▲ 212 ▼ There was a literal civil war over this in Afghanistan, c'mon (lemmy.world) submitted 1 year ago by PugJesus@lemmy.world to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 4 points 1 year ago (1 child) Comparisons aren't exact matches but the relationship still stands. Individuals are tied to both, ideology they both share exists. You're trying to paint them as two totally different things and they're not. You're comparing apples and pears permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PugJesus@lemmy.world [S] -4 points 1 year ago (1 child) Comparisons aren’t exact matches but the relationship still stands. Individuals are tied to both, "Individuals are tied to both" Fuck's sake, you can find individuals who were Nazis in 1938 and Communists in 1950 East Germany, or capitalists in 1950 West Germany. That doesn't mean that those three sides have one secret common cause; it means individuals change allegiances - especially opportunists in times of crisis. ideology they both share exists. What ideology is that, again? You’re trying to paint them as two totally different things and they’re not. What are their similarities, other than both being vaguely nonsecular Afghan paramilitaries? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doom@ttrpg.network 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) You're like really mad about this while being completely obtuse. Relax. The Mujahedeen weren't as organized or as unionized, they were scrambled together to fight the Russians. When that was over another imperial force was pushing onto them, now organized they sort of merged with radicalized groups to form what is the Taliban. I had to Google his name but Jalauddin Haqqani is an exact example of what I mean, cut his teeth fighting Russians and moved to fighting US/NATO. The ideology they share is main entire reason they were fighting in the first place that you're completely overlooking. The entire reason any of this happened. To fight imperial powers, to remove them from their country. Which is the same thing the sons of liberty wanted hence the comparison. They're not vaguely nonsecular afghan paramilitaries. They're people motivated to fight western influence and were lining up under dozens of labels to do so. How is this hard to understand? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PugJesus@lemmy.world [S] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The Mujahedeen weren’t as organized or as unionized, they were scrambled together to fight the Russians. When that was over another imperial force was pushing onto them, now organized they sort of merged with radicalized groups to form what is the Taliban. ... fucking what What 'another imperial force' was 'pushing onto them' in 199 fucking 4, other than the one supporting the Taliban itself, Pakistan?? The ideology they share is main entire reason they were fighting in the first place that you’re completely overlooking. The entire reason any of this happened. To fight imperial powers, to remove them from their country. "The Taliban is anti-imperialist" is the entire idiotic take that this is against. The Taliban is literally an imperialist tool of Pakistan and whose entire existence and rise to power postdates the Soviet invasion and predates the American invasion. Jesus fucking Christ. How is this hard to understand? It's hard to understand because it's utter nonsense with no relation to facts as they actually occurred. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world [S] -4 points 1 year ago (1 child) Comparisons aren’t exact matches but the relationship still stands. Individuals are tied to both, "Individuals are tied to both" Fuck's sake, you can find individuals who were Nazis in 1938 and Communists in 1950 East Germany, or capitalists in 1950 West Germany. That doesn't mean that those three sides have one secret common cause; it means individuals change allegiances - especially opportunists in times of crisis. ideology they both share exists. What ideology is that, again? You’re trying to paint them as two totally different things and they’re not. What are their similarities, other than both being vaguely nonsecular Afghan paramilitaries? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Doom@ttrpg.network 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) You're like really mad about this while being completely obtuse. Relax. The Mujahedeen weren't as organized or as unionized, they were scrambled together to fight the Russians. When that was over another imperial force was pushing onto them, now organized they sort of merged with radicalized groups to form what is the Taliban. I had to Google his name but Jalauddin Haqqani is an exact example of what I mean, cut his teeth fighting Russians and moved to fighting US/NATO. The ideology they share is main entire reason they were fighting in the first place that you're completely overlooking. The entire reason any of this happened. To fight imperial powers, to remove them from their country. Which is the same thing the sons of liberty wanted hence the comparison. They're not vaguely nonsecular afghan paramilitaries. They're people motivated to fight western influence and were lining up under dozens of labels to do so. How is this hard to understand? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PugJesus@lemmy.world [S] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The Mujahedeen weren’t as organized or as unionized, they were scrambled together to fight the Russians. When that was over another imperial force was pushing onto them, now organized they sort of merged with radicalized groups to form what is the Taliban. ... fucking what What 'another imperial force' was 'pushing onto them' in 199 fucking 4, other than the one supporting the Taliban itself, Pakistan?? The ideology they share is main entire reason they were fighting in the first place that you’re completely overlooking. The entire reason any of this happened. To fight imperial powers, to remove them from their country. "The Taliban is anti-imperialist" is the entire idiotic take that this is against. The Taliban is literally an imperialist tool of Pakistan and whose entire existence and rise to power postdates the Soviet invasion and predates the American invasion. Jesus fucking Christ. How is this hard to understand? It's hard to understand because it's utter nonsense with no relation to facts as they actually occurred. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Doom@ttrpg.network 5 points 1 year ago (1 child) You're like really mad about this while being completely obtuse. Relax. The Mujahedeen weren't as organized or as unionized, they were scrambled together to fight the Russians. When that was over another imperial force was pushing onto them, now organized they sort of merged with radicalized groups to form what is the Taliban. I had to Google his name but Jalauddin Haqqani is an exact example of what I mean, cut his teeth fighting Russians and moved to fighting US/NATO. The ideology they share is main entire reason they were fighting in the first place that you're completely overlooking. The entire reason any of this happened. To fight imperial powers, to remove them from their country. Which is the same thing the sons of liberty wanted hence the comparison. They're not vaguely nonsecular afghan paramilitaries. They're people motivated to fight western influence and were lining up under dozens of labels to do so. How is this hard to understand? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] PugJesus@lemmy.world [S] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The Mujahedeen weren’t as organized or as unionized, they were scrambled together to fight the Russians. When that was over another imperial force was pushing onto them, now organized they sort of merged with radicalized groups to form what is the Taliban. ... fucking what What 'another imperial force' was 'pushing onto them' in 199 fucking 4, other than the one supporting the Taliban itself, Pakistan?? The ideology they share is main entire reason they were fighting in the first place that you’re completely overlooking. The entire reason any of this happened. To fight imperial powers, to remove them from their country. "The Taliban is anti-imperialist" is the entire idiotic take that this is against. The Taliban is literally an imperialist tool of Pakistan and whose entire existence and rise to power postdates the Soviet invasion and predates the American invasion. Jesus fucking Christ. How is this hard to understand? It's hard to understand because it's utter nonsense with no relation to facts as they actually occurred. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] PugJesus@lemmy.world [S] -5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) The Mujahedeen weren’t as organized or as unionized, they were scrambled together to fight the Russians. When that was over another imperial force was pushing onto them, now organized they sort of merged with radicalized groups to form what is the Taliban. ... fucking what What 'another imperial force' was 'pushing onto them' in 199 fucking 4, other than the one supporting the Taliban itself, Pakistan?? The ideology they share is main entire reason they were fighting in the first place that you’re completely overlooking. The entire reason any of this happened. To fight imperial powers, to remove them from their country. "The Taliban is anti-imperialist" is the entire idiotic take that this is against. The Taliban is literally an imperialist tool of Pakistan and whose entire existence and rise to power postdates the Soviet invasion and predates the American invasion. Jesus fucking Christ. How is this hard to understand? It's hard to understand because it's utter nonsense with no relation to facts as they actually occurred. permalink fedilink source parent
