|
Post by ofunknownorigins on Apr 23, 2024 1:10:45 GMT
I understood that as far as Afghanistan but it was utter bullshit as far as Iraq went and people knew it at the time. Iraq has nothing to do with 9/11, Saddam Hussein was a evil man but the years of hell we unleashed on that country was worse than anything he ever did to them. And Saddam was a US boogeymen! Our good buddy against Iran in the 80's. Sure, and Saddam kept the region stable. He kept ISIS in prisons. It was a huge blunder to take him out.
Don't forget that the U.S. installed the Mujahadeen and the Taliban in power in Afghanistan in the 80's as well.
Incorrect. The Taliban did not exist as a group until 1988 in Kandahar. The Mujahadeen became the northern alliance in the 1990s that fought the Taliban, including being our Allie’s against them in 2001.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Apr 23, 2024 1:21:17 GMT
Sure, and Saddam kept the region stable. He kept ISIS in prisons. It was a huge blunder to take him out.
Don't forget that the U.S. installed the Mujahadeen and the Taliban in power in Afghanistan in the 80's as well.
Incorrect. The Taliban did not exist as a group until 1988 in Kandahar. The Mujahadeen became the northern alliance in the 1990s that fought the Taliban, including being our Allie’s against them in 2001. That's why included the Mujahadeen. There was a progressive secular government in Afghanistan in the 80's. The U.S. helped overthrow them which ultimately led to the Taliban. Same religious nuts.
|
|
|
Post by ofunknownorigins on Apr 23, 2024 1:42:06 GMT
Incorrect. The Taliban did not exist as a group until 1988 in Kandahar. The Mujahadeen became the northern alliance in the 1990s that fought the Taliban, including being our Allie’s against them in 2001. That's why included the Mujahadeen. There was a progressive secular government in Afghanistan in the 80's. The U.S. helped overthrow them which ultimately led to the Taliban. Same religious nuts. That government was having people massacred, including entire villages, in their effort to modernize the restive rural regions.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Apr 23, 2024 1:49:19 GMT
That's why included the Mujahadeen. There was a progressive secular government in Afghanistan in the 80's. The U.S. helped overthrow them which ultimately led to the Taliban. Same religious nuts. That government was having people massacred, including entire villages, in their effort to modernize the restive rural regions. Both sides we're full of shit. The Taliban put women in burkas and allowed child sex trafficking. The U.S. never accomplished anything by getting involved. They just kicked us out, remember?
|
|
|
Post by ofunknownorigins on Apr 23, 2024 1:55:53 GMT
That government was having people massacred, including entire villages, in their effort to modernize the restive rural regions. Both sides were full of shit. The Taliban put women in burkas and allowed child sex trafficking. The U.S. never accomplished anything by getting involved. They just kicked us out, remember? It’s possible in the early 2000s things could’ve worked out for us but Bush decided to invade Iraq, sapping resources for his dream attack. The same could be said for the Soviets in 1984/85.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Apr 23, 2024 2:01:43 GMT
Both sides were full of shit. The Taliban put women in burkas and allowed child sex trafficking. The U.S. never accomplished anything by getting involved. They just kicked us out, remember? It’s possible in the early 2000s things could’ve worked out for us but Bush decided to invade Iraq, sapping resources for his dream attack. The same could be said for the Soviets in 1984/85. Neo-Conservative theoreticians have been proposing these invasions since the 1970's. What was his dream attack, Iran? If we had left Hussein in Iraq we could have used Iraq against Iran.
|
|
|
Post by ofunknownorigins on Apr 23, 2024 3:00:32 GMT
It’s possible in the early 2000s things could’ve worked out for us but Bush decided to invade Iraq, sapping resources for his dream attack. The same could be said for the Soviets in 1984/85. Neo-Conservative theoreticians have been proposing these invasions since the 1970's. What was his dream attack, Iran? If we had left Hussein in Iraq we could have used Iraq against Iran. No it was Iraq. Saddam was a pain in the ass and a brute to his people, but he did keep Iran checked.
|
|
|
Post by Prince Myshkin on Apr 23, 2024 3:16:12 GMT
Neo-Conservative theoreticians have been proposing these invasions since the 1970's. What was his dream attack, Iran? If we had left Hussein in Iraq we could have used Iraq against Iran. No it was Iraq. Saddam was a pain in the ass and a brute to his people, but he did keep Iran checked. Okay. So Junior wanted to finish the job his father didn't. Still, it was a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by Harry Skywalker on Apr 23, 2024 3:30:48 GMT
And Ukraine haters and Russia lovers just suffered another major public humiliation.
Ukraine Forever!!!
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Apr 23, 2024 8:09:46 GMT
I don't even think the Ukraine can retake the Donbass or sever the land bridge that Russians have from Crimea to the Donbass. The West is still lagging behind Russia in production of artillery shells and this is not something that will be corrected anytime soon. It would probably take a couple of years to do that and the clock might be ticking in Asia and then what? Goodbye US support because the Indo Pacific region is far more important than the eastern parts of Ukraine. Also given the Western military adventures in the last 20 years, I'm very skeptical of Western leadership on matters of war. And for us Europeans the Ukraine is more important. Putin clearly wants to test the "Western Leadership" of the USA bc he knows that for them (and 5 years ago for the UK, but that has changed in the meantime) the Indo-Pacific is more important. There is one thing we shouldn't forget: both wars (Israel/Palestina and Russia/Ukraine) are also wars of disinformation (on both sides). And in the case of Russia attacking Ukraine it is of utter importance not to lose too many nations towards the new narrative of the frontline "Everyone on the globe against Western (former) colonial forces". That's not entirely wrong. Just check the nations that actually imposed sanctions on Russia. Russia is not isolated at all and IMF predictions say that Russia is about grow by 5%, more than EU countries. But you know, sanctions work. But again, if Ukraine has no chance to taking back lost territory, we're wasting money and time. And most importantly, Ukraine is bleeding lives.
|
|
|
Post by ofunknownorigins on Apr 23, 2024 12:19:57 GMT
No it was Iraq. Saddam was a pain in the ass and a brute to his people, but he did keep Iran checked. Okay. So Junior wanted to finish the job his father didn't. Still, it was a mistake. Of course it was a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Apr 23, 2024 13:11:44 GMT
It’s possible in the early 2000s things could’ve worked out for us but Bush decided to invade Iraq, sapping resources for his dream attack. The same could be said for the Soviets in 1984/85. Neo-Conservative theoreticians have been proposing these invasions since the 1970's. What was his dream attack, Iran? If we had left Hussein in Iraq we could have used Iraq against Iran.The US did use Iraq against Iran. It was even supporting Iraq when Iraq was using chemical weapons against Iran.
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Apr 23, 2024 13:50:04 GMT
Russia launched a war of aggression and choice against Ukraine. By providing aid, the U.S. is extending a lifeline, giving Ukrainians a fighting chance at their freedom. If you want to convince us that this is a mistake, I'll tell you this - likening this U.S. policy to our own invasion of Iraq can only persuade me that you are wrong. You are not accounting for the "everything the USA does is necessarily wrong" approach. Indeed. He goes on about past U.S. follies, but can offer no direct criticisms against our simply sending aid to enable the free Ukrainian people in their fight against an autocratic invader. Maybe it's because he can't think of any.
|
|
|
Post by cts1 on Apr 23, 2024 14:15:29 GMT
You are not accounting for the "everything the USA does is necessarily wrong" approach. Indeed. He goes on about past U.S. follies, but can offer no direct criticisms against our simply sending aid to enable the free Ukrainian people in their fight against an autocratic invader. Maybe it's because he can't think of any. Basically, it is the Caitlin Johnstone "the USA is original sin" theory.
|
|
|
Post by kuatorises on Apr 23, 2024 14:34:43 GMT
Yeah, not really. He has a very lengthy resume. The war Bush unleashed killed at least 100k, maybe 200k. I guess it's who does the counting, which is probably the worst thing of all, we're comparing this like it justified what we did there. This is "just" deaths:
This isn't the rapes, people tortured, etc.
|
|