Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

t1_j24flvt wrote

It is high time (well past time, actually) for the entire world to wash its hands of Afghanistan entirely. All previous efforts at aid and assistance should be re-directed to assisting the escape and re-settlement of all individuals who wish to escape that irredeemable hellhole.

414

t1_j24romf wrote

Re-settle them where? Afghanistan has a population of 40 million people lol.

124

t1_j24suc7 wrote

Unfortunately most of them are ok with state of affairs. Resettling ones wishing to leave would not be all that difficult.

123

t1_j2553x7 wrote

the world at large traditionally does not handle refugee relocation well. We should, but I think it'll be difficult.

80

t1_j25e7hm wrote

There are some good examples of mass refugee relocation though. Vietnamese were virtually nonexistent in the US until the post-war refugee surge, and they have since settled and integrated quite well. Median household income for Vietnamese Americans is now $72k, which is well above the average, and even above the $66k for White Americans.

Obviously income is not the end all be all number for how well it was all handled, but I think it's a pretty decent proxy.

56

t1_j25v159 wrote

I don't really see a flood of Afghans settling in anywhere near as well as Vietnamese. The Vietnamese that left Vietnam were educated, well off, and cultural values aligned with success.

36

t1_j27myp4 wrote

I don't think that the Vietnam War is a great example of good refugee evactuation

Many of those "rescued" children were kidnapped from their homes.

3

t1_j27mzva wrote

Operation Babylift

>Operation Babylift was the name given to the mass evacuation of children from South Vietnam to the United States and other western countries (including Australia, France, West Germany, and Canada) at the end of the Vietnam War (see also the Fall of Saigon), on April 3–26, 1975. By the final American flight out of South Vietnam, over 3,300 infants and children had been evacuated, although the actual number has been variously reported. Along with Operation New Life, over 110,000 refugees were evacuated from South Vietnam at the end of the Vietnam War. Thousands of children were airlifted from Vietnam and adopted by families around the world.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)

4

t1_j27pm2b wrote

Because for every refugee walking away from this there's also one that is just take advantage and bring their outdated value with them.

Les us have a value test for everyone and il be ok with it.

1

t1_j25uzn3 wrote

Stop talking out your ass. As someone who has worked there and is in close contact with people I've worked with there, the state of affairs is beyond horrendous for almost the entire population. Almost nobody likes it, except for the top Talibs in power.

25

t1_j26imh4 wrote

They had all the means to resist the taliban, if they didn’t it’s because they didn’t want.

20

t1_j26jova wrote

They actually did. 3 months of heavy fighting, thousands of fighters killed on both sides, civilians including women even volunteered to defend against Taliban. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2021_Taliban_offensive

The international headline was that Kabul fell in one day without a bullet fired. It's very misleading not to take into account all the events that led to it in the months prior to it. Unless you were closely following the war, you wouldn't know of the lengthy battles fought in the provinces and border crossings.

20

t1_j26v8hi wrote

No, it’s not just the headline. The afghani military gave up very quickly and surrendered in many areas. The harder battles fought were almost exclusively civilians picking up arms or small regional areas who wanted to remain independent from the taliban.

The military and defense fell faster than even the most conservative international estimates for how long they would hold out and it’s the main reason why we were scrambling at the end to get out before Kabul and the airport were entirely overrun. We had planned to have at a minimum months longer until they got anywhere near the capital.

26

t1_j26wy81 wrote

The worlds top military tried to help for 20 years and couldn’t

17

t1_j2fs83i wrote

To be fair they did weaken the Taliban considerably in 2001 and had the upper hand for the next few years until the fuck ups started that led to Taliban growing again and eventually winning. If Bush didn't have the "we don't negotiate with terrorists" mindset, they could've made peace with the weakened Taliban in 2001 and potentially prevent the 20 year headache.

1

t1_j26tkiq wrote

3000 people died (including both civilian and military deaths). Given that they had 300,000 troops that should have been fighting for their country’s survival, this is quite a small number of casualties. Evidently they didn’t put up much of a fight at all..

13

t1_j289zyf wrote

If you want to know how much efforts it takes to have a free and Democratic country, look at Ukrainians.

Nothing less will do when you deal with fanatics.

The Afghan had their chance and they gave up. Now they will have to deal with the consequences of their actions as no one will go there and die for them.

2

t1_j2901xc wrote

They folded like pussies in months. You have to fight for your rights! A nation of 40 million people enslaved with only a few thousand dead -- with American backing? These people are craven and deserve no nation at all. Their modus operandi is child rape and opium abuse. Living under harsh Islam is their just returns.

Contrast with the Ukrainians.

1

t1_j25nuie wrote

This is honestly just opening your arms up to widespread terrorism if anything too unfortunately

9

t1_j283u9g wrote

What else are we supposed to do? Invade again? Unfortunately, this seems to be what Afghanis are OK with.

1

t1_j268xdu wrote

No, the vast majority WANT the current state of affairs. Only a very small minority living in the cities were anti-taliban. People have to remember that Afghanistan was a stone age society 20 years ago. We cannot force idealogical change.

9

t1_j28p4wb wrote

>Afghanistan was a stone age society 20 years ago

Yeah no it wasn't.

5

t1_j27dusj wrote

I'm gonna go ahead and say 50% of the rural population also is anti Taliban (women). But they have no power.

4

t1_j27s52w wrote

I wouldn't be so sure about that. If you watch some of the early 1900s interviews of women talking about the right to vote, a surprising number were anti-suffrage. An entire system of oppression cannot be maintained without participation from both genders. Maybe 50% of young women in Afghanistan are anti Taliban but women in general are probably not anti Taliban.

5

t1_j2645sp wrote

Hahaha. 95% of all countries would deny all help and the other 5% would face national backlash because their population hates foreigners.

5

t1_j263qtm wrote

What? The majority of the country is facing extreme food shortages, how are they ok with the situation there?

2

t1_j257414 wrote

Well, I’m a female in the US and I have a spare room. If someone could get an Afghan refugee to me there would be free accommodation, free food, and paid work to do when they felt up to it. I would dearly love to get a woman out of there and to safety.

The problem is all the goddamned bureaucrats between her and me.

I think assisting the ones who want to leave is all we can do. A people have to sort out their own internal problems because our attempts at intervention make things worse. Anyone who Nopes out of it is welcome at my place though. If they like dogs anyway.

I can’t solve everyone’s problems. I can’t bring out a whole family. I can assist one person, which is what I can do. Preferably female because I am female and that is my preference. You might take a male or a whole family.

If everyone did what they could do the Taliban would soon run out of victims. Doing nothing because you would prefer to solve a different problem is exactly that, doing nothing.

10

t1_j25b2gh wrote

It’s not bureaucrats, it’s the entire society. Most people would not want to go without their family and you probably can’t fit her, her husband, 3 kids, cat and mother-in-law in your spare room.

33

t1_j25h1i9 wrote

Also you’ll find out that even their “liberals” are raging right wing religious nut jobs by our standards.

25

t1_j25h67u wrote

In the meantime reach out to local women's shelters, there are many women in need of help to escape abusive situations. You can still transform the lives of many women, they just won't be Afghan. ♥️

14

t1_j261dn7 wrote

Think globally act locally. It's easy to look at a news story of a far off place and say I would totally help them! Well that's great that you have a desire to help because there are neglected seniors, foster kids without homes and abused young folks of all kinds who could use a big brother/sister right where you are right now that would be thrilled with your help and require a lot less red tape. Start there!

9

t1_j25bzg3 wrote

That’s very nice of you!

3

t1_j25fgy6 wrote

Well it would be if there wasn’t a ton of officials to wade through first. I have no idea how to extract someone. It’s all good intentions right now, which achieves nothing :(

−3

t1_j25c2kg wrote

I've noticed all you guys only want to get the women out and forget about the boys and men who are also suffering

−14

t1_j25e8oz wrote

Quit it with that shit dude. They aren’t suffering nearly as much as the women, who are being persecuted, and having their lives uprooted, and basic human rights revoked, just simply because they were born women. Men aren’t being told they will no longer have access to education. Men aren’t forced to cover their bodies head to toe. Men aren’t forced into a life of servitude just because of their sex.

Sure, there are men and boys who I’m sure are struggling. But they aren’t facing persecution simply because of their sex.

Get out of here with that dumbass shit.

7

t1_j25icqp wrote

While I agree with most of what you say, young boys do have a rough time over there as well, being male doesn't give them immediate protection, they get sold off to slavery and used for sexual purposes, check out bacha bazi for more information. Again, not disagreeing with what you said, just that if it's anything like other third world countries being male alone doesn't protect you, connections to powerful people are what keep you safe.

7

t1_j25ve2g wrote

Pakistan, since they bear a big chunk of responsibility in Af's affairs /s

1

t1_j26llgc wrote

We can just pick a tiny Country somewhere with people already living in it then just start depositing them there and funnel lots of Military Aid and hardware to them for decades.

1

t1_j25f2iq wrote

I'd imagine the majority of the people wanting out will be female... but to get out they will need a male relative to accompany them.

66

t1_j25pre6 wrote

Was there in 2006, was real shitty. But, the people under the government and their tribal leaders were really astounding. That being said. There is poo everywhere, and it dries, then a helo lands or the wind picks up and you get poo-dirt in your mouth. Then you get the shits and sweat. Afghanistan is a hard place and letting it be only reminds the taliban that they can be dickheads, but reminders that rest of the world is capable of driving them back into the mountains weighs on their collective conscience (I understand that this is futile, but it’s their fragile “governments” reality)

9

t1_j2678vo wrote

Evacuate all the women and wall off the place so that no beast can ever escape and murder again.

5

t1_j24qu5n wrote

condemning those who live their to famine and disease is much like condemning the son for the sins of the father. it's exceedingly stupid and the taliban are not the types to yield so if it's just a bluff then it's still ineffective, and if it's a serious threat then it clearly won't deter them.

−18

t1_j24wo2e wrote

What exactly is everyone supposed to do about Afghanistan? I've seen people say we should help, I've seen people say we should just leave them alone entirely, and both times people have said we can't do that.

29

t1_j252lym wrote

Reminds me of the Andy's wiping problem. At some point you have to give up.

9

t1_j253peu wrote

This is a weird feedback loop that some people fall into. They look at strife abroad and think surely we must help but almost always it ends up badly and then they think we have no business even being there until the next problem that tugs at their heartstrings arises.

It’s a bit of a straw man but I’ve seen it play out enough to disregard that. People can say I’m full of shit but here’s what comes next/has been happening. We decide we are going to do something but with no military intervention. We give food but local warlords seize it and only dole out generous portions to themselves and their most loyal supporters and if there’s any left everyone else can fight over it. Warlords keep doing business as usual because we’re feeding them and regular people, the ones we’re desperately trying to help, starve. Which brings us back to either cutting off all aid or military intervention, which we’ve already tried and failed, to ensure the people are getting the food and other supplies.

Frankly I think you’ve got the right idea of skipping over the next part. There’s nothing we can do so why enable the warlords. I’m open to an alternative I’ve just never heard a one personally.

Edit: some words

8

t1_j2529ds wrote

Could have just not left, leaving 40 million people to lose human rights was a bad thing actually. Or we could have actually built the Afghan army to operate independent of us instead of being 100% dependent on us.

Like, no matter how you look at it this is our fault.

−9

t1_j2541ms wrote

Did you witness the last 20 years? What should've been done differently ?

15

t1_j255zur wrote

Well, aside from the fact this was always going to be a generational conflict if we wanted to actually change the country, a good start would have been building an Afghan military that wasn't entirely reliant on us for logistics, intelligence, procurement, maintenance, training, air support, CasEvac, you know. Literally every support function.

We cut the cord practically over night, leaving behind a military that was all tooth no tail, and then justified the abandonment as the same moralizing bullshit we use to claim poverty is the fault of the impoverished.

−1

t1_j258fdw wrote

They did nothing to stand against the Taliban, repeatedly. You can't help people who clearly don't want to be helped.

7

t1_j252i38 wrote

>and the taliban are not the types to yield so if it's just a bluff then it's still ineffective

Shrug. At this point who cares. Don't ask them for anything. Don't send them anything. Maybe your god will provide for you because the rest of us won't.

3

t1_j24w6yi wrote

Taliban : your concern has been noted

What are you gonna do ban our Twitter?

177

t1_j24dr9u wrote

They won't - What you gonna do?

86

t1_j266odl wrote

Same thing the UN will do, they will be very angry, they will be so angry they will send an angry letter telling how angry they are.

20

t1_j29awnd wrote

The UN is not meant to do things, its meant to be a forum for international politics.

1

t1_j29hwxo wrote

It a joke from team America, it references they are totally useless to stop things like these and shouldn’t rely on the UN to help issues like these

1

t1_j29wsid wrote

Yar, read it in Hans "Bricks" (Blix)'s accent :P, but the in this context I just wanted to point out that the sentiment was a bit off, that's all.

1

t1_j25fgui wrote

A few things come to mind:

borderline ignore

conditional aid(bribe),

sanctions,

back opponents to regime(diplomatically, financially, militarily),

occupy (again...),

drone strikes,

sabotage,

assassinate someone important(I dunno if that would really halt them that much),

nuke(might be a bit of an overreaction)

Not a lot of those are appealing or effective, so the likely course of action is to just sort of let them be whilst nudging and teasing it where you can, and hope that the situation improves it self.

Diplomacy is a complex and nuanced art, of which I know very little, so I'm sure there are more nuanced ways for changing a country situation externally(if you want too).

12

t1_j26ktw5 wrote

Doesn’t conditional aid fail because they agree to terms and then the warlords just take resources and ignore promises until it’s time to rinse and repeat?

9

t1_j29a6kq wrote

That's if you pay in one lump sum, the idea is that you give it over in installments depending if the requested conditions are met and maintained. I don't know the exact balance but sometimes aid is sort of meant as a bribe. You write it up to aid the people but in reality you fully expect the local leaders to embezzle it. Its just a hard pill to swallow for the people back home, however for international politics bribery is a legitimate and important diplomatic tool.

1

t1_j25en8b wrote

We'll invade them and put them in their place!

oh wait...

4

t1_j24gvim wrote

Or what?

47

t1_j24obfv wrote

Well some of the charities have withdrawn , as it has become untenable, so much needed aid is not available.

33

t1_j25fizw wrote

"Oi! Taliban! We don't like the way you're treating your people. If you don't sort your shit out, mate, we're gonna cut the aid money we send to help your people. That oughta show you right good it will!"

3

t1_j248wnt wrote

This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 72%. (I'm a bot)

> Major world powers have called on the Taliban to urgently reverse a "Reckless and dangerous" decision to ban women from working for aid agencies and charities.

> In a joint statement, foreign ministers from 12 countries, as well as an EU representative, warned the ban on women working in non-governmental organisations would have an inevitable impact on UN aid programmes because many of these multimillion-dollar relief efforts were delivered and designed by NGOs.

> "The Taliban continue to demonstrate their contempt for the rights, freedoms, and welfare of the Afghan people, particularly women and girls, and their disinterest in normal relations with the international community," the statement read. "[We] are in close contact with the United Nations, who are urging, also on behalf of all international donors, that the Taliban reverse this decision immediately.

Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: women^#1 aid^#2 Taliban^#3 international^#4 Afghanistan^#5

38

t1_j24d3fz wrote

LOL. I'm sure the Taliban will really take that advice to heart.

21

t1_j25f2t0 wrote

They blow themselves up to kill civilians and post torture/execution videos on the internet.
They are literally terrorists that wants everyone in the west dead.

I dont think they are going to care what people think of them.

14

t1_j25vbe8 wrote

You're confusing them with ISIS - they're the ones who posted such videos on the internet and want to annihilate the west entirely.

10

t1_j269644 wrote

If you let only males be aid workers, they will start fucking the poor females for food and aid in return. That's what happened in mass in Syria and there was a huge scandal about it.

13

t1_j26bol9 wrote

Well, and, plus, according to Islamic laws in Afghanistan, women can only be examined by female doctors. This isn't even getting into the fact that most social workers just are women.

10

t1_j26e2h8 wrote

Why would they listen to the G7? Are they asking for IMF loans or something?

5

t1_j24eh8z wrote

phew, im sure the talibal will now revert it all and will make afganisthan into a great working democracy with female rights

4

t1_j25owgr wrote

No Femail aid workers, no women getting healthcare. That's probably their reasoning

3

t1_j26kt7i wrote

We need to let this nation sort itself out rather than continuing to prop up the Taliban by letting them outsource basic governing functions to NGOs.

3

t1_j2795iw wrote

Jesús fucking christ, let those freaking cavemen be...don't bother them, don't acknowledge them, just let them be..eventually they always turn on each other and figure things out on their own ...

2

t1_j29qok0 wrote

How does the rest of the Muslim world feel about the Taliban’s and Iran’s abuse? I know there is a lot of infighting between Muslim factions but why don’t we see public condemnation from the rest of the Muslim world?

2

t1_j26g1hx wrote

I’m sure the Taliban will have a reasonable and measured response to such a request, clearly they have a track record of respecting international organizations…..

1

t1_j283yql wrote

Everybody wanted to complain and say that the US military needed to pull out of Afghanistan without thinking about what we were actually doing there. We are the ones that removed the Taliban from power and it was our presence in Afghanistan that prevented the Taliban from regaining power. So now the question that needs to be asked is…. What’s worse, Taliban oppression or a couple thousand US soldiers?

1

t1_j2axaal wrote

Let’s send in the following armies to Afghanistan: Maurya Empire-failed. Alexander the Great-failed. Rashidun Caliphate-failed. Genghis Khan-failed. Timurid Empire of Timur-failed. Mughal Empire-failed. Various Persian Empires-failed. British Empire (2x’s)-failed. Soviet Union-failed. and dang it… there’s one more…

1

t1_j26ihdz wrote

[deleted]

−5

t1_j26npqp wrote

Irrational Trudeau hate once again. His policy's aren't great but when you look at the alternatives they are middle of the road in most situations. Id rather mediocre at this point then an actual nut job like Danielle Smith. She is a conspiracy theory crazy person, and nothing she spouts fact checks. The only other real alternative is Jagmeet Singh, who i would be curious to give a chance and see what he would do with a minority government.

Most of the things i see the "fuck Trudeau Crowd" spouting is nonsense and made up social media redirect from the far right who are trying to win votes with fanaticism and lies. When they could focus on some of the actual problems with the liberal government. For example overspending, and reneging on their promise for voting reform. Instead all we get is, Truckers need vaccines and mask mandates, my rights! Like any sensible country in the world has mask and vaccine mandates. Why would we not use medical science to reduce human suffering, because of some right wing grifters?

4

t1_j24zzlg wrote

It’s war against females. It’s sick and evil perpetuated largely by the men of Afghanistan, along with the area surrounding. Those who choose to fight against them are small in number.

My idea is to arm, support, provide ongoing on base education to create a female resistance army in Afghanistan. The men can’t do it but I’ll wager a shiny bauble that if the women there find out there’s an army, they’ll do some changes.

−15

t1_j251ies wrote

Arm?

Gee whiz. That went well the last 20 years. A trillion dollars in US military expenditure and guess what the result is?

How about just Butt out and stop trying to micromanage other societies? Much of the regression in Iran and Afghsnistan is due to a backlash against Western interference.

22

t1_j2572du wrote

Agreed. The urge of the western world to bring freedom & liberation (and all their good values) to the rest of the world needs to stop. Let them evolve on their own. Just a few decades ago the American women and coloured did not have equal rights.. they evolved from within, nobody had to fund them.

7

t1_j25amt9 wrote

You cannot force people to change, even if they are objectively wrong. Attempting to do so will just make it worse, as we have seen over and over. We just have to hope they decide to change for themselves and be ready to encourage and support them when that time comes.

3

t1_j25g0ro wrote

It is almost like they were all just pretending to be good kids while the guests are visiting (US been in Afghanistan for 2 decades) & then immediately went back to their daily lives/quarrels when the guest left! Lol

2

t1_j25mg5e wrote

I didn’t say anything about the U.S. but that’s just like you sort to invite yourself when no one asked. And my plan wasn’t to start and mismanage a corrupt war, if it were I’d have asked you coup starting jokers along.

And another thing, just because you fools supported an invasion of IRAQ over ‘weapons of mass destruction’, then kept supporting it (and re-elected the even bigger fool who called for it) doesn’t in anyway suggest there aren’t better people to wage a war against the Taliban and certainly I think an all female army would be far superior than what you guys mounted for 20 years, (which you couldn’t handle by yourselves to begin with: see rotation in from UK and Canadian forces to help you sorted lot out).

−2

t1_j282yw9 wrote

Yeah. Who do you think would arm and train these female warriors you suggest? Lol

1