Status
Not open for further replies.

entremet

You wouldn't toast a NES cartridge
Member
Oct 26, 2017
61,482
MAZAR-I-SHARIF, Afghanistan — Racing down the cratered highways at dawn, Mohammad Rasool knew his 9-year-old daughter was running out of time.

She had been battling pneumonia for two weeks and he had run out of cash to buy her medicine after the bank in his rural town closed. So he used his last few dollars on a taxi to Mazar-i-Sharif, a city in Afghanistan's north, and joined an unruly mob of men clambering to get inside the last functioning bank for hundreds of miles.

Then at 3 p.m., a teller yelled at the crowd to go home: There was no cash left at the bank.

"I have the money in my account, it's right there," said Mr. Rasool, 56. "What will I do now?"

Three months into the Taliban's rule, Afghanistan's economy has all but collapsed, plunging the country into one of the world's worst humanitarian crises. Millions of dollars of aid that once propped up the previous government has vanished, billions in state assets are frozen and economic sanctions have isolated the new government from the global banking system.

Now, Afghanistan faces a dire cash shortage that has crippled banks and businesses, sent food and fuel prices soaring, and triggered a devastating hunger crisis. Earlier this month, the World Health Organization warned that around 3.2 million children were likely to suffer from acute malnutrition in Afghanistan by the end of the year — one million of whom at risk of dying as temperatures drop.

No corner of Afghanistan has been left untouched.

In the capital, desperate families have hawked furniture on the side of the road in exchange for food. Across other major cities, public hospitals do not have the money to buy badly needed medical supplies or to pay doctors and nurses, some of who have left their posts. Rural clinics are overrun with feeble children, whose parents cannot afford food. Economic migrants have flocked to the Iranian and Pakistani borders.

www.nytimes.com

Afghan Economy Nears Collapse as Pressure Builds to Ease U.S. Sanctions (Published 2021)

Afghanistan’s economy has crashed since the Taliban seized power, plunging the country into one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises.

Sanctions are literally killing people here.
 

Zeouter

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,620
Ireland
More suffering & death after what we in the West did to this country..

I should contact my represent6 and see if there's a good charity to donate to.
 

Deleted member 8579

Oct 26, 2017
33,843
That's horrible and no doubt the people in charge won't go hungry.

I'm guessing assets are frozen etc. becaues the Taliban aren't playing ball in human rights etc.?

Are international authorties going to go after the crooks who left with hundreds of millions or more like the former Afghan President?
 
Oct 26, 2017
19,962
Is this due to countries not recognizing the Taliban's rule yet and withholding money that would normally go to Afghanistan?
 

kradical

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,570
original.jpg
 

Chikor

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
14,239
It wasn't enough that we killed those people for 20 years we bombs and guns, now we're gonna kill them with sanctions.
But American foreign policy only have two tools - war and sanctions, and we tried the war for 20 years there.

Is this due to countries not recognizing the Taliban's rule yet and withholding money that would normally go to Afghanistan?
The US is freezing billions of dollars of Afghanistan central bank that belong to the Afghani people.
Also since the Taliban is designated a terrorist organization, anyone that work with them get the same designation from America.
The US is doing it and the US can make it stop tomorrow. Hopefully we will.
 

Pollux

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
940
It wasn't enough that we killed those people for 20 years we bombs and guns, now we're gonna kill them with sanctions.
But American foreign policy only have two tools - war and sanctions, and we tried the war for 20 years there.


The US is freezing billions of dollars of Afghanistan central bank that belong to the Afghani people.
Also since the Taliban is designated a terrorist organization, anyone that work with them get the same designation from America.
The US is doing it and the US can make it stop tomorrow. Hopefully we will.
Cool - let the elected Afghan government back in power and we'll do it. Otherwise blame the Taliban.
 

sacrament

Banned
Dec 16, 2019
2,119
It wasn't enough that we killed those people for 20 years we bombs and guns, now we're gonna kill them with sanctions.
But American foreign policy only have two tools - war and sanctions, and we tried the war for 20 years there.


The US is freezing billions of dollars of Afghanistan central bank that belong to the Afghani people.
Also since the Taliban is designated a terrorist organization, anyone that work with them get the same designation from America.
The US is doing it and the US can make it stop tomorrow. Hopefully we will.

Oh comon. The US froze the governments money, not the people's. Even if the funds were released it would go straight to the Taliban and other terrorist groups which wouldn't help anything - better funded women and [insert vulnerable population here] killers.

Maybe the Taliban should have had a plan to actually run the country instead of dismantling everything and banning and killing the rest. Or they actually reform and not be a theocratic terrorist regime?

There's a lot of blame to go around, but giving them money ain't it.
 

Griffith

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,585
I don't the slightest clue how to solve the mess left in Afghanistan but I wish there was a way to hold those that caused it accountable.

If anyone here wishes to give any aid, savethechildren seems to be a reliable and well regarded organization that helps Afghan children.
 

Rangerx

Member
Oct 25, 2017
5,573
Dangleberry
Afghanistan has been left to implode. A twenty year war was waged all to replace the Taliban with the Taliban. Huge admiration and respect to all those NGOs who stayed behind to help pick up the pieces. Massive aid needs to get to the innocent Afghanis.
 

Joni

Member
Oct 27, 2017
19,508
Cool - let the elected Afghan government back in power and we'll do it. Otherwise blame the Taliban.
The last election went so well that the US government decided to reduce the aid it gives because they were working so great together. In any case, about only 20% of the registered voters actually did so in that election, which is 1.6 million of 32 million people. The Taliban might actually have more support than the previous elected government.
 

krazen

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,472
Gentrified Brooklyn
Oh comon. The US froze the governments money, not the people's. Even if the funds were released it would go straight to the Taliban and other terrorist groups which wouldn't help anything - better funded women and [insert vulnerable population here] killers.

Maybe the Taliban should have had a plan to actually run the country instead of dismantling everything and banning and killing the rest. Or they actually reform and not be a theocratic terrorist regime?

There's a lot of blame to go around, but giving them money ain't it.

The problem is the alternative. In the former at least there's a chance the government might have to show and prove and throw some cash into the economy even if it's mainly a bank account for warlords; now it's a certainty the people there will starve.

And the problem is, morally, the US can't really say 'They will use the money for bad things' considering we consistently send money and other forms of resources out worldwide that ends up getting used for bad things, often with our permission.
 

bionic77

Member
Oct 25, 2017
30,929
I don't the slightest clue how to solve the mess left in Afghanistan but I wish there was a way to hold those that caused it accountable.

If anyone here wishes to give any aid, savethechildren seems to be a reliable and well regarded organization that helps Afghan children.
It's not hard to help. Build a few schools and hospitals and send them food and leave them alone. No country can develop or progress when others are in referring. And the US and most countries usually don't just help another country without getting something in return.

Not likely to happen though. That country has been through hell for 40 years. Really sad.

Imagine if the trillions the US spent on war could have been spent to improve things in any of these countries.
 
Oct 27, 2017
45,782
Seattle
This is a good reminder to continue to help NGOs and other organizations that are helping the afghan people. Including those that can get out and those that can not.
 

Pollux

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
940
That's not a great stance when innocent people with no control over the situation are starving to death
Yeah maybe. There's no way the US will allow that money loose when it will probably be used against them. Especially when it's going to an illegitimate government like the taliban. Blame the taliban for having no clue how to run the country and not joining in with the rest of their countrymen in the democratic process.
 

sacrament

Banned
Dec 16, 2019
2,119
The problem is the alternative. In the former at least there's a chance the government might have to show and prove and throw some cash into the economy even if it's mainly a bank account for warlords; now it's a certainty the people there will starve.

And the problem is, morally, the US can't really say 'They will use the money for bad things' considering we consistently send money and other forms of resources out worldwide that ends up getting used for bad things, often with our permission.

I disagree with the morality question, but even so, doesn't mean there is any obligation here to just give another country, whose leaders kill and rape children, money to get out of their mess.

We didn't fund the Taliban before the invasion, and we aren't now. Just like we aren't supporting a whole slew of bad behaving people and institutions.

No one forced the Taliban to take over the country again, they held the gun to others for the opportunity to rule over the country and it's people. They could step down. But they won't. And I suspect even if they had funding from the US and the west they'd use to undermine/and attack the west.
 

Baji Boxer

Chicken Chaser
Member
Oct 27, 2017
11,415
I have mixed feelings on all this. Yes, this is the culmination of many years of imperialistic fucking around with the country, but the Taliban is perfectly capable of implementing changes to improve the situation for the Afghan people.
 

Addie

One Winged Slayer
Member
Oct 25, 2017
8,938
DFW
It's not hard to help. Build a few schools and hospitals and send them food and leave them alone. No country can develop or progress when others are in referring. And the US and most countries usually don't just help another country without getting something in return.

Not likely to happen though. That country has been through hell for 40 years. Really sad.

Imagine if the trillions the US spent on war could have been spent to improve things in any of these countries.
The US did build schools and infrastructure projects in Afghanistan. Not so great at leaving them alone or propping up the correct ministers, of course.

And honestly (not directed at you): the Afghan people live in Afghanistan. The afghani is their currency.
 

Griffith

Banned
Oct 27, 2017
5,585
Imagine if the trillions the US spent on war could have been spent to improve things in any of these countries.

I wish I could, but when I start thinking about how much money was spent in such a meaningless war I can only feel infuriated at those that started and stoked the flames only to profit from them.
 

Chikor

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
14,239
Oh comon. The US froze the governments money, not the people's. Even if the funds were released it would go straight to the Taliban and other terrorist groups which wouldn't help anything - better funded women and [insert vulnerable population here] killers.

Maybe the Taliban should have had a plan to actually run the country instead of dismantling everything and banning and killing the rest. Or they actually reform and not be a theocratic terrorist regime?

There's a lot of blame to go around, but giving them money ain't it.
It's not the Taliban money, it's their central bank. This like saying the money in the US's central bank is Biden's money. It's Afghan money that the US is withholding for no reason other that neocons are upset they lost their forever war and they are determined to make Afghans people suffer for that.

We have no moral or legal right to do that, but we're America, we do what we want, who is going to stop us?
 

Joni

Member
Oct 27, 2017
19,508
It is probably better if governments tried to work with the Taliban. You aren't making the world safer by having the Afghans starve to death. It just leads to a lot of desperate people hating the US. You aren't improving the rights of women by having them starve to death. You aren't actually reaching anything. And they aren't going anywhere if you ignore them, they are still the ones with all the weapons. A starving weaponless population isn't going to beat people with army-grade weapons.
 

krazen

Member
Oct 27, 2017
13,472
Gentrified Brooklyn
I disagree with the morality question, but even so, doesn't mean there is any obligation here to just give another country, whose leaders kill and rape children, money to get out of their mess.

We didn't fund the Taliban before the invasion, and we aren't now. Just like we aren't supporting a whole slew of bad behaving people and institutions.

No one forced the Taliban to take over the country again, they held the gun to others for the opportunity to rule over the country and it's people. They could step down. But they won't. And I suspect even if they had funding from the US and the west they'd use to undermine/and attack the west.

I mean, the Taliban attacking the West? This Foxnews?

Ultimately, and this is a circular argument on here and forever, the problem is that you can either look at the M.East on some 'We broke it, so we need to fix it' or we wash our hands of it. Not going to say either is an easy choice, but you make it sound like the Taliban was this insane outside force that teleported in as opposed to an ecosystem that we ultimately helped create, turned on us by harboring a terrorist that our friends actually created. Taliban are terrible, but sanctions only end up hurting the regular people. To say 'Well the Taliban needs to step down' ignores our 40-50 years of chaos in the region. I push back on your A + B = C logic when its clearly much more complicated
 

Deleted member 8257

Oct 26, 2017
24,586
The Taliban religious nutcase regime is literally killing people there.

Stop shifting the blame, jfc.
the taleban is literally worse than the united states
billions in state assets are frozen and economic sanctions have isolated the new government from the global banking system.
You know you both can eff off. Your governments are literally genociding Afghanistan's children right now, just like they did with Iraq's children under Saddam during the 90's. And you have the audacity to sit here and say "yea its those people, they're the problem". Who has frozen the Afghanistan government's assets and sanctioned it? Taliban, or America/Europe? Face it, we all in the west are culpable for this atrocity.
 

ChippyTurtle

Banned
Oct 13, 2018
4,773
The fact that important news is paywalled is counterproductive.

Realistically if the U.S releases the money without getting something back, Biden and Dems will lose domestically. I would hope a face saving agreement with the Taliban can occur, where maybe large numbers of at risk Afghan people can be traded for passage out of the country for sanction relief and international recognition.
 
Oct 27, 2017
39,148
It is probably better if governments tried to work with the Taliban. You aren't making the world safer by having the Afghans starve to death. It just leads to a lot of desperate people hating the US. You aren't improving the rights of women by having them starve to death. You aren't actually reaching anything. And they aren't going anywhere if you ignore them, they are still the ones with all the weapons. A starving weaponless population isn't going to beat people with army-grade weapons.
What I came here to say.

Thinking that you can get rid of Taliban by doing this is some stupid shit. The Taliban made it clear they are here to stay and while the world might refuse to recognize this, nothing they can do changes this.

Either there needs to be another invasion (which would be stupid and awful as hell) or they put aside their differences and work with them for the sake of the people that have no control over their situation.

The US was there for decades then decided to leave without fixing the problem (not that they were fixing it to begin with) so they need to take responsibility instead of this shit.
 

Dyle

One Winged Slayer
The Fallen
Oct 25, 2017
30,352
Situation is fucked all around. The Taliban have no idea how to and/or no interest in governing effectively and things would be on the brink of collapse even without sanctions. Regardless the sanctions need to be lifted. The country will likely never be able to truly stabilize
 

Deleted member 70788

Jun 2, 2020
9,620
More suffering & death after what we in the West did to this country..

I should contact my represent6 and see if there's a good charity to donate to.
I know a relatively small one that is headed up by a guy who escaped Afghanistan before the Taliban tried to kidnap his sister. He lives in the US now and still has connections.
 

Chikor

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
14,239
You know you both can eff off. Your governments are literally genociding Afghanistan's children right now, just like they did with Iraq's children under Saddam during the 90's. And you have the audacity to sit here and say "yea its those people, they're the problem". Who has frozen the Afghanistan government's assets and sanctioned it? Taliban, or America/Europe? Face it, we all in the west are culpable for this atrocity.
And it's almost always the same people who insist the hardest that America go to war because human rights and that bombing a country's bridges and power stations somehow help civilians there that are "oh well, if a million kids die because of sanctions then it is what it is".

Also after lying to the American public for 20 years about how terrible life was for most Afghan people under the American occupation, we need to make the case that the alternative is worse, and no better way to drive that point than to starve children. We do it every time after we lose a war. Vietnam had very harsh sanctions on them until the mid 90s.
 

sacrament

Banned
Dec 16, 2019
2,119
I mean, the Taliban attacking the West? This Foxnews?

Ultimately, and this is a circular argument on here and forever, the problem is that you can either look at the M.East on some 'We broke it, so we need to fix it' or we wash our hands of it. Not going to say either is an easy choice, but you make it sound like the Taliban was this insane outside force that teleported in as opposed to an ecosystem that we ultimately helped create, turned on us by harboring a terrorist that our friends actually created. Taliban are terrible, but sanctions only end up hurting the regular people. To say 'Well the Taliban needs to step down' ignores our 40-50 years of chaos in the region. I push back on your A + B = C logic when its clearly much more complicated

Of course it's more complicated, it's Afghanistan. And yes, the Taliban harboured terrorists before the invasion, including bin Laden. No they themselves didn't carry out the attack, but more than 9/11 was planned and coordinated there. Since they've kept up the women killing and anti-gay behaviors I suspect that's going to be part of the plan too - unless you really think otherwise - then I dunno, reference?

You know you both can eff off. Your governments are literally genociding Afghanistan's children right now, just like they did with Iraq's children under Saddam during the 90's. And you have the audacity to sit here and say "yea its those people, they're the problem". Who has frozen the Afghanistan government's assets and sanctioned it? Taliban, or America/Europe? Face it, we all in the west are culpable for this atrocity.

The US nor the west are genociding the Afghan people. The Taliban are incompetent assholes who are mismanaging the shit out of everything, and proactively killing or jailing anyone with an education or ability to solve their infrastructure problem.

As an aside, the Taliban are considered a terrorist organization around the globe, and by international law direct transactions are blocked. Sure the US could change that designation and most would follow along, but would you change it's classification knowing what you know?
 

Pollux

Banned
Oct 26, 2017
940
You know you both can eff off. Your governments are literally genociding Afghanistan's children right now, just like they did with Iraq's children under Saddam during the 90's. And you have the audacity to sit here and say "yea its those people, they're the problem". Who has frozen the Afghanistan government's assets and sanctioned it? Taliban, or America/Europe? Face it, we all in the west are culpable for this atrocity.
My government is NOT genociding children in Afghanistan right now. We're not even there. These funds were frozen because a terrorist organization seized control. Blame the taliban.
 

Deepwater

Banned
Oct 25, 2017
6,349
citizens of countries that routinely sells arms and trades with israel and Saudi Arabia saying they can't stop enabling famines vis-a-vis sanctions because terrorism is some mind boggling shit.
 

Deleted member 8257

Oct 26, 2017
24,586
And it's almost always the same people who insist the hardest that America go to war because human rights and that bombing a country's bridges and power stations somehow help civilians there that are "oh well, if a million kids die because of sanctions then it is what it is".

Also after lying to the American public for 20 years about how terrible life was for most Afghan people under the American occupation, we need to make the case that the alternative is worse, and no better way to drive that point than to starve children. We do it every time after we lose a war. Vietnam had very harsh sanctions on them until the mid 90s.
Sanctions are the biggest colonialist tool of the west which we employ to slowly genocide children around the world. When an "acceptable" number of babies die, say around a million, we get to stand on the soapbox and say "See? Look at all the dead kids. We told you these backward savages dont know how to government!!" followed by "say, does that country happen to have some oil or minerals we can steal? hmm..."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.