• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Economic and humanitarian crisis in Afghanistan

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
A government which can sustain itself based on support from within the nation it claims to represent has a more legitimate claim than a government which relies on foreign military invasion. Are you under the impression that Afghanistan voted for the US to invade their country? The institutionalized sexual assault of Afghani women by western troops?
I don't know whether your assertion as to assaults is true or not, so no comment. And unfortunately Afghanistan appears to be one of the countries locked into the past - as to patriarchy - such that it is difficult to see much change. If one would like to see males and females free to have a life they might want rather than imposed upon them, and perhaps by some theocracy or dictatorship, then should we interfere?

The American interference came about after a stupid and outrageous act of violence by a delusional few. :oops:
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
If shows the pitfalls of big brother rule in any form. As people gain more self rule, things always get better; back to the states and cities.

In the USA when big brother thought it knew best all the people got hurt with inflation. When big brother knew best during the Covid pandemic, the economy was messed up setting the stage for the current decline in standard of living.

The same US big brother allowed the big bother Taliban to rise up by leaving them $billion in military armaments as they withdrew. The Taliban had the means to mess up their country with an iron fist of intolerance to anyone who speaks against them; clones. They use the power of force; FBI, to spy, censor and punish. But when people rise to fight back, this can be reversed.
 

metis

aged ecumenical anthropologist
In the USA when big brother thought it knew best all the people got hurt with inflation. When big brother knew best during the Covid pandemic, the economy was messed up setting the stage for the current decline in standard of living.
So, money is more important than human lives?

The same US big brother allowed the big bother Taliban to rise up by leaving them $billion in military armaments as they withdrew.
They destroyed them before leaving but, unfortunately, not all were fully destroyed.

BTW, Trump wanted us to leave a few months earlier.

They use the power of force; FBI, to spy, censor and punish.
Under Nixon, yes; under Biden, no.

But when people rise to fight back, this can be reversed.
Oh, so now you're advocating what? armed insurrection? Your sentence leaves that open to interpretation.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
So, money is more important than human lives?
It all depends upon which human lives, & how much money.
You have more money than you need to survive. Have
you sent all your excess to parts of the world where people
are starving or dying of disease? Of course not.
You place more value on your money than their lives.
This is reasonable, & should be acknowledged as such.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
What a crock. The Taliban violated agreements they made during the U.S. withdrawal and confiscated billions of dollars worth of materiel. If they want foreign aid so much they could simply off to return the stolen hardware for it. But the Taliban would rather have the weapons than help the Afghan people. It is wrong to try to make the U.S. the bad actor in this case. The Taliban are the ones creating the crisis and hardships, not the U.S.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Biden made one good choice about war...not his
vote to invade Iraq, but rather his decision to end
our war in Afghanistan.
I believe you meant his concurrence to continue to implement President Trump’s decision to end the war.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
I believe you meant his concurrence to continue to implement President Trump’s decision to end the war.
Trump planned it.
Biden actually did it.
Trump criticized Biden for it.
This raises the question of whether
Trump would've actually ended it.
 

Brian2

Veteran Member
What a crock. The Taliban violated agreements they made during the U.S. withdrawal and confiscated billions of dollars worth of materiel. If they want foreign aid so much they could simply off to return the stolen hardware for it. But the Taliban would rather have the weapons than help the Afghan people. It is wrong to try to make the U.S. the bad actor in this case. The Taliban are the ones creating the crisis and hardships, not the U.S.

The whole withdrawal was a bit mess up.
But yes the Taliban, if it cared for the people could offer to give the weapons back and the Taliban could also not skim money off the top of any aid that comes into the country if they cared for the people.
So money comes before the lives of people it seems for the Taliban and for the US Governments.
Also if you read the articles you will see that the private foreign aid has not been stopped but the US has also seized assets of Afghanistan.
>>The biggest and most destructive sanction currently facing Afghanistan is the seizure of more than $7 billion of the country’s assets that are held at the US Federal Reserve. This is equivalent to about 40 percent of Afghanistan’s economy, and about 14 months of the country’s imports – which include food, medicine, and infrastructure needs that are vital to public health.<<
This has a flow on effect in the Afghan economy.
It is like an invading country withdrawing and burning the crops and town on the way out.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Trump planned it.
Biden actually did it.
Trump criticized Biden for it.
This raises the question of whether
Trump would've actually ended it.
The Trump plan was to withdraw in the Spring. Biden changed that to the Fall. That change made a world of difference. If you want me to elaborate let me know.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The Trump plan was to withdraw in the Spring. Biden changed that to the Fall. That change made a world of difference. If you want me to elaborate let me know.
Biden spring & fall of the same or different years?
Nonetheless, Biden did what Trump didn't in 4 years.
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Biden spring & fall of the same or different years?
Nonetheless, Biden did what Trump didn't in 4 years.
Trump planned to finish the U.S. withdrawal in the Spring of 2021. Biden delayed that until the late Summer/early Fall of 2021. It is quite clear that Trump pushed the withdrawal faster than many wanted and that he really wanted to finish it in 2020 but the military said that was logistically impossible. A Spring withdrawal would have allowed an orderly withdrawal. The U.S. could have handed control over to the interim Afghan government with support and given them time to assume control. It would also have not given the Taliban forces an opportunity to mobilize. But a later withdrawal date meant U.S. forces had to fight the organized Taliban while transferring control to the interim government while also withdrawing. This lead to the fiasco that Biden created by changing the schedule.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
I don't think you can carpet bomb patriarchy out of a country. The US/Canada and other coalition forces have been implicated in many war crimes in Afghanistan, so while they try to convince their populace that they are on a feminist mission, that is not what this war was about. The framing of the conflict as being about women's rights is simply a modern iteration of an emotional talking point which has been used to justify war for hundreds if not thousands of years.
I don't have an answer for Afghanistan, but I and many others would rather see any country have even basic rights - as to the males and females expecting much the same in this line, and where apparently this is not possible under a religious dictatorship - which the Taliban essentially is.
9/11 was a terrible crime, but it was not an act of war. The pentagon framed it as an act of war to justify a war they were already itching for.

I'd implore you to check out the below article by Snowden.

"September 12 was the first day of a new era, which America faced with a unified resolve, strengthened by a revived sense of patriotism and the goodwill and sympathy of the world. In retrospect, my country could have done so much with this opportunity. It could have treated terror not as the theological phenomenon it purported to be, but as the crime it was. It could have used this rare moment of solidarity to reinforce democratic values and cultivate resilience in the now-connected global public.

Instead, it went to war.

The greatest regret of my life is my reflexive, unquestioning support for that decision. I was outraged, yes, but that was only the beginning of a process in which my heart completely defeated my rational judgment. I accepted all the claims retailed by the media as facts, and I repeated them as if I were being paid for it. I wanted to be a liberator. I wanted to free the oppressed. I embraced the truth constructed for the good of the state, which in my passion I confused with the good of the country. It was as if whatever individual politics I’d developed had crashed—the anti-institutional hacker ethos instilled in me online, and the apolitical patriotism I’d inherited from my parents, both wiped from my system—and I’d been rebooted as a willing vehicle of vengeance. The sharpest part of the humiliation comes from acknowledging how easy this transformation was, and how readily I welcomed it."

9/12
For such an act (9/11) it was probably justified, given they wouldn't give up the instigators of the plot, and hence were harboring terrorists. How would you go about getting at such?
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Trump planned to finish the U.S. withdrawal in the Spring of 2021. Biden delayed that until the late Summer/early Fall of 2021. It is quite clear that Trump pushed the withdrawal faster than many wanted and that he really wanted to finish it in 2020 but the military said that was logistically impossible. A Spring withdrawal would have allowed an orderly withdrawal. The U.S. could have handed control over to the interim Afghan government with support and given them time to assume control. It would also have not given the Taliban forces an opportunity to mobilize. But a later withdrawal date meant U.S. forces had to fight the organized Taliban while transferring control to the interim government while also withdrawing. This lead to the fiasco that Biden created by changing the schedule.
Oh, yeah....Trump's withdrawal would'a gone smoothly
because it would'a been even earlier. I don't think so.
Nonetheless, Biden ripped off the bandage. Trump
only planned it. He could'a done it earlier. He didn't.
The Afghan government was doomed to fall.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
The US has financed terrorism on every continent and it would never allow the architects or financiers of the terror to be extradited to another nation. However I would be surprised if we could find any English speaking person would ever be comfortable with carpet-bombing American citizens to hurt the US government in retaliation for this terror. Why would we be okay with it in Afghanistan?
You are still not answering as to what should have been done. Some countries might have gone even further perhaps. :oops:
 

Shaul

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Oh, yeah....Trump's withdrawal would'a gone smoothly
because it would'a been even earlier. I don't think so.
Nonetheless, Biden ripped off the bandage. Trump
only planned it. He could'a done it earlier. He didn't.
The Afghan government was doomed to fall.
Well you should think so. An early spring withdrawal is absolutely the right time to do so in Afghanistan. Military operations in Afghanistan come to a halt in its winter. Only in Spring could the Taliban organize for operations. Withdrawing before they could get organized would produce the fewest risks. Not just my opinion. If you don’t understand, that’s ok. Before Trump left office he had signed a withdrawal agreement that US forces would be out by May 2021. Biden abrogated that. Biden screwed up.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
Well you should think so. An early spring withdrawal is absolutely the right time to do so in Afghanistan. Military operations in Afghanistan come to a halt in its winter. Only in Spring could the Taliban organize for operations. Withdrawing before they could get organized would produce the fewest risks. Not just my opinion. If you don’t understand, that’s ok. Before Trump left office he had signed a withdrawal agreement that US forces would be out by May 2021. Biden abrogated that. Biden screwed up.
I don't share your optimism that the Afghan people
& government have what it takes to quell the Taliban.
My view has always been to get out ASAP. That'd
stop the flow of money & blood from here to there.
 

Mock Turtle

Oh my, did I say that!
Premium Member
What should've been done?
Literally anything except militarily occupy Afghanistan, commit war crimes and then leave the Taliban with even more weapons and support. Doing nothing would have been better. Noone was saved by the war in Afghanistan. Only death.

I can't imagine a coalition who would've been more equipped to cause havoc than US/Canada and NATO allies who participated.
Well, as often happens, things are not thought through, and punishing those responsible for any terrorism often leads to worse things when there is an endemic problem - as there appears to be in Afghanistan with regards patriarchy and religious dominance. And the same occurred in Iraq - after it attacked Kuwait - leading to a second war and no essential plan as to how to stabilize the country afterwards.

The responses to terrorism might lead to bad things but this could equally be laid at the feet of those who initiate terrorist attacks in the first place.
 
Top