Tuesday, 31 August 2021

Who To "Blame" For Afghanistan

quote [ Hi. Today we discuss forever war, and explore what it is good for. ]

It's just a fun little trip down memory lane.

Bush Rejects Taliban Offer On Bin Laden - The Washington Post

Peace Activist Kathy Kelly on Reparations for Afghanistan & What the U.S. Owes After Decades of War | Democracy Now!

"Somewhat" related posts. :P
Confidential documents reveal U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanistan

For nearly two decades of war in Afghanistan, U.S. leaders have sounded a constant refrain: We are making progress. They were not, documents show, and they knew it.

Afghan Papers Inadvertently Document WaPoโ€™s Role in Spreading Official Lies

If the Post is now publishing material demonstrating that US officials have been โ€œfollowing the same talking points for 18 years,โ€ emphasizing how they are โ€œmaking progress,โ€ โ€œespeciallyโ€ when the war is โ€œgoing badly,โ€ shouldnโ€™t the paper acknowledge that it has been cheerleading this same line for all of those 18 years? Doesnโ€™t it have a responsibility to examine how it served as a primary vehicle for those officials to spread these same โ€œtalking pointsโ€ to spin the coverage in the desired fashion?

[SFW] [politics] [+2]
[by steele@9:22pmGMT]


rndmnmbr said @ 10:39am GMT on 1st Sep [Score:1 Underrated]
Christ, reading that WaPo article, we really did blindly lash out like a wounded animal after 9/11, didn't we?
steele said @ 1:50pm GMT on 1st Sep [Score:1 Insightful]
The populace did, but I remember it came out at one point that there were people in the whitehouse "cheering" that we were going to use 9/11 to go into Iraq. The Military Industrial Complex and their ilk knew exactly what they were doing.
R1Xhard said @ 11:46pm GMT on 31st Aug
mechanical contrivance said @ 3:29am GMT on 1st Sep
The war, therefore if we judge it by the standards of previous wars, is merely an imposture. It is like the battles between certain ruminant animals whose horns are incapable of hurting one another. But though it is unreal it is not meaningless. It eats up the surplus of consumable goods, and it helps to preserve the special mental atmosphere that the hierarchical society needs. War, it will be seen, is now a purely internal affair. In the past, the ruling groups of all countries, although they might recognize their common interest and therefore limit the destructiveness of war, did fight against one another, and the victor always plundered the vanquished. In our own day they are not fighting against one another at all. The war is waged by each ruling group against its own subjects, and the object of the war is not to make or prevent conquests of territory, but to keep the structure of society intact. The very word "war," therefore, has become misleading. It would probably be accurate to say that by becoming continuous war has ceased to exist. The peculiar pressure that is exerted on human beings between the Neolithic Age and the early twentieth century has disappeared and has been replaced by something quite different. The effect would be much the same if the three superstates, instead of fighting one another, should agree to live in perpetual peace, each inviolate within its own boundaries. For in that case each would still be a self-contained universe, freed forever from the sobering influence of external danger. A peace that was truly permanent would be the same as a permanent war. This--although the vast majority of Party members understand it only in a shallower sense--is the inner meaning of the Party slogan: WAR IS PEACE.

Post a comment
[note: if you are replying to a specific comment, then click the reply link on that comment instead]

You must be logged in to comment on posts.

Posts of Import
If you got logged out, log back in.
4 More Years!
SE v2 Closed BETA
First Post
Subscriptions and Things
AskSE: What do you look like?

Karma Rankings