Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

billpalto t1_j9uamf3 wrote

It reminds me of North Korea. The people are starving, and the leadership spends the money not on food but on weapons to threaten their neighbors. Should the neighbors enable this by providing food to the starving people?

The Taliban made the decision that they would rather their kids starve than let them be fed by a woman who won't cover her head. Should we enable their behavior?

126

passinghere t1_j9uq31v wrote

> Should the neighbors enable this by providing food to the starving people?

Even if the neighbours try that you can guarantee that almost everything they provide will be taken and used or sold elsewhere by the wealthy in charge and fuck all will get to the poor / starving that really need it

44

burningphoenix77888 OP t1_j9ud5gp wrote

That’s the problem. Both options are complete shit.

Frankly what should be done is giving aid to the remaining Republican resistance groups. But seems politicians are too cowardly to do that.

And aiding the Taliban also indirectly aids Al Qaeda since the Taliban went back on their agreement in Doha. So if we help stabilize the country, thats more money that could go to Al Qaeda. It’s completely fucked.

26

successful_nothing t1_j9ur6lp wrote

> Frankly what should be done is giving aid to the remaining Republican resistance groups. But seems politicians are too cowardly to do that.

I don't know if that really is that case, as there might be some covert support still provided to internal resistance groups in Afghanistan. But, overtly funding a resistance group would be a pretty bold move after leaving the country and seeing the Taliban easily take over, and it would undoubtedly be met with international condemnation for continuing to stoke instability and war in Afghanistan. I mean, let's be real here, even just on reddit, how many smug comments about "U.S.-funded terrorists" would you imagine seeing on any given thread? Moreover, overtly funding a resistance would only serve to give the Taliban more legitimacy, because that's where the Taliban thrives -- in fighting a foreign enemy. Now they've been largely denied that boogeyman, they're in shambles.

9

burningphoenix77888 OP t1_j9utxy7 wrote

That’s true. It would be better for it to be covert. Tajikistan is also not so secretly giving them safe harbor as well as bank access where the online donations to the NRF go.

Still. I feel if they were getting any significant amount of support beyond what Tajikistan is doing that they wouldn’t be getting crushed the way they are.

Remember that the US didn’t send any material support to the Northern Alliance until after 9/11 happened (the lack of aid arguably indirectly led to Massoud’s death). Had we in the 90’s covertly sent to the northern alliance the level of material aid we are sending Ukraine, the invasion may never have been necessary.

I’m worried we are making that same mistake again and that history may rhyme once Al Qaeda central rebuilds. We should have sent a fuckload of support during the battle for Panshjir. But we didn’t and the rebels were forced to resort to hit and run tactics now.

3