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:
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.
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
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!
Reddit bingo card
deleted by creator
They were directly responding to your words, to disprove them.
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.
Do you really not see the connection between the comments?
correlation ≠ causation
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
Terrible argument. Textbook case of:
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.
This flew over your head but it is heavily implied
are logical fallacies all you guys know?
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.
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
I’m unimpressed by your self-portrait
I had a bunch of friends who went to Afghanistan/Iraq and they were protecting poppy and marijuana fields
Selling it, what else.
Mint Press News – Bias and Credibility
FAR LEFT BIAS
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
- Overall, we rate Mint Press Far-Left Biased and Questionable based on the publication of conspiracy theories, pseudoscience anti-Israel propaganda, poor sourcing, failed fact checks, and false claims.
Detailed Report
- Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracies, Pseudoscience, Poor Sources, Failed Fact Checks
- Bias Rating: FAR LEFT
- Factual Reporting: LOW
- Country: USA
- Press Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
- Media Type: Website
- Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
- MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Mint Press News is an independent Minnesota-based news website launched in 2012 by Mnar Muhawesh. It covers political, economic, foreign affairs, and environmental issues. According to their about page, “We focus our coverage on issues relating to the effects of special interest groups, big business and lobbying efforts and how they shape policies at home and abroad, including American foreign policy. Through the lens of social justice and human rights, we report on how these dynamics drive our foreign affairs and impact the world, and examine the effects they have on our democracy and freedoms as defined by the constitution.”
Analysis / Bias
Mint Press presents news with a strong left-leaning bias in story selection. Headlines and articles use moderately loaded language like this: NFL Freezes Policy Barring Players From Kneeling During Anthem. This particular story is republished from the conspiracy website ZeroHedge. Typically, Mint Press sources their information, but sometimes it is from Mixed factual or conspiracy websites. In general, story selection moderately favors the left, such as this Trump Administration Opens Door for Corporate Attack on Vulnerable Wildlife.
pseudoscience anti-Israel propaganda
Lol what is this even supposed to mean
It means they peddle far-left conspiracy theories like Palestinian children needing water and food to survive which is something that Israeli scientists have debunked
80% of worlds’s opioids consumption is in USA which has 4,6% of worlds population.
That’s what they are doing, waging Third Opium War on their own people.
This is one of the dumbest articles I ever read. The entire government changed. Taliban can be dictators. The US couldn’t. On top of this, they essentially had two years to switch to wheat before this occurred. Something that was less economically feasible over two years ago due to an unfortunate food shortage in the area now.
Asking why someone couldn’t get something done as quickly as a dictator is something a naive child asks.
deleted by creator
I mean… Sure there are major improvements that can be had in the US, but punishment and consequences as defined in Sharia law isn’t exactly something that the US can simply adopt.
Three million dead due to the Afghanistan war alone wasn’t brutal enough for you?
The systematic, institutional rape and torture of men, women, and children in Abu Ghraib was more brutal than anything defined in Sharia law but we still pretend that the occupation was clean.Both can be wrong, Sounds like you’re just here to derail into having a different conversation you want to have entirely separate to the topic rather than addressing the actual topic.
I’m staying on topic.
I am demonstrating how the American occupational forces handed out harsher punishments and consequences than the Taliban did, yet couldn’t curb opium production. Ergo, the Americans were never interested in curbing opium production.The Americans didn’t intend to kill all those people. They intended to kill soldiers, and lots of other people who they deemed evil, but growing drugs was never deemed evil enough to be worth killing someone over. The Taliban intended to kill those growing drugs, along with a lot of other people doing things they deem to be evil I’ll leave moral judgements to you.
LOL
No one I served with gave two shits who they were killing or why
The us was using opium as a weapon of war against russia and iran. Its well known and the public health concequences in both those countries were horrific
But since mexico has orders of mag itude more state capacity than the taliban their failure to solve opium problem makes one almost certain the us goverment is also behind that.
You got a source on that? Last I checked Opium is an excellent cash crop that the Taliban used to fund their guerilla war with the US. Now that the Americans are out there is no point to keep growing it.
I’m so tired of all this authoritarian propaganda on Lemmy, it’s killing the community
deleted by creator
LOL. Raises questions for whom? Libs? Everyone knows what the fucking USA was doing all along. Except the libs.
NB: both USA Rs and Ds are both liberal in their political philosophy and are both subject to this critique.
A decade ago sure, but Rs are just fascists now
Fascism has only ever emerged from liberalism
Sure but it’s illiberal by definition
But the Republicans have not yet become fascists. So they are still in the liberal phase.
