I'm not sure the CIA was doing stuff as advanced as Stuxnet in its LSD days when it was supplying Iran.
Though now that you mention it, I'm surprised we've never heard of the CIA doing more things like obscure Stuxnet style sabotage on leaders' aircraft and the like.
Yeahhhh it's the age-old campism of
"If it's anti-america, it must be good"
I'm so sick of this black and white thinking, we can force the U.S government to do better without praising whoever is doing atrocities in the name of attacking the west.
"So hear me out, we place a bomb in one of the Hueys and then stop supplying them with new ones, one day their leader will totally get on it and then we got em"
"Yo bill maybe slow down on the company acid please."
Hmmmm the guy everyone thought was gonna be leader next suddenly dies and the son of the current leader is now the heir presumptive... I know nowhere enough about Iranian politics and ik it was a heli crash but this sounds suspicious as hell.
Every 10 days a few blocks wouldn’t match the expected construction rate, and there’s no reasoning why they think it was for the Great Pyramid
Unless there were other crews, like there almost always is in any construction. The journal also specifically names the pyramid, it'd be odd for the stone they're moving to go to the site of the Pyramid of Khufu, mention the name of the pyramid of Khufu, and then not be used for the pyramid of Khufu.
Depressing but not surprising, Putins favorite little sycophant in Chechnya, Kadyrov, has been saying, "There's no gay people in Chechnya" like "There's no war in Ba Sing Se" while simultaneously throwing thousands of LGBT people into camps for a decade now.
Saddam was the state structure it wasn't like some organic thing existed through a shared nationalist identity.
Oh you've misunderstood what I've said. Sadam definitely wasn't some good leader that united the country, and I know we helped put him in power to stop the Iraqi Communists.
I'm just saying that the oppression had effectively held the country together for decades, and so when we arrived, stuff was a little more stable, and then we fucked it up.
Afghanistan had already been going through a civil war for a long, long, time. I wasn't making any value judgements like "Saddam is good", I was simply saying that Iraq was an easier situation than Afghanistan.
Yeah I was aware of the other ethnic/religious groups in Iraq, but haven't done enough research into them (except the Yazidis, ISIS made us get exposed to them in the west). I know about the Iraqi kurds and the factionalist fights they have, so it would make sense if the rest of the country was similar.
My point was really that a state structure already existed in Iraq, all the U.S. had to do was seize it while not damaging it too much in the process. (Or doing something stupid like idk firing the entire military and all the teachers and anyone remotely tied to Baathism)
Afghanistan would've taken far, far, far, more effort.
the fact that you basically gave the country to the iranian backed political groups which forms the backbone of a lot of political parties - security forces and businesses clashing with the rest of the very diverse iraqi society whether shia or sunni.
Possibly a bigger mistake than invading in the first place. Not completely sure how it could've been avoided without an endless occupation, but there had to have been a better solution than letting them fund opposition groups, and then letting them be one of the key military components against ISIS with the PMF system.
Yeahhhh Afghanistan was a shitshow. We were actually nation-building, not just nation rebuilding like we did in Iraq, a lot harder to create a national identity out of several tribes and ethnic groups than it is to change/"modernize" a nation like we did in Iraq.
Even Iraq had that issue with the sectarianism, but atleast almost everyone spoke the same language (sorry Kurds). Iraq had also had a national identity beat into them by the monarchy and then the Baathists, which probably helped as well.
Afghanistan never really had that.
The U.S. also had local opposition fighters to help them gain sympathy from the local population, and we were actually trying to nation build.
You can say that Fatah is basically that for Israel, but they aren't fighting in Gaza. If the fighting in Gaza was being done by Fatah, then global perceptions would probably be a lot different.
It would also probably involve less civilian deaths as Fatah would be much less likely just to bomb a neighborhood to get 10 Hamas fighters as opposed to actually fighting for it and taking casualties which is what Israel is currently doing.
Of course, this couldn't happen under the current Israeli government. They barely trust Fatah with enough weapons to be policemen in the West Bank, let alone enough to take a city of 2 million.
