World News
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
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.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
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 !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
view the rest of the comments
Reading the article, it seems capitalism is the cause rather than imperialism past or present. Especially considering the Taliban were in charge in 2000 as they are today, could you explain how the situation would be meaningfully different without the (admittedly stupid) western military escapade? Would Talib like money less than they do today?
~~Can you quote the part of the article that made you think so?~~ Edit: Found it, but that's presented in the article as a secondary cause. Because the main causes cited in the article are climate change, the impact of the war and sanctions, but that aside;
As we've seen these past few years, the Taliban obviously have no idea how to run a country. They would've never lasted as long as they have in peacetime; it was the US invasion that sustained them all these years. Without that they'd have either grown into a competent-ish government in time to tackle the current crisis or been overthrown by a more competent faction. They also had real military opposition in the form of the North Afghanistan Alliance, which was coopted and ran into the ground by the West following the invasion, so now the Taliban are governing unopposed during a time of crisis that requires a competent and timely response. The US invasion stole 20 years from Afghanistan where they could've otherwise started to get their bearings as a modern state. And also, as the article states, Kabul's population only got this big as a result of the war making the countryside less safe.
Clearly the soda company and the rich still have water, so I'd hardly say it's a "secondary cause", but anyway, even taking all you've said as true, that still doesn't explain why the west should get involved here. What would we even do? Occupy the soda factory and give free bottles to everyone?
For humanitarian reasons and because most of the origins of this crisis are Western-caused.
for starters suspend sanctions, at least partially, so international aid, funding and expertise can enter the country. Then fund projects that could help avert the crisis.
In the first place the sanctions on Afghanistan are only going to be counterproductive. The people of Afghanistan need to develop economically before they can have political ambitions; the longer they're kept in poverty the longer the Taliban will remain in power.
I've tried nothing and I'm all out of ideas!
Please never pursue politics or sociology as a career.