The 90s sucked ass for a lot of people, but the culture of the time, as presented through a bunch of media, children’s shows, movies, and random TV, was pushing the message that we could do better. That we owed it to each other to do better.
And then Fox news started ramping up, then 9/11 hit and everyone lost their god damn minds.
I’m conflicted in that theory as time goes on. Prior to 2020, I would have agreed with you entirely.
Now, I’m not so sure. He fought against the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union, defense is and easy thing to understand. His goals with the US are much less clear to me. If it was to merely punish the entirety of US citizens and weaken US international influence, I say yes, easily.
But that doesn’t make sense, as it has been confirmed that the US provided military training directly to bin Laden but military aid was not sent directly to his militia and funneled through Pakistan. I dont know enough about the guy, but it is quite possible that he was entirely unaware of the indirect nature of the aid to him. So he just could have been retaliating for the perception that the U.S. gave him training and abandoned him.
It was a failed act of terrorism that served as a pretext for a successful assault on the rule of law in the US.
There’s little evidence that Binladen ever had operational command over AQ. His role was more as a figurehead, money-raiser and recruiter. Zawahiri was the tactician. Binladen’s objectives, which he repeatedly stated, and which were supported by internal AQ documents that were later obtained, were to overthrow the Saudi state (which failed), to drive US troops out of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf (which failed) and to strengthen the global jihad (which briefly grew, then largely collapsed). He also made repeated calls for the US to convert to Islam, but that’s standard Islamic rhetoric. Give 'em an offer to join you; if they don’t, it’s OK to go ahead and kill them all.
The US assisted Binladen when Russia was in Afghanistan, because Binladen was a bagman for Saudi money to the jihadis. When the Russians were driven out, that Saudi money largely dried up, except contributions from a small number of fanatical Wahhabi minor royals. Pakistan’s role was ambiguous: the Pakistani state is weak relative to the military and the intelligence service. The latter two organizations leaned heavily towards Islamism. But the US needed the Pakistanis to at least pretend to be on-side, and to effectively be more or less neutral, during the US invasion of Afghanistan. That meant a big flow of bribe money to Pakistan, and substantial leakage of some of that money to Al Qaida and to the Taliban (a group which was largely created and nurtured by the Pakistani intelligence service, the ISI). And, of course, the Pakistani military sheltered Binladen once he was on the run.
So Binladen was never a US puppet, and, once the Saudi royals realized what his plans were for their cosy family business, he was their enemy too, though, as I mentioned, there were a small number among the 5000 princes who supported him. AQ did, though, have support among some of the non-royal Saudis, as can be seen by the national origin of many of the jihadis including the 9/11 hijackers.
Bin Laden was not removed from CIA payroll after 9/11, or not announced as removed from payroll. Bin Laden was essential in maintaining/reviving US militarism. Bin Laden was staying in a heart of Pakistani ISI/military buildings, when captured. ISIS/Al Quada are US/Israel allies today. Instrumental in invasion of Syria, and in destabilizing Iraq so that they needed US to stay longer.
We live in a cynically amoral time where there seems to be no philosophical or political objective except to hurt people. People are only just now coming around to understand how dangerous it is, at least economically, but it might be too late. This is how empires fall.
You’re kinda right, but the problem was that a lot of mainstream liberals’ idea of doing better meant just forgetting what people like CIA Director George HW Bush had done and instead focusing on how people like Sister Souljah were actually the real problem now
I’d start reading some better history books. After purchasing a firearm of course. They never went away.
The 90s sucked ass for a lot of people, but the culture of the time, as presented through a bunch of media, children’s shows, movies, and random TV, was pushing the message that we could do better. That we owed it to each other to do better.
And then Fox news started ramping up, then 9/11 hit and everyone lost their god damn minds.
9/11 was the single most successful act of war/terrorism in human history, bin Laden succeeded in ways I’m sure he never imagined.
I’m conflicted in that theory as time goes on. Prior to 2020, I would have agreed with you entirely.
Now, I’m not so sure. He fought against the invasion of Afghanistan by the Soviet Union, defense is and easy thing to understand. His goals with the US are much less clear to me. If it was to merely punish the entirety of US citizens and weaken US international influence, I say yes, easily.
But that doesn’t make sense, as it has been confirmed that the US provided military training directly to bin Laden but military aid was not sent directly to his militia and funneled through Pakistan. I dont know enough about the guy, but it is quite possible that he was entirely unaware of the indirect nature of the aid to him. So he just could have been retaliating for the perception that the U.S. gave him training and abandoned him.
It was a failed act of terrorism that served as a pretext for a successful assault on the rule of law in the US.
There’s little evidence that Binladen ever had operational command over AQ. His role was more as a figurehead, money-raiser and recruiter. Zawahiri was the tactician. Binladen’s objectives, which he repeatedly stated, and which were supported by internal AQ documents that were later obtained, were to overthrow the Saudi state (which failed), to drive US troops out of Saudi Arabia and the Gulf (which failed) and to strengthen the global jihad (which briefly grew, then largely collapsed). He also made repeated calls for the US to convert to Islam, but that’s standard Islamic rhetoric. Give 'em an offer to join you; if they don’t, it’s OK to go ahead and kill them all.
The US assisted Binladen when Russia was in Afghanistan, because Binladen was a bagman for Saudi money to the jihadis. When the Russians were driven out, that Saudi money largely dried up, except contributions from a small number of fanatical Wahhabi minor royals. Pakistan’s role was ambiguous: the Pakistani state is weak relative to the military and the intelligence service. The latter two organizations leaned heavily towards Islamism. But the US needed the Pakistanis to at least pretend to be on-side, and to effectively be more or less neutral, during the US invasion of Afghanistan. That meant a big flow of bribe money to Pakistan, and substantial leakage of some of that money to Al Qaida and to the Taliban (a group which was largely created and nurtured by the Pakistani intelligence service, the ISI). And, of course, the Pakistani military sheltered Binladen once he was on the run.
So Binladen was never a US puppet, and, once the Saudi royals realized what his plans were for their cosy family business, he was their enemy too, though, as I mentioned, there were a small number among the 5000 princes who supported him. AQ did, though, have support among some of the non-royal Saudis, as can be seen by the national origin of many of the jihadis including the 9/11 hijackers.
Bin Laden was not removed from CIA payroll after 9/11, or not announced as removed from payroll. Bin Laden was essential in maintaining/reviving US militarism. Bin Laden was staying in a heart of Pakistani ISI/military buildings, when captured. ISIS/Al Quada are US/Israel allies today. Instrumental in invasion of Syria, and in destabilizing Iraq so that they needed US to stay longer.
We live in a cynically amoral time where there seems to be no philosophical or political objective except to hurt people. People are only just now coming around to understand how dangerous it is, at least economically, but it might be too late. This is how empires fall.
I heard someone say it’s like the 70s all over again with power and greed coming back just without the cocaine.
Which to me is more dangerous. I get how cocaine could drive that. But just power and greed for the sake of it is just evil
You’re kinda right, but the problem was that a lot of mainstream liberals’ idea of doing better meant just forgetting what people like CIA Director George HW Bush had done and instead focusing on how people like Sister Souljah were actually the real problem now