this post was submitted on 29 Sep 2024
432 points (98.2% liked)

World News

39362 readers
4644 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News [email protected]

Politics [email protected]

World Politics [email protected]


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

There is a young woman sheltering under a tree between two busy roads clutching a pile of documents to her chest.

These pieces of paper are more important to Bibi Nazdana than anything in the world: they are the divorce granted to her after a two-year court battle to free herself from life as a child bride.

They are the same papers a Taliban court has invalidated - a victim of the group's hardline interpretation on Sharia (religious law) which has seen women effectively silenced in Afghanistan's legal system.

Nazdana's divorce is one of tens of thousands of court rulings revoked since the Taliban took control of the country three years ago this month.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Fondots 8 points 2 months ago (1 children)

I think you're misreading the comment of the person you're replying to here, it's worded a little wonky and I don't know if you picked up on a bit of a sarcastic tone there, I think you also may not be reading far enough into the history to really have a handle on the situation but frankly neither of you are doing a great job of explaining your positions so it's a little hard to say what point either of you are trying to make

Tl;dr of modern Afghan history:

Around the 80s, Russia invaded Afghanistan and installed a socialist government

The US backs Islamic militants, essentially the Taliban or the groups that eventually morph into them, to oust the Russian backed government,

The Taliban also likes to style themselves as the Islamic emirate of Afghanistan

Some power struggles ensue, by the 90s sometime the Taliban is in charge of the country

9/11 happens, US invades, tries to set up their own government, pulls out, Taliban quickly takes back over

[–] AbidanYre 3 points 2 months ago

Yeah, but if you go back to the 80s it doesn't make sense to say we bombed them so much that the Taliban was a better option than Western values. Unless the USSR is being counted as part of the West.

I was just pointing out that the Taliban was already in charge when the US started wrecking up the place, so they aren't really a response to the US occupation. More a return to the status quo of the 90s.

Which is not to say that the US is blameless. I have a good enough handle on the situation to remember when the Taliban were the good guys in a Bond movie. But I'm not going to claim to be an expert on the region.