lmao, no it doesn’t. the US didn’t go to Afghanistan to eradicate opium. the US didn’t give a shit about it at all, lmao.
do tankies so blindly hate the US that they’ll give the Taliban a bj just to try to make the US look bad? wow...
The Afghanistan Papers: A Secret History of the War is a summary of the Washington Post's reporting on Afghanistan, specifically on the US government's own internal assessments from all levels of the military and political administration. In it, you'll find this quote:
Of all the failures in Afghanistan, the war on opium ranked among the most feckless. During two decades, the United States spent more than $9 billion on a dizzying array of programs to deter Afghanistan from supplying the world with heroin. None of the measures worked. In many cases, they made things worse.
The US doesn't need "tankies" or anyone else to make themselves look bad as far as the Afghan drug trade goes.
We also didn't threaten to kill the farmers for growing it. No shit the Taliban was successful. Comply or die. They're the ones who were profiting from it anyway. Now that they're in charge again, religion trumps financial needs.
I'm pretty sure the Talibans (not to defend them, mind you), were already cracking down on poppy farming before 9/11 and the subsequent decade long war.
So how were they benefitting? Or do you mean to say the US and allied forces allowed mass poppy crop farming that was then utilized by the Taliban to fund itself? You know there is an alternative hypothesis: the US and other occupation allied forces tolerated poppy farming to pacify and win over tribal chiefs and keep corrupt Afghan officials squarely on their side. Maybe both were happening, who is to say.
80% of worlds's opioids consumption is in USA which has 4,6% of worlds population.
That's what they are doing, waging Third Opium War on their own people.
Intelligence agencies love the drug trade because:
This is one of the dumbest articles I ever read. The entire government changed. Taliban can be dictators. The US couldn't. On top of this, they essentially had two years to switch to wheat before this occurred. Something that was less economically feasible over two years ago due to an unfortunate food shortage in the area now.
Asking why someone couldn't get something done as quickly as a dictator is something a naive child asks.
Mint Press News – Bias and Credibility
FAR LEFT BIAS
QUESTIONABLE SOURCE
A questionable source exhibits one or more of the following: extreme bias, consistent promotion of propaganda/conspiracies, poor or no sourcing to credible information, a complete lack of transparency, and/or is fake news. Fake News is the deliberate attempt to publish hoaxes and/or disinformation for profit or influence (Learn More). Sources listed in the Questionable Category may be very untrustworthy and should be fact-checked on a per-article basis. Please note sources on this list are not considered fake news unless specifically written in the reasoning section for that source. See all Questionable sources.
- Overall, we rate Mint Press Far-Left Biased and Questionable based on the publication of conspiracy theories, pseudoscience anti-Israel propaganda, poor sourcing, failed fact checks, and false claims.
Detailed Report
- Reasoning: Propaganda, Conspiracies, Pseudoscience, Poor Sources, Failed Fact Checks
- Bias Rating: FAR LEFT
- Factual Reporting: LOW
- Country: USA
- Press Freedom Rank: MOSTLY FREE
- Media Type: Website
- Traffic/Popularity: Medium Traffic
- MBFC Credibility Rating: LOW CREDIBILITY
History
Mint Press News is an independent Minnesota-based news website launched in 2012 by Mnar Muhawesh. It covers political, economic, foreign affairs, and environmental issues. According to their about page, “We focus our coverage on issues relating to the effects of special interest groups, big business and lobbying efforts and how they shape policies at home and abroad, including American foreign policy. Through the lens of social justice and human rights, we report on how these dynamics drive our foreign affairs and impact the world, and examine the effects they have on our democracy and freedoms as defined by the constitution.”
Analysis / Bias
Mint Press presents news with a strong left-leaning bias in story selection. Headlines and articles use moderately loaded language like this: NFL Freezes Policy Barring Players From Kneeling During Anthem. This particular story is republished from the conspiracy website ZeroHedge. Typically, Mint Press sources their information, but sometimes it is from Mixed factual or conspiracy websites. In general, story selection moderately favors the left, such as this Trump Administration Opens Door for Corporate Attack on Vulnerable Wildlife.
pseudoscience anti-Israel propaganda
Lol what is this even supposed to mean
A reminder that the Taliban only exists because the US funded the Mujahideen during the Soviet-Afghan war
During the time of the US occupation of Afghanistan, opium from the region comprised a full 90% of the world's heroin supply. So I would say "the same thing they've been doing since at least the days of the Vietnam War and the Golden Triangle."
I had a bunch of friends who went to Afghanistan/Iraq and they were protecting poppy and marijuana fields
I mean... Sure there are major improvements that can be had in the US, but punishment and consequences as defined in Sharia law isn't exactly something that the US can simply adopt.
The us was using opium as a weapon of war against russia and iran. Its well known and the public health concequences in both those countries were horrific
But since mexico has orders of mag itude more state capacity than the taliban their failure to solve opium problem makes one almost certain the us goverment is also behind that.
No, it doesn't raise questions. We knew back in 2003 that there was never a long-term plan. The point was to kill a guy, and then to do some military spending. A major success, on those lines.
The Taliban are terrible, though.
Turns out they were also attempting to monopolize the worlds heroin supply too, a major success on those lines too.
Editorially, MintPress News supports Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, and the governments of Russia, Iran, and Syria. It opposes the governments of Israel and Saudi Arabia, and reports geopolitical events from an anti-Western perspective. In one contentious article, MintPress News falsely asserted that the Ghouta chemical attack in Syria was perpetrated by rebel groups rather than by the Syrian government.
Lmao
You mean the US wasn't trying to eliminate heroin production 
"...but at what cost?!?!" These lizards deserve a whole lot of things.
I'm so tired of all this authoritarian propaganda on Lemmy, it's killing the community
Talican doing what Americant lol
News from around the world!
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
