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 01:40
|
|
|
How are u posted:I would be really, really careful with this type of moral-absolutist thinking. The Taliban do not suddenly become Good or Just because they fought Americans. If you adhere to this type of thinking it can take you down some really dark roads. dude did you even read my post A big flaming stink posted:not due to any virtue on their part
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 01:43
|
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:dude did you even read my post I absolutely did. quote:It is a moral good that the Taliban have regained control of Afghanistan
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 01:45
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:Anti-imperialists and conservatives both are discovering a strange new respect for the Taliban. As an anti-imperialist I would say a lot of people are getting a little to glib, I'm guilty of this myself. I don't think that translates to support for the Taliban just dumbasses being to smug, but that being said I'd point to America's adventure into Afghanistan as a case study into why American Empire is immoral and stupid. My take away from this whole pointless and tragic mess is that Afghans are more willing to willing to work with russians who within living memory started an agressive war that killed 10% of the entire populatuon that us
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 02:12
|
|
|
Broken brain fascist country https://www.newsweek.com/armed-us-citizens-caught-way-afghanistan-raising-concerns-rogue-civilian-operations-1626852
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 02:32
|
|
|
Sinteres posted:The US isn't actually being pushed back all that hard, but have no fear, the genocidal Chinese government is still an up and coming power! One genocidal power replaced by another!
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 07:44
|
|
|
How are u posted:I absolutely did. That post does not say the Taliban is good. If it helps, think of it like our vote for Joe Biden. Didn't you spend all last year asserting that voting for Biden isn't supporting him, it's just a vote against Trump? So you should be very familiar with the notion that believing it's a moral good for the worst side to lose does not translate into automatically believing the winning side is good.
|
|
#
?
Sep 8, 2021 14:11
|
|
|
Qatar has brought Kabul airport back in business for all flights https://twitter.com/theahmadzia/status/1435933806775742464?s=21
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 13:26
|
|
|
This seems incorrect to me but let's see how it plays out. https://twitter.com/ObaidullaBaheer/status/1435550911846395905
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 17:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 23:50 |
|
|
Al-Saqr posted:Qatar has brought Kabul airport back in business for all flights Looks like flights are already departing. https://twitter.com/airlinewriter/status/1436004124231933958?s=21
|
|
#
?
Sep 9, 2021 17:32
|
|
