150

submitted 2 weeks ago by ConcreteHalloween@hexbear.net to c/chapotraphouse@hexbear.net

20 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] ReddRatt@hexbear.net 29 points 2 weeks ago

They don't care, these people legitimately don't care. All of planet earth could burn and it still wouldn't matter to the average American reactionary. A tragedy like 9/11 doesn't even hurt them in the slightest, as they don't identify themselves with the people of New York. As if they're completely different "people" despite being under US territory.

[-] AmarkuntheGatherer@lemmygrad.ml 27 points 2 weeks ago

I'm annoyed beyond measure by halfwit western wankers conceding that the US is an oligarchy, ruled by the profit motive and extraction, while not skipping a beat in believing whatever the Usian state department says. "The US is bad but its enemies are the worst" isn't you rationally reaching a conclusion, shit-for-brains, you're just falling for propaganda and the hegemon didn't give a shit if you're unconvinced they're the guys guys full stop.

[-] Belly_Beanis@hexbear.net 26 points 2 weeks ago

Should add Vietnam and Korea to this list.

[-] thefluffiest@feddit.nl 16 points 2 weeks ago

The upside is, this time it’s explicitly said it’s about the oil. At least that’s something

[-] InexplicableLunchFiend@hexbear.net 17 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah so much better to have americans screaming "we took it by force, this is OURS. MIGHT MAKES RIGHT HOORAH USA USA USA!" while they kill me instead of "this is for democracy and human rights" while they kill me

[-] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 8 points 2 weeks ago

Because liberal support is currently not needed, but they are building liberal consent for the war anyway.

[-] DaMummy@hexbear.net 6 points 2 weeks ago

What's it gonna achieve? It's just gonna kill the comedy sketches that were laughing at W for lying that it's about anything but oil. I guess you can claim that it's at least the acceptance stage of grief.

[-] chgxvjh@hexbear.net 14 points 2 weeks ago

The libs are already busy celebrating that the coup was more competent than Russia invading Ukraine.

[-] PKMKII@hexbear.net 12 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Love how Syria doesn’t even get a year, it’s just “whenever the West fucked around in Syria.”

Regarding Afghanistan, I don’t think the Dubya administration would have invaded it if Bin Laden hadn’t appeared to be there. Everything indicates they weren’t interested in the place, they didn’t think it was the fit to try out their right wing version of Trotskyite world building, and they did it as more or less a formality they had to go through to get to Iraq. Now that occupation lasting twenty years, that definitely had nothing to do with terrorism.

[-] DaMummy@hexbear.net 24 points 2 weeks ago

It was a mere coincidence that opiod production shot up in Afghanistan, and that so many people died in USA of an opiod overdose. The two trillion dollars in mineral wealth had nothing to do with it.

[-] PKMKII@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

See, I would put that in the “why America stuck around for twenty years” category. Or put another way, that’s how the Dubya administration took advantage of the situation. But if Bin Laden had been in Pakistan or Saudi Arabia at the time of 9/11, I don’t think they would’ve bothered with Afghanistan.

[-] InexplicableLunchFiend@hexbear.net 15 points 2 weeks ago

He was found in Pakistan…

[-] PKMKII@hexbear.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

Pakistan also bent the knee pretty much immediately whereas the Taliban was more resistant.

[-] InexplicableLunchFiend@hexbear.net 17 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Well probably because they didn’t do 9/11. The countries that actually involved in 9/11 were American allies (Saudis, Israel)

Also, Pakistan openly and knowingly harbored Bin Laden for years. Americans knew he was there too and didn't go after him for quite some time. It's pretty obvious that Bin Laden wasn't the cause of the war when they knew where he was and couldn't be arsed to do anything about it for years. They eventually went and got him, dragging their feet, like a lazy man forced to take out the trash by his spouse

[-] Belly_Beanis@hexbear.net 6 points 2 weeks ago

I think they had their eyes on Iraq and Afghanistan because of previous US involvement in those places that didn't result in total subjugation. They would have preferred Iran, but Iran would have been too difficult to invade or get the justification for to build the Coalition that helped invade both Afghanistan and Iraq.

The US had been fucking around in both countries prior to 9/11 about a decade before and never saw return on their investments. Plus, by choosing those as targets, they could go off existing intelligence and experience from previous adventurism.

[-] InexplicableLunchFiend@hexbear.net 22 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Absolutely not. Afghanistan occupation was pivotal to many American goals. It borders China and Pakistan, giving us a military foothold with airbases within range of both nations as well as the ability to train extremists and have them permeate the borders into Xinjiang. In addition, 90% of the worlds illicit opium supply came from Afghanistan under US occupation, which funded the CIA around the world for decades. We also have all the rare earths and minerals which were more of a long term project.

It had nothing to do with Bin Laden at all, as he wasn’t even in Afghanistan (he was in Pakistan mostly) and it didn’t stop once he was killed but continued on for over a decade

[-] LeninWeave@hexbear.net 13 points 2 weeks ago

Love how Syria doesn’t even get a year, it’s just “whenever the West fucked around in Syria.”

Probably because they did it so much and it took them so long to finally get Al-Qaeda in power that it's hard to choose a year to use, lmao.

[-] darkernations@lemmygrad.ml 6 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

At some point it must be understood that they did not "fall for it again"; it's a licence for murderous bigotry as a function of their material conditions - their class as a westerner:

https://redsails.org/masses-elites-and-rebels/

Dialectial materialism. The material always comes before the idea. Try to learn it if you can. It's a superpower in the west. A primer: