The US Government Lied for Two Decades on Afghanistan

https://greenwald.substack.com/p/the-us-government-lied-for-two-decades

by all_usernames • 5 years ago

36 11 5 years ago

greenwald.substack.com

Jyaif• 5 years ago

When I see this picture, I can't help but think that a drone strike on the palace at the right time would have gotten rid of a good chunk of the taliban leadership.

criticaltinker• 5 years ago

a drone strike on the palace at the right time would have gotten rid of a good chunk of the taliban leadership

It probably would - but even if there were no civilian casualties, consider that such a strike would further radicalize the next generation of Taliban members who are unified by hatred towards a common enemy.

The U.S has been fighting fire with fire for the past 20 years in Afghanistan. The OP hints at the deeper mysterious behind this operation, and voices a concern that is representative of the growing public disdain for the entire fiasco. As much as I want peace and equality for everyone in the region, more drone strikes are unlikely to fix the systemic and generational issues.

xen2xen1• 5 years ago

That was done in Somalia, and was a large part of why Black Hawk Down happened, IIRC. As the sister comment says, drone strikes seem like a simple answer, and people are never simple.

Dma54rhs• 5 years ago

When I see this comment, I can't help but think that this is the thinking that sent Americans into these messes the first place. Ordering drone and air strikes is easy, you have to answer what's next. But you can't. The reality is that their sons will pick up weapons instead and are even more convinced in their ideas.

rasz• 5 years ago

There was never a case of a drone strike ending a war. Nukes on the other hand ... but that is not viable https://www.nti.org/learn/countries/pakistan/nuclear/

mark_l_watson2• 5 years ago

I wonder why more people don't follow Matt Taibbi and Glen Greenwall. I believe them more than I believe MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, etc., and it feels right to me to spend a few dollars a month supporting independent journalism. (I also donate to Democracy Now and NPR).

yann2• 5 years ago

Cause all they do is laugh at incompetent people. Whats to respect about it?

Incompetent people are people who dig themselves into deep holes because they are clueless or crazy. They are not capable of digging themselves out.

Now what happens if such people yank a whole bunch of others into that deep hole? What do you do?

If you are not capable of pulling all of them out sure you can make a big noise and hope grandma or someone shows up to help. But for some problems no one is coming.

And these two fools sell to their fan clubs that grandma will show up if the right noise is produced. For all their giggling and raging, count the number of times that has happened.

CarelessExpert2• 5 years ago

I believe them more than I believe MSNBC, Fox News, CNN, etc.

Why?

Is there some objective reason you believe them more, or is it just that they tell you the things that feel right to you?

Speaking purely for myself, I find Greenwald and Taibbi to be every bit as slanted and shrill as any other source of media, they're just slanted in a different direction.

Should they be included as part of an overall media diet that, on balance, gives you a more rounded view of current events?

Perhaps.

Should they be believed to the exclusion of other media sources? If you're asking me, absolutely not. That's no better than subsisting on a diet solely of Fox or the Times.

mark_l_watson2• 5 years ago

Just my opinion, but what Greenwald and Taibbi say is much more aligned with news from other countries. I occasionally choose one story that interests me, and try to read coverage of the same story from news sources from around the world.

CarelessExpert2• 5 years ago

Honestly, I don't know that I'm with Greenwald all the way to the conclusion, here. I think it's just as possible that successive administrations all fell for a mix of sunk cost fallacies, confirmation bias, poor incentives, etc, that caused leadership to receive or only pay attention to the most rosy results, the best possible models, the most positive data.

Bureaucracies are weird, byzantine things. To assume malice when, given the information we currently have, incompetence is equally likely seems to me to be editorializing.

Is incompetence good? Hell no, and the administration has a lot to answer for. But to assume, not just that the administration didn't know how bad the exit from Afghanistan would be, but that they intentionally lied about it, is a leap that, while possible, I'm not yet willing to make.

TheCuriousGuy• 5 years ago

Yes and what is worse is China will get access to the natural resources at a fraction of what US spent in Afghanistan all these years. More discussion in this podcast episode: https://jingle.fm/p/tabadlabs-dragon-road-1570336991/s01-e08...

The US Government Lied for Two Decades on Afghanistan

Related Stories