this post was submitted on 09 Apr 2025
140 points (98.6% liked)

World News

46179 readers
2948 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 !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/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 6 points 2 weeks ago (4 children)

Mexico is not South Sudan or Afghanistan, failed states ruled by warlords

I'll note that for the latter, it's a failed state ruled by warlords because the US rolled in and fucked everything up.

[–] Texas_Hangover@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Afghanistan was all fucked up long before that.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 3 points 2 weeks ago

I mean it wasn't exactly a shining example of progress and order, but it wasn't a failed state.

[–] EvilCartyen@feddit.dk -1 points 2 weeks ago

Arguably, Afghanistan has never been united as a nation in the way we think about it, at least not for long. The cycle seems to be short decades of control under some power followed by decades of decentralization and local powers.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

This statement is only relevant if your knowledge of history started in 1980.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I mean given that the war on terror started in 2001, we don't need to go back any further than 1980.

[–] GreyEyedGhost@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 weeks ago

Well then, I guess it was perfect and stable prior to 2001, no need to investigate further!

[–] CobraChicken3000@lemmy.ca -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

But Taliban was in power before the 2001 invasion.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Okay, and? Like them or hate them (jk you should hate them) but they had a state; it wasn't "a failed state ruled by warlords".

[–] CobraChicken3000@lemmy.ca -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)
[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

No it's not? A failed state is one in which the state can't punish a significant amount of non-state sanctioned violence, which wasn't the case in Afghanistan.

[–] FarceOfWill@infosec.pub 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I suppose if you use that definition then when America invaded it became a failed state run by warlords and now it has recovered.

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 3 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah exactly. Now, being a non-failed state, they can start the long, gruelling process of cultural and political evolution. That's why you're hearing about Afghani human rights activists now but not ten years ago.