Definitely violently too.

Well, there’s also that bit where we funded fundamentalists during the cold war to try and fuck with the soviets, and the imperialism we and the soviets did that led to radicalization. A problem that we exacerbated which bit us back in the ass a few decades later.

American occupation actually strengthened the Taliban compared to before the US came, so America does bear some responsibility for this. Left to their own devices, the Taliban would've likely collapsed under their own weight, but now it's likely they'll stick around for while because of Chinese support.

I wish the US had spent its efforts and resources towards completely eliminating the Taliban as an institution and ideology rather than kind of shoveling money around to opportunists with no skills for organizing people or maintaining loyalty. I think what happened instead was that the US was afraid of sparking a new movement that would eventually operate outside of its control so it funded what it thought it could control: rich assholes.

And now the religious fascists are back in charge. Wheee.

we wanted them not to occupy it in the first place.

i think everyone is at loss on how to fix it now.

I think everyone wanted Afghanistan to not give up immediately and surrender to the Taliban. Fighting spirit like Ukraine.

Yes, that's the only option. It's always occupation or no occupation. No other options exist. /s

Wait, really? That's an even dumber name that I thought it was already! Normally I'd feel bad for spelling a persons name wrong...but it's literally hitler. Excuse me while I feel no sympathy for insulting one of the biggest facists in history.

The UK newspaper the Daily Mail had a headline titled 'Hurrah for the Blackshirts!'. Are you telling me the Daily Mail lies?

The more I hear about this Hitler guy, I tell ya

He’s a little sus.

Which one would that be?

The Telegraph is the British Conservative Party's media wing. I'm not saying this isn't true, but it would come better from someone else.