Imperialism and illicit drugs commonly go together. However, with Taliban opium eradication efforts in full effect, heroin is in short supply, and experts fear that a new fentanyl crisis could be brewing in the US.
The Afghanistan Papers: A Secret History of the War is a summary of the Washington Post’s reporting on Afghanistan, specifically on the US government’s own internal assessments from all levels of the military and political administration. In it, you’ll find this quote:
Of all the failures in Afghanistan, the war on opium ranked among the most feckless. During two decades, the United States spent more than $9 billion on a dizzying array of programs to deter Afghanistan from supplying the world with heroin. None of the measures worked. In many cases, they made things worse.
The US doesn’t need “tankies” or anyone else to make themselves look bad as far as the Afghan drug trade goes.
Ha you were conclusively proven wrong and didn’t even blink
oh, you mean here?
the US didn’t give a shit about it at all
ya got me there. they did care. still doesn’t prove that it’s why the US was there, and, in fact, several of the linked sources directly state to the contrary against claims that it was.
too bad it’s meaningless and - like always - you’re wrong. lmao
Lol so you initially ignore being wrong, then acknowledge you were wrong somewhere else, then say “well that was meaningless” when you go back to claim you were adult enough to say you missed on that one? …What?
Go back to reddit if you’re going to be a debatelord
wow, you moved those goalposts so fast and with such double-standards, I’m amazed you didn’t snap your own neck with those mental gymnastics. impressive!
This flew over your head but it is heavily implied that the US’ “war on opium” was in fact a deliberate effort to subsidize opium production and transport, a policy that we have pursued for the benefit of our own state-backed terror organizations in many other countries. Regardless of all other opinions on the US and the Taliban, this is an issue that the Taliban is objectively better than us on, and saying “lol who cares” is not an argument against talking about it since obviously the people in this thread care because they’re in here talking about it.
That’s not the creation of a straw man, that is an accusation I’m making of you, specifically, based on the fact that your comment in no way addressed the idea. If you read my comment you’ll see that I also address your “argument” directly.
Who said I was arguing with you, dipshit? What would the point of that be? I’ve seen how you act. You ignore literally everything everyone says and post clippings from a high school textbook you clearly never read and don’t understand.
And what the fuck would I be making an argument about in the first place? You aren’t talking about anything. Shame on my comrades for engaging with you for anything other than to bully your ass for being a blight on the conversation other people are having around you.
and your childish tantrums and name-calling don’t impress me, nor does your bullying. all it tells me is that you’re so afraid of losing an argument to a stranger on the internet, it drives you into a blind rage.
that’s how much control you give to strangers because you have no control over yourself.
it’s 3:48a on the east coast. it’s more likely those few people went to sleep than your paranoid delusion is true, even after you keep moving the goal posts.
You know we are leftists here. You can just say you are into your wife sleeping with other men. We respect a diversity of lifestyles. You don’t have to do the whiskey overcompensation persona thing here. We can accept and respect who you are.
You know we are leftists here. You can just say you are into your wife sleeping with other men. We respect a diversity of lifestyles. You don’t have to do the whiskey overcompensation persona thing here. We can accept and respect who you are.
you have a talent for self-contradictory speech. the way you mix the word “respect” with overflowing disrespect, how you espouse leftism and diversity while speaking the sexism and misogyny of a fascist… it’s artful.
you have a talent for self-contradictory speech. the way you mix the word “respect” with overflowing disrespect, how you espouse leftism and diversity while speaking the sexism and misogyny of a fascist… it’s artful.
Wtf are you talking about? Nobody said anything sexist or misogynyst. Words have meaning. Saying that you’re into cuckoldry has nothing to do with being sexist to women. It’s rude to you yes but fascist? Come the fuck on. Stop saying socialists are fascist for fuck’s sake it’s unbelievably cringe and nobody is buying it.
Yeah, if anything the cuckold fans are likely to be less misogynistic. They can appreciate a woman’s activities without being threatened or offended by their autonomy.
It is artful. That is the point. Further, the only sexism I talked about is the internalized negative self image that would lead a person to think ‘whiskey pickle’ is anything other than a cringe attempt to develop a self identity by subverting the worst societie’s worst instincts. Most of us here have done worse, but we grew stronger and passed through that phase. Join us.
artful trolling and disingenuousness is the point? and you proud of that? ew…
Further, the only sexism I talked about is the internalized negative self image that would lead a person to think ‘whiskey pickle’ is anything other than a cringe attempt to develop a self identity by subverting the worst societie’s worst instincts.
OR I like a drink called a pickleback, which is a shot of whiskey served with a pickle brine chaser, and you’ve decided to demonize me because of your own deep-seated insecurities that you’re projecting onto me.
ut thanks for that revolting glimpse into your psyche…
I’ve certainly learned a lot about hexbear trolls and what triggers them: getting called out as trolls and images of logical fallacies. just look at you!
The only thing logical fallacies trigger for us is our funny bones
Nothing funnier than a fool who thinks shouting “logical fallacy, logical fallacy, logical fallacy!” over and over again wins any argument instead of just making them look like the asshole they are
You might not recall this, but Operation Enduring Freedom was sold as a war on terrorism and the US repeatedly cited opium as a target of the war because they claimed it funded the Taliban.
Which does make it a direct debunking of your comment. Regardless of how you feel about it and how you rage in response.
Or did you think it was retaliation for 9/11 or something? That’s the alternative I’m seeing here. Don’t you remember when the Taliban offered Osama Bin Laden to the US after 9/11, and the US said no?
[Removed bc it feels like dirtying the memory] I remember it all very well.
Also do feel free to explain how this is any way relevant to the conversation:
“I know you are but what am I?” is not a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5. (borrowed form another comment)
Operation Enduring Freedom was sold as a war on terrorism
see, you even admit that it wasn’t about opium.
the US repeatedly cited opium as a target of the war because they claimed it funded the Taliban.
you’re welcome to cite sources to back up your claims. and I’ll be happy to point out how the timeline doesn’t support your assertions that the war was about opium, it just happened to be something the US did while we were there.
Or did you think it was retaliation for 9/11 or something?
what I think is irrelevant. that facts are what matter.
I have American friends who died defending those poppy fields. I remember it all very well.
irrelevant. present facts. not anecdotes or your feelings.
Also do feel free to explain how this is any way relevant to the conversation:
correlation ≠ causation
I have, repeatedly. your inability/refusal to understand is not my problem.
You don’t seem to be capable of following the conversation, after all. I explained how the official stance was opium = terrorist activity to the US.
it just happened to be something the US did while we were there.
Oh my, you are really lost! Do you even know what headline you’re commenting under? Did you miss every other comment?
I’m sorry that I do not know how to find search results from 2001. I don’t even know why I’m trying so hard, it isn’t my country that was running a cartel.
what I think is irrelevant. that facts are what matter.
Yes, that’s why I was trying to figure out why you are struggling with them. If your thinking is misaligned from reality, then it would explain the issue. I agree, the facts are what matter. But you were presented with some and could not even comprehend how they were relevant, prompting my initial comment. If you streamrolled through that, why should I let you play sealion? So you can ignore more data points? You’ve showed no intention of polite or honest engagement.
I have American friends who died defending those poppy fields. I remember it all very well.
irrelevant. present facts. not anecdotes or your feelings.
Well that pretty much confirms my suspicions that America sent their best and brightest to die…
Also do feel free to explain how this is any way relevant to the conversation:
correlation ≠ causation
I have, repeatedly. your inability/refusal to understand is not my problem.
Ah, so you do realize that it makes absolutely no sense lol
Looks like my job is done here. Rage on, little snowflake.
You don’t seem to be capable of following the conversation
I’m perfectly capable of noticing when people move the goalposts because they can’t prove their argument with facts, as I keep pouting out. raging about it doesn’t change this fact or any other facts.
Oh my, you are really lost!
not according to the facts. if this continues to confuse you, that’s not my problem.
I’m sorry that I do not know how to find search results from 2001
not my job to prove your argument.
Yes, that’s why I was trying to figure out why you are struggling with them.
“I know you are but what am I?” is not a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
you’ve presented nothing but anger, insults, and logical fallacies, none of which are convincing of anything other than that, when you can’t argue the facts in good faith, you resort to these bad-faith tactics ad nauseam because, so blinded by anger and hate, you can’t handle defeat.
Well that pretty much confirms my suspicions
so you admit to arguing from a position of clear and obvious bias. we get it— you hate the US. this has zero bearing on the facts— just that you like to insult people when you lose an argument.
Ah, so you do realize that it makes absolutely no sense lol
I’m not responsible for your lack of comprehension.
Looks like my job is done here. Rage on, little snowflake.
You selectively picked an activity that American soldiers would do everywhere (peeing) over something they did only in Afghanistan (guarding opium fields) only because it would support your argument.
That my dear good m’sir is a classic case of cherry picking.
You selectively picked an activity that American soldiers would do everywhere (peeing) over something they did only in Afghanistan (guarding opium fields) only because it would support your argument.
nope, just an example. you’re not very good at this
person replies back with factual evidence contradicting your personal beliefs in a foreign war, “lmao, so?”
Where is here? The World News community? The only one I see whining is the pickle. Is this a small step away from saying people should go back from where they came from and leave this social space you’ve claimed as your own? IDK wtf you’re thinking coming into someone else’s post, refuting verified evidence, then proclaiming hate because its context makes the US look subpar. What’s your point, you love the US, why come on here and have to ignorantly shout it?
person replies back with factual evidence contradicting your personal beliefs in a foreign war, “lmao, so?”
you mean an Association Fallacy that fails to prove their claims? US Maries also peed while they were there. That doesn’t prove it’s why they were there.
wow, that’s quite the pretzel you’d twisted yourself into trying score some imaginary “point”.
The “goal post” was always the “why” and it was never to eradicate opium. Every source, every article linked here bears that out. all that’s ben proven here is:
the US didn’t give a shit about it at all
ya got me there. they did care. still doesn’t prove that it’s why the US was there, and, in fact, several of the linked sources directly state to the contrary against claims that it was.
try not to hurt yourself with more of those mental gymnastics. it’s hilarious to watch
edit: ya know, you probably wouldn’t be so outraged and angry all the time if you didn’t constant make stuff up to be outraged and angry about.
We also didn’t threaten to kill the farmers for growing it. No shit the Taliban was successful. Comply or die. They’re the ones who were profiting from it anyway. Now that they’re in charge again, religion trumps financial needs.
I’m pretty sure the Talibans (not to defend them, mind you), were already cracking down on poppy farming before 9/11 and the subsequent decade long war.
So how were they benefitting? Or do you mean to say the US and allied forces allowed mass poppy crop farming that was then utilized by the Taliban to fund itself?
You know there is an alternative hypothesis: the US and other occupation allied forces tolerated poppy farming to pacify and win over tribal chiefs and keep corrupt Afghan officials squarely on their side. Maybe both were happening, who is to say.
Quite a few would disagree with that view, giving how many fled their own country when the Taliban took over again. But hey, don’t let that narrative ruin your perspective. Lol
Of course people who cooperate with occupiers usually want out when the occupation ends. They don’t want to face the consequences of selling out their country.
And of course “when people leave a Bad Country it’s for political reasons, when they leave a Good Country it’s for economic reasons” applies.
Lmao, how can you justify this shit? Do you really think American was actually trying to win hearts and minds when even you admit high command was protecting child rapists?
lmao, no it doesn’t. the US didn’t go to Afghanistan to eradicate opium. the US didn’t give a shit about it at all, lmao.
do tankies so blindly hate the US that they’ll give the Taliban a bj just to try to make the US look bad? wow…
The Afghanistan Papers: A Secret History of the War is a summary of the Washington Post’s reporting on Afghanistan, specifically on the US government’s own internal assessments from all levels of the military and political administration. In it, you’ll find this quote:
The US doesn’t need “tankies” or anyone else to make themselves look bad as far as the Afghan drug trade goes.
lmao, so? we get it. you hate the US. what’s your point? just to come here and whine about it?
Ha you were conclusively proven wrong and didn’t even blink. A brain so smooth no facts can get stuck on it.
spoiler
Post another 🤓 “I was on the debate team” graphic, that’s how discussions work
oh, you mean here?
too bad it’s meaningless and - like always - you’re wrong. lmao
Lol so you initially ignore being wrong, then acknowledge you were wrong somewhere else, then say “well that was meaningless” when you go back to claim you were adult enough to say you missed on that one? …What?
Go back to reddit if you’re going to be a debatelord
wow, you moved those goalposts so fast and with such double-standards, I’m amazed you didn’t snap your own neck with those mental gymnastics. impressive!
Reddit bingo card
wow, you are lost.
you don’t need a hyphen there.
how-about-here-?
I’m unimpressed by your self-portrait
This flew over your head but it is heavily implied that the US’ “war on opium” was in fact a deliberate effort to subsidize opium production and transport, a policy that we have pursued for the benefit of our own state-backed terror organizations in many other countries. Regardless of all other opinions on the US and the Taliban, this is an issue that the Taliban is objectively better than us on, and saying “lol who cares” is not an argument against talking about it since obviously the people in this thread care because they’re in here talking about it.
are logical fallacies all you guys know?
That’s not the creation of a straw man, that is an accusation I’m making of you, specifically, based on the fact that your comment in no way addressed the idea. If you read my comment you’ll see that I also address your “argument” directly.
I saw this in another comment, I think it works here:
“nuh-uh” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
just because you don’t understand (or refuse to acknowledge) what I said doesn’t make me wrong or you right.
with a logical fallacy. I pointed this out
lmao. Let’s review what you said that I responded to.
🤡 “Why would you post world news in a world news community? Who cares?”
when you have t twist my words into something other than what they meant just to score imaginary points, it’s not me who looks bad… ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Invoking the concept of a strawman when someone says you’re not paying attention
That’s just plain fucking stupid.
your hurt feelings don’t make much of an argument.
Who said I was arguing with you, dipshit? What would the point of that be? I’ve seen how you act. You ignore literally everything everyone says and post clippings from a high school textbook you clearly never read and don’t understand.
And what the fuck would I be making an argument about in the first place? You aren’t talking about anything. Shame on my comrades for engaging with you for anything other than to bully your ass for being a blight on the conversation other people are having around you.
you replied to my comment. are you lost? lol
and your childish tantrums and name-calling don’t impress me, nor does your bullying. all it tells me is that you’re so afraid of losing an argument to a stranger on the internet, it drives you into a blind rage.
that’s how much control you give to strangers because you have no control over yourself.
Still +5 upvotes on this six hours later, huh?
Weird how the only people who find value in your comments only ever show up right when you make them.
says the troll
you’ve been at this for over 6 hours…
it’s 3:48a on the east coast. it’s more likely those few people went to sleep than your paranoid delusion is true, even after you keep moving the goal posts.
Difference is I explicitly said I wasn’t arguing. If you think you’re winning an argument… what’s it about?
you lied. shocking!
you tell me. you’re the one who came here to troll
Neither do you
“no you!” isn’t a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
You know we are leftists here. You can just say you are into your wife sleeping with other men. We respect a diversity of lifestyles. You don’t have to do the whiskey overcompensation persona thing here. We can accept and respect who you are.
you have a talent for self-contradictory speech. the way you mix the word “respect” with overflowing disrespect, how you espouse leftism and diversity while speaking the sexism and misogyny of a fascist… it’s artful.
Wtf are you talking about? Nobody said anything sexist or misogynyst. Words have meaning. Saying that you’re into cuckoldry has nothing to do with being sexist to women. It’s rude to you yes but fascist? Come the fuck on. Stop saying socialists are fascist for fuck’s sake it’s unbelievably cringe and nobody is buying it.
Yeah, if anything the cuckold fans are likely to be less misogynistic. They can appreciate a woman’s activities without being threatened or offended by their autonomy.
aww, sorry you don’t get it, but that’s not my problem.
Well excuse him for trying to make a lib feel at home
your gushing insecurities are supposed to be a “favor”?
It is artful. That is the point. Further, the only sexism I talked about is the internalized negative self image that would lead a person to think ‘whiskey pickle’ is anything other than a cringe attempt to develop a self identity by subverting the worst societie’s worst instincts. Most of us here have done worse, but we grew stronger and passed through that phase. Join us.
artful trolling and disingenuousness is the point? and you proud of that? ew…
OR I like a drink called a pickleback, which is a shot of whiskey served with a pickle brine chaser, and you’ve decided to demonize me because of your own deep-seated insecurities that you’re projecting onto me.
ut thanks for that revolting glimpse into your psyche…
lmao, so? we get it. you hate learning. what’s your point? just to come here and whine about it?
I’ve certainly learned a lot about hexbear trolls and what triggers them: getting called out as trolls and images of logical fallacies. just look at you!
👍
sorry you’re having such trouble. try
Thanks, I fed em all to the hogs:
Removed by mod
The only thing logical fallacies trigger for us is our funny bones
Nothing funnier than a fool who thinks shouting “logical fallacy, logical fallacy, logical fallacy!” over and over again wins any argument instead of just making them look like the asshole they are
Removed by mod
lol
Removed by mod
I’m sorry for my alt’s poor behavior
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
deleted by creator
except they didn’t disprove them. US Marines also peed a lot while they were there, but it’s not why they are there. it proves nothing.
correlation ≠ causation
You’ve moved the goalposts, but no matter.
You might not recall this, but Operation Enduring Freedom was sold as a war on terrorism and the US repeatedly cited opium as a target of the war because they claimed it funded the Taliban.
Which does make it a direct debunking of your comment. Regardless of how you feel about it and how you rage in response.
Or did you think it was retaliation for 9/11 or something? That’s the alternative I’m seeing here. Don’t you remember when the Taliban offered Osama Bin Laden to the US after 9/11, and the US said no?
[Removed bc it feels like dirtying the memory] I remember it all very well.
Also do feel free to explain how this is any way relevant to the conversation:
“I know you are but what am I?” is not a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5. (borrowed form another comment)
see, you even admit that it wasn’t about opium.
you’re welcome to cite sources to back up your claims. and I’ll be happy to point out how the timeline doesn’t support your assertions that the war was about opium, it just happened to be something the US did while we were there.
what I think is irrelevant. that facts are what matter.
irrelevant. present facts. not anecdotes or your feelings.
I have, repeatedly. your inability/refusal to understand is not my problem.
You don’t seem to be capable of following the conversation, after all. I explained how the official stance was opium = terrorist activity to the US.
Oh my, you are really lost! Do you even know what headline you’re commenting under? Did you miss every other comment?
I’m sorry that I do not know how to find search results from 2001. I don’t even know why I’m trying so hard, it isn’t my country that was running a cartel.
Yes, that’s why I was trying to figure out why you are struggling with them. If your thinking is misaligned from reality, then it would explain the issue. I agree, the facts are what matter. But you were presented with some and could not even comprehend how they were relevant, prompting my initial comment. If you streamrolled through that, why should I let you play sealion? So you can ignore more data points? You’ve showed no intention of polite or honest engagement.
Well that pretty much confirms my suspicions that America sent their best and brightest to die…
Ah, so you do realize that it makes absolutely no sense lol
Looks like my job is done here. Rage on, little snowflake.
I’m perfectly capable of noticing when people move the goalposts because they can’t prove their argument with facts, as I keep pouting out. raging about it doesn’t change this fact or any other facts.
not according to the facts. if this continues to confuse you, that’s not my problem.
not my job to prove your argument.
“I know you are but what am I?” is not a convincing argument. most people learn this when they’re 5.
you’ve presented nothing but anger, insults, and logical fallacies, none of which are convincing of anything other than that, when you can’t argue the facts in good faith, you resort to these bad-faith tactics ad nauseam because, so blinded by anger and hate, you can’t handle defeat.
so you admit to arguing from a position of clear and obvious bias. we get it— you hate the US. this has zero bearing on the facts— just that you like to insult people when you lose an argument.
I’m not responsible for your lack of comprehension.
the finest projection in all the land.
You selectively picked an activity that American soldiers would do everywhere (peeing) over something they did only in Afghanistan (guarding opium fields) only because it would support your argument.
That my dear good m’sir is a classic case of cherry picking.
nope, just an example. you’re not very good at this
Terrible argument. Textbook case of:
whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night.
Ad Hominem
sorry for your troubles. I recommend you seek medical or psychiatric help.
person replies back with factual evidence contradicting your personal beliefs in a foreign war, “lmao, so?”
Where is here? The World News community? The only one I see whining is the pickle. Is this a small step away from saying people should go back from where they came from and leave this social space you’ve claimed as your own? IDK wtf you’re thinking coming into someone else’s post, refuting verified evidence, then proclaiming hate because its context makes the US look subpar. What’s your point, you love the US, why come on here and have to ignorantly shout it?
you mean an Association Fallacy that fails to prove their claims? US Maries also peed while they were there. That doesn’t prove it’s why they were there.
You:
Response:
You:
Now the goal post has been moved to WhY?!? were we there? Throw up some more pretty images to explain the situation please.
wow, that’s quite the pretzel you’d twisted yourself into trying score some imaginary “point”.
The “goal post” was always the “why” and it was never to eradicate opium. Every source, every article linked here bears that out. all that’s ben proven here is:
ya got me there. they did care. still doesn’t prove that it’s why the US was there, and, in fact, several of the linked sources directly state to the contrary against claims that it was.
try not to hurt yourself with more of those mental gymnastics. it’s hilarious to watch
edit: ya know, you probably wouldn’t be so outraged and angry all the time if you didn’t constant make stuff up to be outraged and angry about.
We also didn’t threaten to kill the farmers for growing it. No shit the Taliban was successful. Comply or die. They’re the ones who were profiting from it anyway. Now that they’re in charge again, religion trumps financial needs.
I’m pretty sure the Talibans (not to defend them, mind you), were already cracking down on poppy farming before 9/11 and the subsequent decade long war.
So how were they benefitting? Or do you mean to say the US and allied forces allowed mass poppy crop farming that was then utilized by the Taliban to fund itself? You know there is an alternative hypothesis: the US and other occupation allied forces tolerated poppy farming to pacify and win over tribal chiefs and keep corrupt Afghan officials squarely on their side. Maybe both were happening, who is to say.
Financed their war effort. We valued the whole hearts and minds over destroying farmers livelihood.
winning the hearts and minds of the people we brutally conquered and ruled over for 20 years
Quite a few would disagree with that view, giving how many fled their own country when the Taliban took over again. But hey, don’t let that narrative ruin your perspective. Lol
Of course people who cooperate with occupiers usually want out when the occupation ends. They don’t want to face the consequences of selling out their country.
And of course “when people leave a Bad Country it’s for political reasons, when they leave a Good Country it’s for economic reasons” applies.
Lol, winning hearts and minds by protecting child rapists
Average soldier wanted to deal with that. It was high command keeping that shit going because they wanted to keep tribal leaders happy.
That’s even worse? Your senior officers are supposed to be the ones doing the right thing.
No no you see the rank and file totally wanted to stop all that child SA, but alas they simply had to follow orders
“Just following orders” I say at my trial, confident no one has used this argument before
Lmao, how can you justify this shit? Do you really think American was actually trying to win hearts and minds when even you admit high command was protecting child rapists?
So are you actually in favor of US action in Afghanistan?
The US doesn’t need any help looking bad
deleted by creator
it must be easy to say whatever you want when you don’t have to worry about facts, lol
deleted by creator