They were late smh my head
this post was submitted on 23 Mar 2024
119 points (100.0% liked)
chapotraphouse
13198 readers
375 users here now
Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.
No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer
Vaush posts go in the_dunk_tank
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
There was also an attack in Afghanistan after the US left
It was as they were leaving, and it was an attempt to get the US to stay
maybe i shouldn't be but i'm less suspicious about the ISIS-K thing there, some splinter groups aren't gonna like the taliban for local splitter reasons
Yet they wait until the day the US is withdrawing to do it? Come on
no that kinda makes sense to me too, taliban is busy filling the vacuum so if you want some territory grab it while they're busy and when you're not going to get third-partied by an airstrike.
ISIS-K is not capable of holding territory, they're a tiny tiny splinter faction. If they wanted a vacuum, they should have waited until US was gone. Instead, they attack as US was still there. They are only capable of terrorist attacks but not capable of holding territory. They never did any major attacks until the day America is leaving, then they attack an airport with both Taliban and US present to try and drag US back into Afghanistan for "counter-terrorism". This is the ISIS-CIA playbook, and I think you're a fool if you deny it. If you didn't pay painstaking attention to detail in the Syrian War, I would advise you not to speak where you are not educated.
i'm just saying it's operationally plausible to act on that day from the perspective of a local belligerent, not that it definitely wasn't the CIA.
If they wanted to exploit a vacuum and avoid US airstrikes they would have waited a day or two and not struck right when they did. The only plausible reason for the strike was desperation to keep their allies around. This was a common and repeated tactic in Syria to allow US to get a foothold