This. Americans got their blood lust. Everything else didn't really matter. Surprised they hung around 20 years TBH.
Afghanistan
- Thread starter Sherzad
- Start date
The Taliban weren't involved with 9/11. They did nothing to help Al Qaeda.
It was an American flight school that trained the main hijacker. The US military should have bombed themselves.
Then why didn't they go after the Saudis?
Their allies? Still don't believe it was just about "getting revenge". Main goal was probably to get in Iraq, which they did with lies and deceit in the end.
It absolutely was. For the optics alone, Bush had to go to war and he had to rack up a body count. There's no way the American electorate would have settled for a peaceful resolution.
Then why not lie it was Iraqi hijackers then?
Afghanistan has been in mess long before the 2001. You could argue that a lot of things improved over the last 20 years, but to just leave and the whole thing be unwound in a couple of months is pretty shocking.
The Taliban were, are and always will be an bunch of absolute fecking cnuts. They were harbouring Bin Laden to boot.
The Taliban were, are and always will be an bunch of absolute fecking cnuts. They were harbouring Bin Laden to boot.
Just for the record: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/afghanistan.392369/page-15
They have improved immensely since 2001, but ultimately, you can't win against a militant group that can hop back and forth across the Pakaistani border at will to perpetually re-arm and plot new attacks in Afghanistan.
I'll merge
Apart from the training camps, providing a base of operations, and political protection, what did the Taliban ever do for Bin Laden?
Afghanistan was a justified target for the US post 9/11. Whether it was a wise one, is a different question.
They did later and then claimed they had weapons of mass destruction.
You're probably right, Americans are as bloodthirsty as the worst of them.
What a silly, silly comment that shows no understanding of 9/11 whatsoever.
Nor would ANY country given what had been done to the twin towers. The moment the second tower fell, it was clear someone had declared war on the US. Everyone watching it knew it.
Neither the the Taliban nor Afghanis in general did do any of those things. They just happened to be neighbours.
Yeah, no.
From wiki:
"Following the September 11 attacks orchestrated by al-Qaeda, the United States under the Bush administration issued an ultimatum to Afghanistan to hand over Osama bin Laden and other high ranking al-Qaeda officials and shut down all al-Qaeda training camps within the country. In an interview with Voice of America, Omar was asked if he would give up Osama bin Laden. Omar replied, "No. We cannot do that. If we did, it means we are not Muslims, that Islam is finished. If we were afraid of attack, we could have surrendered him the last time we were threatened."
Lots more in this BBC obit about the personal ties between bin Laden and mullah Omar including the allegation that bin Laden part funded the taliban.
The US is not quick to go to war? And it"s citizens in general approve of this.
Beyond this, the Taliban welcomed Al-Qaeda into Afghanistan which allowed the latter free access to use the country as a haven from which to plan their terrorist activities. Therefore the invasion was inevitable once the Taliban refused to give him up.
Try reading your own post. None of what Omar said is related to anything you've claimed above.
The Taliban were a loosely assembled armed militia. Just like Al Qaeda were a loosely assembled armed militia. They simply happened to exist next to each other.
The only thing Afghanistan had to do with 9/11 was that it was a remote location where a group of people could formulate a plan and train for an attack. That could literally have happened anywhere in the world. Including Germany and a flight school in Florida.
47,245 Afghani civilians died because America got a bloody nose and needed somebody to take out its rage on.
Last edited:
The Taliban weren't the government. It was America who invited Al Qaeda into Afghanistan to fight the Russians.
And OBL wasn't the Taliban's to give up. It took a decade for the US military to do it themselves.
It was politically expedient for Bush that Al Qaeda wasn't destroyed on day one. The US was (and still is) better suited to fighting a conventional war than an asymmetric one. That's what the public wanted and expected.
Quite so.
How so?
The Taliban only formed in 1994. Al Qaeda (and its predecessors) were in Afghanistan from 1978.
So, you support the Taliban and their actions in Afghanistan?
No. I don't support the US military and actions in Afghanistan either. And just to pre-empt your next post, I also don't support the actions of Bolsanaro in Brazil.
Its true they didn't control the entire country, but they were considered the defacto government since they ran much of the country and controlled Kabul, Kandahar, Jalalabad and other key areas. They also oversaw Al-Qaeda's involvement in Afghanistan and Bin Ladin reciprocated by helping them against the Northern Alliance.
The invasion was inevitable and justified given the free reign Al-Qaeda had to plot further attacks from within Afghanistan. Unlike the Iraq invasion, there was a fairly broad consensus that the US could go in and remove Al-Qaeda and their Taliban benefactors to prevent Afghanistan from being used for further terror attacks.
The trouble with the US involvement in Afghanistan is that the American public largely forgot about it and there wasn't much of an appetite to continue among politicians. If 20 years of fighting and rebuilding wouldn't do the trick, then neither would staying another 10 imo.
So Americans hated Afghanistan for its freedom?
Al Qaeda could literally plot further attacks from anywhere. Including America. As evidenced by the rise of global terror in the aftermath of the invasion. And also domestic terror within the US.
I don't necessarily disagree with the idea of invading for the express purpose of finding OBL. It was obviously a futile exercise because he was always going to have an escape plan on 9/12. But I get it that particular impetus.
What I don't get is the declaration of total war on Afghanistan. Like I said previously, it was about revenge more than justice or resolution of any wider issues.
The point is that rebuilding was always an afterthought. The US went in half-cocked in October 2001 without thinking any of that through. Helping innocent Afghanis was never on the priority list.
The rebuilding bit was part of the strategy from the beginning - after the Taliban were expelled and the last remnants of Al-Qaeda were captured or killed. Its how the new Afghan government was stood up and all the rebuilding of infrastructure, expansion of schools (including for girls), and training of the new military was done. Trouble is, the Taliban eventually reformed and used the fact that there was a porous border with Pakistan (if you can call it that) to use it as a home base to launch a new war from across the border and throughout many rural areas in the south.
Well, Bin Laden was mates with Mullah Omar from the Mujaheddin days. He raised money there. He backed the Taliban in its wars, with armed men, to consolidate its control over the country. Mullah Omar was the leader of the country. The Taliban, which he founded, controlled most of the country, and its key cities, and had established Sharia law in those regions. It simply won't do to pretend that the Taliban and Al Quaeda existed next to each other, it completely downplays the influence the Taliban had in the country at the time and the relatoinships that existed between the two organisations, and the protection that Omar afforded Bin Laden post 9/11. That protection and those connections, is why the US went to war with Afghanistan post 9/11.
Bin Laden was also mates with the US from the Mujaheddin days.
You're massively overstating what the Taliban were/are. OBL didn't get any protection from Omar because he didn't need it. He'd been planning his escape in secret since the 90s.
The Mujadeddin was specifically about fighting the soviets. Al Quaeda was formed in 1988 and differed because it was an organisation dedicated to waging wars beyond Afghanistan. Its name comes from the bases used to train Mujadeddin but it became a distinct organisation with distinct internationally minded goals.
How so?
The Taliban only formed in 1994. Al Qaeda (and its predecessors) were in Afghanistan from 1978.
Indeed it was. My father was part of that rebuilding effort and saw it up close. it was futile though.
He should probably worked to remain mates with the US - thousands would still be alive.
The Taliban allowed AQ free access to do as they pleased within Afghanistan and Bin Ladin reciporated by using his soldiers to help the Taliban against the Northern Alliance - both by moving people up to protect Jalalabad and Bin Ladin's successful international plot to assassinate Ahmad Shah Masoud, who at the time was the Taliban's arch nemisis. Therefore the relationship was pretty symbiotic.
Last edited:
If by mates with the US you mean that George Bush married into the Bin Laden family, like Mullah Omar is alleged to have done, then I'll stand corrected.
Video of Afghanis being asked if they'd ever heard of 9/11.
92% of them have never heard of it. One guy thought that the Twin Towers were in Kabul.
These are the people who were killed. 47,245 of them. Because America needed to lash out at somebody. Judging by this thread, the propaganda did a fantastic job of conflating everyday Afghanis, the Taliban and Al Qaeda into one homogenous whole.
Exactly. Any country who'd suffered an attack like 9/11 would have looked at those links and drawn the same conclusions.
I'm sure if you'd asked the average American to name Sayyid Qutb you'd get the same response, but it didn't stop 3,000 Americans dying due to the ideology he created.