An estimated 2.4 million Afghan girls remain excluded from secondary education five years after the Taliban took over the country, a U.N. agency said Tuesday, renewing a call for an immediate restorat...
The money was transferred to accounts used by US relief agencies.
So that means they didn’t count
If I shove you over, take your wallet, hand half the money to my friend who lost his house in a fire, and hand you back an HEB gift card with the other half banked on it? Did I just give you food aid?
In brief tho, the cessation of the opium trade was the largest (internally originated) exacerbating factor to the 2022 famines and completely destroyed the economy in the poorest regions of the country
The sudden loss of an external market for opium exports certainly hurt the Afghan economy overall.
But that market was the result of US military and contractor affiliates and the Karzai government leaving. So… should they simply not have left? Afghanistan should just stay a narco-state forever?
it’s tragic that gay marriage was such an impossible sell to the crossroads muslim population
It’s not an impossible sell. But it’s also not something foreign governments are going to impose on a population at gunpoint.
This is how you get the old Soviet “Gayness is just when the Brits do Imperialism” bad take.
The money was transferred to accounts used by US relief agencies.
So… what’s your point?
If I shove you […] Did I just give you food aid?
Vile sure, but literally yes.
The sudden loss of an external market for opium exports certainly hurt the Afghan economy overall.
I’m sorry, this is just me being genuinely unclear on what you’re saying here - do you mean that the US military and the Karzai government was the primary market for / exporter of Afghan heroin, or that in leaving they somehow restricted the export of heroin in a way that it hadn’t been restricted through their presence, or that there suddenly was no global demand for heroin, or… what? Again not trying to be shitty, genuinely just unclear.
It’s not an impossible sell.
Sure! But it was an impossible sell - and my use of the past tense there was quite intentional. In Afghanistan under Taliban rule it’s still effectively impossible, but the cultural attitudes of the crossroads region as a whole are, incredibly slowly, changing in a more positive direction with regards to homosexuality (outside the bounds of pederasty, which is it’s own disgusting side topic). However my invocation of the concept was to highlight the use of child rape as a rhetorical tool to polarize the attitudes towards the northern alliance, while ignoring that the Taliban’s approach was to simply declare child rape legal if you’re married (but not if it’s gay child rape - no, that’sA Bridge Too Far!). A clever loophole, though still by any other definition child rape.
should they simply not have left? Afghanistan should just stay a narco-state forever?
Bit of a false dilemma here. So stepping around it to the issue, I’m genuinely interested in why you’re presenting the export of narcotics as being a Bad Thing™. That was one common piece of rhetoric trotted out to justify having blown the crap out of some random farming village, and it’s as much a pro-imperialist argument now as it was back then.
This is how you get the old Soviet “Gayness is just when the Brits do Imperialism” bad take.
I’ve not encountered this one before, that’s… another one for the depressingly-on-brand pile, I suppose.
It’s unfortunately a valid question. I don’t know how that factors in to the argument that dismantling USAID hasn’t lead to a famine. Or how it shows that USAID to afghanistan didn’t continue for 3.5 years after the US withdrawal.
You know you could simply elaborate on your point, instead of resorting to accusing me of performatively misunderstanding a confusingly presented argument. This has been quite a pleasant conversation otherwise.
The money was transferred to accounts used by US relief agencies.
If I shove you over, take your wallet, hand half the money to my friend who lost his house in a fire, and hand you back an HEB gift card with the other half banked on it? Did I just give you food aid?
The sudden loss of an external market for opium exports certainly hurt the Afghan economy overall.
But that market was the result of US military and contractor affiliates and the Karzai government leaving. So… should they simply not have left? Afghanistan should just stay a narco-state forever?
It’s not an impossible sell. But it’s also not something foreign governments are going to impose on a population at gunpoint.
This is how you get the old Soviet “Gayness is just when the Brits do Imperialism” bad take.
So… what’s your point?
Vile sure, but literally yes.
I’m sorry, this is just me being genuinely unclear on what you’re saying here - do you mean that the US military and the Karzai government was the primary market for / exporter of Afghan heroin, or that in leaving they somehow restricted the export of heroin in a way that it hadn’t been restricted through their presence, or that there suddenly was no global demand for heroin, or… what? Again not trying to be shitty, genuinely just unclear.
Sure! But it was an impossible sell - and my use of the past tense there was quite intentional. In Afghanistan under Taliban rule it’s still effectively impossible, but the cultural attitudes of the crossroads region as a whole are, incredibly slowly, changing in a more positive direction with regards to homosexuality (outside the bounds of pederasty, which is it’s own disgusting side topic). However my invocation of the concept was to highlight the use of child rape as a rhetorical tool to polarize the attitudes towards the northern alliance, while ignoring that the Taliban’s approach was to simply declare child rape legal if you’re married (but not if it’s gay child rape - no, that’s A Bridge Too Far!). A clever loophole, though still by any other definition child rape.
Bit of a false dilemma here. So stepping around it to the issue, I’m genuinely interested in why you’re presenting the export of narcotics as being a Bad Thing™. That was one common piece of rhetoric trotted out to justify having blown the crap out of some random farming village, and it’s as much a pro-imperialist argument now as it was back then.
I’ve not encountered this one before, that’s… another one for the depressingly-on-brand pile, I suppose.
Jesus, dude
It’s unfortunately a valid question. I don’t know how that factors in to the argument that dismantling USAID hasn’t lead to a famine. Or how it shows that USAID to afghanistan didn’t continue for 3.5 years after the US withdrawal.
Then you’re being deliberately obtuse
You know you could simply elaborate on your point, instead of resorting to accusing me of performatively misunderstanding a confusingly presented argument. This has been quite a pleasant conversation otherwise.
I think I’ve spilled enough ink on the subject
Ah - that would explain why this reads like a blotter…
(that one may be a stretch, I admit)