Seriously does anyone here support the wars in Iraq in Afghanistan? They haven't made our country any safer. In fact I'm pretty sure its made the global security situation much worse. It's also increased our national debt by trillions of dollars with no real return for anybody but war industries.
>two countries were much better under sharia law and a dictatorship where thousands were killed for the horrible crimes of book learnin and having a low opinion of the current regime were much better before the invasions!
Fuck off. I notice that you leave out the horrid security problems is nearly every Arab state since the Arab Spring, which would have happened no matter what. Here's the deal: you get rid of the authoritarian regime, a civil war follows. It's a historical imperative in the middle East. Just because you haven't any education in geopolitics doesn't mean you can just make blanket judgments of a very complex situation.
>>54885288 Notice that the security situation is ten times worse in Iraq and Afghanistan? Hmm I wonder why that would be. Fuck off. There's no excuse for either of the wars. The only positive thing accomplished was the killing of Bin Laden, but now we have ISIS.
>>54885288 Can't wait till Trump cleanses neocons like you from our party. No more nearsighted crocodile tears about dictatorships. Sisi is a military leader and the only reason Egypt LITERALLY isn't controlled by Islamists.
It didn't produce any of them, they already existed and recruited due to the poor security situation. Remember though, it would have fallen anyway and the civil war would have ensued and probably would have resulted in mass emigration to Europe anyway, hence the attacks.
The security situation wasn't great in the country anyway. Have you forgotten that there was already a civil war ongoing in Afganistan before 2001? Have you also forgotten that the Taliban swore protection for AQ in exchange for assassinating Mehsud? Of course you don't, because you're an idiot.
>>54885288 Why is it acceptable now for people that don't what they're talking about to just drop the word geopolitics into a conversation with no context in order to act like they know what they're talking about?
>>54885473 Or you could just close your eyes and pretend that Afghanistan will magically stop being run by terroists and that their legitimate government hasn't been crying for help for years. Fucking everyone, (even discount America) was involved in that invasion, and now Afghanistan is a better place because if it.
Lmao. You didn't even read what I wrote. Taliban literally protected AQ in Afghanistan after they planned 9/11, which if you bother to look at a fucking map would definitely not be over there. Have you people not read any history that occurred before 2001? Do you think that radical idealists every kept their shit "over there" do you think that 9/11 was the first extremist attack on America, or Canada or the UK? You should really educate yourself, it makes me sad that you think anything that happens shouldn't be examined for a predicate. What a waste.
>>54886012 And what have we accomplished? The Tajik alliance has completely fallen apparent. We can't we've had to push back the withdrawal several times because ANA can't take over security for itself. ISIS affiliates growing in power. Al Qaeda still just as much there as it was before. Complete abject failure. If the US left now we would have nothing to show for it except for lost tax dollars and the Islamists would be rolling into Kabul within weeks.
Not to mention Iraq which you completely ignored. And you talk geopolitics like you know what you're talking about but so far the invasion of Iraq has netted 0 geopolitical benefit. Iraq is now at the mercy of Pro-Iranian politicians with or newest choice for leader virtually powerless. IRGC and Hezbollah are openly operating there. The second we withdraw and US aid leaves the Shia's that were able to buy support with our money will lose all power and we'll be left with a regime EXTREMELY unfriendly to our interests. Our intervention has caused a geopolitical catastrophe.
Hang on, did you say that Iraq has netted us 0 geopolitical benefit? Do you consider dismantling the state owned oil ministry and forcing them to accept contracts for American companies not beneficial for the United States? Or perhaps that the Shia ruled government facilitates in roads to Iranian diplomatic missions? Have you considered all the factors in place that have improved American-Iranian relations since the invasion? Have you thought about the massive infrastructure contracts that we forced the Iraqi government to accept?
ISIS won't be around forever, and at the very least there will always be someone in Iraqi that will play ball with us when before under Saddam there was nothing of the sort. The real spectacular failure was nothing of this really immediately benefits Iraqis as much as the U.S., but if you ask me no one should give a fuck when you frame this in the context of a unilateral geopolitical aim.
Nice meme lol. Iran's interests will never push them into our corner despite Obama's deluded hopes. They are literally on the polar opposite side of all our allies in the ME. I'm not even sure how this meme of a friendlier Iran has helped us or will help.
>Now we have someone to play ball with
The PM is literally on our side because he was in charge of where the US cash flowed when he was the chair of the finance committee. Now that he's in power he's openly critical of the US and our future role there. And this is our friend in the country. The moment ISIS is there and they don't need us we'll get the boot.
Five years from now when Afghanistan is in complete collapse, Iraq in unfriendly hands and trillions of dollars added to our deficit you won't find one person arguing it was a positive. Even now with the writing on the wall its pretty pathetic to see you doing the mental gymnastics required to try and frame this as anything but a complete disaster and net negative for the US.
Sounds like a lot of hoping and no facts to back it up, anon. The fact that Iran is even coming to the table to talk with the U.S. confirms my statement. The fact we are lifting sanctions on Iran confirms it. The Shia government of Iraq will say what it must in order to maintain popularity amongst its voter base, but the fact remains that they will always do business with the U.S., military bases or no.
Because we offered to seriously lift the sanctions for the first time. You know how much opposition this got from conservatives in Congress? Them coming to the table to lift sanctions doesn't mean they are some partner. It means they're serving their own self-interests. And as long as they keep their nose clean when it comes to nukes they can pursue whatever FP goals they want even if they counter our interests.
Just because Iran took our carrot doesn't mean they have now completely changed their outlook on us. There's no reason for them to even deffer to our policy in the future. In fact their current policy runs counter to our interests and our ME allies' interests and this deal doesn't offer them any real incentive to change it.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.
This is a 4chan archive - all of the shown content originated from that site. This means that 4Archive shows their content, archived. If you need information for a Poster - contact them.
If a post contains personal/copyrighted/illegal content, then use the post's [Report] link! If a post is not removed within 24h contact me at email@example.com with the post's information.