Afghanistan Thread | Taliban Rule

DirtyD

Last Time That I Checc'd......
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
3,387
Reputation
670
Daps
7,906
Reppin
Queens
Taliban gotta pay what they owe. The people of Afghanistan could have avoided this by not put the Taliban back in power knowing they had an outstanding debt against them.

Everyone knew these funds would be siezed if the Taliban regained power. Hence the money being kept stateside.

:russell:

If they're unhappy with the Taliban, oh well.:smugbiden:

IDK if you know this but the people of Afghanistan didn't have a vote to see who was going to be in charge. :mjlol: :troll: The U.S., however, could have made other choices and not funded the mujahideen some of whom would go on to become the Taliban.

If they didn't want their money jacked they shouldn't have kept it in the New York Federal Reserve. They should have given up Bin Laden back in 01 and the US would have left them alone.

Yeah the U.S. is real good at leaving resource rich countries in the middle east alone. :mjlol:

The Taliban was also offering to give Bin Laden up, but the Bush administration wasn't interested in that.

President George Bush rejected as "non-negotiable" an offer by the Taliban to discuss turning over Osama bin Laden if the United States ended the bombing in Afghanistan.
Bush rejects Taliban offer to hand Bin Laden over


The perception of the anti-Taliban Afghan resistance was not far from the stance of President Bush and his Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld. Both dismissed Taliban initiatives to send bin Laden for trial abroad despite Washington’s refusal to provide evidence (which it didn’t have). Finally, they refused Taliban offers to surrender. As the president put it, “When I said no negotiations, I meant no negotiations.” Rumsfeld added, “We don’t negotiate surrenders.” E.g., we’re going to show our muscle and scare everyone in the world.
Noam Chomsky: The US-Led “War on Terror” Has Devastated Much of the World | Global Policy Journal
 

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
45,970
Reputation
6,947
Daps
146,466
Reppin
CookoutGang
IDK if you know this but the people of Afghanistan didn't have a vote to see who was going to be in charge. :mjlol: :troll: The U.S., however, could have made other choices and not funded the mujahideen some of whom would go on to become the Taliban.
No, their president ran into exile and their military and entire government pulled a :hubie:
.

8 billion dollars won't fix the issues they have humanitarian or otherwise.

They're on their own now. Good luck. Be careful what you wish for :pachaha:
 

DirtyD

Last Time That I Checc'd......
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
3,387
Reputation
670
Daps
7,906
Reppin
Queens
No, their president ran into exile and their military and entire government pulled a :hubie:
.

8 billion dollars won't fix the issues they have humanitarian or otherwise.

They're on their own now. Good luck. Be careful what you wish for :pachaha:

You can hear Bush and Rumsfeld say out of their own mouths they weren’t trying to negotiate and still think that they were operating in good faith.:lolbron:

I don’t believe that they civilian population of Afghanistan asked for George W bush to invade their country and for Joe Biden to place sanctions on them that will kill a significant portion of their population, but hey that’s just me. :manny:
 

Geek Nasty

Brain Knowledgeably Whizzy
Supporter
Joined
Jan 30, 2015
Messages
30,679
Reputation
4,791
Daps
115,543
Reppin
South Kakalaka


fukk that country, we're not giving $9B to a terorist regime that took over by force. And, the first time we track a terrorist attack back to a cell in Afghanistan, whatever President unfreezes those funds will be DESTROYED by the same media trying to play the sympathy card.

Those fukkers got $300 MILLION A DAY for 20 YEARS, they don't need a red cent more from us.
 

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
45,970
Reputation
6,947
Daps
146,466
Reppin
CookoutGang
You can hear Bush and Rumsfeld say out of their own mouths they weren’t trying to negotiate and still think that they were operating in good faith.:lolbron:

I don’t believe that they civilian population of Afghanistan asked for George W bush to invade their country
No, the Taliban decided they wanted to run a terrorist playground and those terrorists decided to attack to US.

They fukked around and found out. :pachaha:

and for Joe Biden to place sanctions on them that will kill a significant portion of their population, but hey that’s just me. :manny:
:duck:



It feels like you're attempting to push an alternative reality of the Taliban and its pathetic. :rudy:
 

Pressure

#PanthersPosse
Supporter
Joined
Nov 19, 2016
Messages
45,970
Reputation
6,947
Daps
146,466
Reppin
CookoutGang
fukk that country, we're not giving $9B to a terorist regime that took over by force. And, the first time we track a terrorist attack back to a cell in Afghanistan, whatever President unfreezes those funds will be DESTROYED by the same media trying to play the sympathy card.

Those fukkers got $300 MILLION A DAY for 20 YEARS, they don't need a red cent more from us.
"Biden gives Taliban 8bn dollars.:smugbiden:"

Entire US media and government for four years:
 

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
63,038
Reputation
6,096
Daps
166,672
fukk that country, we're not giving $9B to a terorist regime that took over by force. And, the first time we track a terrorist attack back to a cell in Afghanistan, whatever President unfreezes those funds will be DESTROYED by the same media trying to play the sympathy card.

Those fukkers got $300 MILLION A DAY for 20 YEARS, they don't need a red cent more from us.
Indeed breh, let the people of Afghanistan die. American sociopathy :blessed:
 

DirtyD

Last Time That I Checc'd......
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
3,387
Reputation
670
Daps
7,906
Reppin
Queens
No, the Taliban decided they wanted to run a terrorist playground and those terrorists decided to attack to US.

They fukked around and found out. :pachaha:


:duck:



It feels like you're attempting to push an alternative reality of the Taliban and its pathetic. :rudy:

There is a difference between the government and the entire population.No is defending the taliban.
 

mastermind

Rest In Power Kobe
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
63,038
Reputation
6,096
Daps
166,672


In essence, a group of 9/11 families secured a default judgment against the Taliban as a nonsovereign entity a decade ago. At the time it was viewed as a largely symbolic ruling. After the Taliban’s takeover of Afghanistan last year, however, this same group of families went after the central bank’s assets held in the New York Fed. Using some bizarre logic, a federal district court ruled that because the Taliban now controlled Afghanistan, the plaintiffs could go after the frozen assets — even though the United States does not recognize the Taliban as the lawful rulers of Afghanistan (and even if they did, Afghanistan was not named as a sovereign defendant in the initial lawsuit).

The New York Times’ Charlie Savage explains that in the wake of this legal thicket “the White House’s National Security Council led months of deliberations on the central bank funds involving top officials from departments including Justice, State and Treasury.” The resulting executive order is an attempt by the Biden administration to preserve at least some of these funds for the Afghan people.

The procedural means through which the administration plans to follow through on this, however, hints at the legal farce requiring this move to work. According to Savage:

It is highly unusual for the United States government to commandeer a foreign country’s assets on domestic soil. Officials are said to have discussed a two-part legal process for Mr. Biden to engineer that outcome.

First, in his executive order on Friday morning, he used emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to consolidate all Da Afghanistan Bank assets in the United States in a segregated account at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. That has blocked them, but the Afghanistan central bank still owns them.

Second, officials have discussed then using a provision of the Federal Reserve Act that permits disposing of property belonging to the central bank of a foreign nation — so long as it has the blessing of someone the secretary of state has recognized as being “the accredited representative” of that foreign country.

But deciding who qualifies as such a person, at a time when Afghanistan’s former government no longer exists, has raised significant complications. It remained unclear what solution Biden administration officials had settled on and whether the name of any person or people they deem as such would be disclosed for security reasons, like possibly endangering family members still in Afghanistan.
In seizing more than 40 percent of Afghanistan’s hard currency reserves — including a half-billion dollars of private bank assets required by law to be deposited into the central bank — the United States is taking a bad financial situation and making it worse. As Rafiq notes, “to the extent that the State was found liable and international law rules on reparation were given attention, reparation should be limited. If ever a case against crippling compensation could be made, it is here.” One Afghan American activist told Al Jazeera: “What Biden is proposing is not justice for 9/11 families, it is theft of public funds from an impoverished nation already on the brink of famine and starvation brought on by the United States’ disastrous withdrawal.”

It is not politically popular to declare that it is wrong for the federal government to take funds potentially available to the Taliban and give them to the families of those who died on Sept. 11. Stripped of legalese, Biden is proposing to divert Afghanistan state funds to help grieving citizens. The United States poured hundreds of billions of dollars into a fruitless effort at Afghan state-building; some Americans will not begrudge clawing some of that taxpayer money back.

None of that, however, changes the precedent of this move. The United States government is looting assets legally held by another sovereign government to reward its own citizens. If another country pulled this move — and another country might be tempted to try it using this case as precedent — it would be viewed as outright theft. It makes it much easier for other great powers to act in a similarly imperial manner.

The short-term implications of U.S. actions will be to free up some funds for humanitarian assistance in Afghanistan. The longer-term implication is to give other countries yet another reason to resent and fear the United States weaponization of the dollar. Because no matter what legal rationale is being provided, the federal government is stealing Afghanistan’s money.

When you have the NY Times and WaPo, both super war hawk papers, saying "the US is stealing these peoples money," then you know its fukked up.

Too bad many brehs are sociopaths.
 
Top