Realpolitik and Afghanistan. - Page 4 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15188213
(I'm only going to do a little more of this because I'm not *arguing* any content.)


QatzelOk wrote:
Good, I ask that it be taken seriously because human agency is so limited regarding "which technologies or social structures" we can use. The norms are mandatory, and all older lifestyles are killed by us.



But the tipping-point, as for *anything* personal, boils down to whether one has the *means* and the *free time* to 'enjoy' the world for oneself. You're specifically addressing service-type jobs in particular, and notably so.


QatzelOk wrote:
People who stare at their phones all day will have much less fulfilling lives because of the reduction in opportunities for social sharing and spontaneous experiences. This is a social disaster waiting to happen. All the "joy of using" smartphones is bullshit. We are now FORCED to use them whether we like to or not. And the damage to our societies is severe.



On the flipside, what about the joys of using Wikipedia, *on* a smartphone -- ?


QatzelOk wrote:
Like with any steroids, we get addicted to these techs, and then our natural ability to produce something (like hormones) dries up and we're less well off than before.

The West's attempt to control the world using our amazing technologies and maxxed out VISA cards in Afghanistan... is a perfect metaphor for what we do to ourselves with modern technologies. We're all just a few antidepressants away from joining our own Talibans just to escape the rat race, and all the rat tech.
#15188336
Potemkin wrote:

...which they decided to do in the end anyway. Lol.
Worse than that , China was among the state sponsors of Mujahedin terrorism .
China, though, was perhaps the most surprising of the major supporters of the Afghan mujahideen. In 1980, China was poor, with an economy ravaged by decades of mismanagement and incompetence. Economic reforms had only nominally begun, and had had no discernible effect yet. The effects of the Cultural Revolution were still being felt at all levels of Chinese society. And China was still very much a closed society, and country.

Yet, over the next several years, China would train anti-Soviet Afghan mujahideen forces, and provide millions of dollars of weaponry to them.

And, also in 1980, China would, incredibly, receive military support from the United States to combat the threat from both the Soviet Union and Afghan Communists. In a move designed to bolster the new diplomatic relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China both for its own value, as well as to counter the Soviet Union, the Carter administration not only sold China military equipment, it also extended Communist China most-favored nation trading status.
China, though, was perhaps the most surprising of the major supporters of the Afghan mujahideen. In 1980, China was poor, with an economy ravaged by decades of mismanagement and incompetence. Economic reforms had only nominally begun, and had had no discernible effect yet. The effects of the Cultural Revolution were still being felt at all levels of Chinese society. And China was still very much a closed society, and country.

Yet, over the next several years, China would train anti-Soviet Afghan mujahideen forces, and provide millions of dollars of weaponry to them.

And, also in 1980, China would, incredibly, receive military support from the United States to combat the threat from both the Soviet Union and Afghan Communists. In a move designed to bolster the new diplomatic relationship between the United States and the People’s Republic of China both for its own value, as well as to counter the Soviet Union, the Carter administration not only sold China military equipment, it also extended Communist China most-favored nation trading status.... The path from China’s embrace and acceptance of Soviet communism from the 1920s forward, to its complete repudiation of the Soviets themselves in the 1950s, is an oft and well-told story. The key takeaway, however, is that the split was so decisive, and so final (one thought), that China could turn its back on its former mentor, accept assistance from its former nemesis, the United States, instead, and actively oppose the installation of a communist government in another of its border neighbors that by logic it should have welcomed.

So much for communist brethren and the Internationale.
https://thediplomat.com/2018/09/how-the-1980-laid-the-groundwork-for-chinas-major-foreign-policy-challenges/ As to China's interests in regards to the current situation , I feel that much hinges upon the Taliban's policy regarding relations with such terrorist organizations as the ETIM , especially in Xianjiang Province .
Yet the cessation of violence within Afghanistan and the ascent of a Taliban government alone do not by any means guarantee greater Chinese investment. Complicating the matter are two issues: first, the Taliban’s ties to foreign terrorist organizations that pose a threat to China’s domestic security, and second, the consequences of the Taliban’s victory in Afghanistan on the country’s immediate neighbor: Pakistan.

Regarding the first, the Taliban—which has ties to ETIM and other terrorist groups—was recently urged by Chinese officials to “make a clean break with all terrorist organizations including the ETIM.” The Taliban’s leaders appear eager to quell the international community’s anxieties over the numerous terrorist groups residing in Afghanistan, insisting that the country would not be a launching point for terrorist attacks “against any country including China.” However, it is not clear how willing they are to cut support for ETIM and other Uighur militants. Even if one assumes the organization’s leadership is willing to sacrifice its patronage of Uighur extremists in exchange for Chinese economic patronage, the Taliban’s various commanders and soldiers may not be so keen on the prospect. ETIM has allegedly fought alongside the Taliban, and ethnic Uighurs have joined the Taliban’s ranks. Reining in these fighters may thus be an unpopular move for the group’s leadership. After all, the Taliban is—at its core—a religious fundamentalist group, and it has not ceased support for groups such as al-Qaeda and the Tehrik-i-Taliban (TTP). In short, it remains to be seen whether the Taliban will jettison its ties to the Uighur militants in Afghanistan and settle for being another link in China’s BRI.

Regarding the second issue, Pakistan: the establishment of an Islamic Emirate next door will likely rouse jihadist elements within Pakistan proper. Radicals like the TTP, whose stated goal is the overthrow of the government in Islamabad, may become emboldened by the Taliban’s victory. The TTP maintains ties with the Afghan Taliban and has attacked Pakistani civilians and security forces. Moreover, under the new regime in Kabul, Pakistani-based terrorists could be more freely aided by sympathetic elements in Afghanistan. Such a threat to Pakistan’s stability is incredibly concerning to Beijing, which has invested over $60 billion into the country so far. The immediate security of China’s BRI projects in Pakistan remains in question as well, with Chinese nationals working on said projects facing attacks from Pakistan-based terrorist groups as recently as July. Given the Taliban’s renewed position of power, it is unclear if Pakistan’s security establishment remains influential enough to persuade the organization to rein in terrorist groups that target Chinese projects.

If the Taliban’s leaders refuse to cut ties with radical militants who threaten China’s direct interests, or if they are unable to stabilize Afghanistan, Beijing will maintain an observational role, focusing on the security of its border areas and regional investments. China will likely invest more into regional security and place pressure on neighboring countries to ensure the safety of BRI projects. In July, as the Taliban was swiftly bringing Afghanistan under their control, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi visited Tajikistan for talks with Central Asian states, to whom he stressed the need for cooperation on “border defense and security.” It is too early to tell whether the Taliban’s triumph and the potential stabilization of Afghanistan will open the door for greater Chinese-Afghan cooperation. China, however, has signaled its redline, making clear that its support is conditional on the Taliban’s willingness to suppress anti-China militancy. The Taliban may call China a “friend,” but a closer relationship hinges on whether the Taliban is willing to acquiesce to Beijing’s demand
https://chinafocus.ucsd.edu/2021/08/30/chinas-strategy-in-a-taliban-ruled-afghanistan/
China held its first diplomatic talks with the Taliban Wednesday, establishing “effective communication” with the insurgent group in Afghanistan. However, the growing relationship between the two countries seems to be contingent on Taliban’s ties with the East Turkestan Islamic Movement (ETIM), an Uyghur militant group.

In an earlier meeting with Taliban representatives on 28 July, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi had asked the former to crack down on the ETIM, which is based out of the Xinjiang province. In response, the Taliban spokesperson Abdul Ghani Baradar reportedly said, “The Afghan Taliban will never allow any force to use the Afghan territory to engage in acts detrimental to China.” ETIM, allegedly, moves fighters from Afghanistan to China and is active in the former country.... With the Taliban’s return to power and China’s efforts to establish a diplomatic relationship with them, the issue of the Taliban’s links to ETIM has come to the fore once again.

However, according to a report in the Asia Times as well as reporting by the South China Morning Post, the Taliban leadership’s promise to China to tackle the ETIM is not necessarily in line with the views of several ground commanders of the insurgent group in Afghanistan.
https://theprint.in/theprint-essential/what-is-etim-the-uyghur-extremist-group-china-wants-taliban-to-crack-down-on/722635/
#15188477
ckaihatsu wrote:
Nikki Haley



Nikki is a Republican running for president...

Which means she has to get in bed with the War Lobby (that's the guys we have that always want another war).

Tell me, what is the one thing Afghanistan has been known for, for most of recorded history?

Frustrating the ambitions of foreigners...
#15188490
late wrote:
Nikki is a Republican running for president...

Which means she has to get in bed with the War Lobby (that's the guys we have that always want another war).

Tell me, what is the one thing Afghanistan has been known for, for most of recorded history?

Frustrating the ambitions of foreigners...



So is she empirically *correct*, or not -- ? If so, then it's valid geopolitical reporting.


philosophical abstractions

Spoiler: show
Image
#15188496
ckaihatsu wrote:
So is she empirically *correct*, or not -- ? If so, then it's valid geopolitical reporting.




The last thing that is, is reporting. She is speculating on what might happen.

China clearly wants the business potential, they always do. They might be able to use that relationship as leverage. But what could it amount to? Not much, really.
#15188498
late wrote:
The last thing that is, is reporting. She is speculating on what might happen.

China clearly wants the business potential, they always do. They might be able to use that relationship as leverage. But what could it amount to? Not much, really.



Whatever. Semantics. It's always about the BRI, for China.

I don't support the right-wing, regardless.
#15188564
QatzelOk wrote:
People who stare at their phones all day will have much less fulfilling lives because of the reduction in opportunities for social sharing and spontaneous experiences. This is a social disaster waiting to happen. All the "joy of using" smartphones is bullshit. We are now FORCED to use them whether we like to or not. And the damage to our societies is severe.



F.y.i....


The Social Dilemma _ Full Feature _ Netflix

#15188692
Common Dreams wrote:Estimated Cost of Post-9/11 US Wars Hits $8 Trillion
With Nearly a Million People Dead


Image


Why would the US military-industrial complex blow up the WTC towers in 2001?

If you could have 8 trillion dollars by blowing up towers, would you blow them up?

Is this a decent return on investment for a war-starved military-industrial complex?

And dude, where's my health care and highspeed rail?
#15188698
QatzelOk wrote:Why would the US military-industrial complex blow up the WTC towers in 2001?

If you could have 8 trillion dollars by blowing up towers, would you blow them up?

Is this a decent return on investment for a war-starved military-industrial complex?

And dude, where's my health care and highspeed rail?

The American people voted for this. And they kept on voting for it. They would clearly prefer to have lots of dead brown people and lots of rich fat cat corporate types rather than affordable healthcare or infrastructure that doesn't collapse without warning. As H.L. Mencken put it, "Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard." Lol.
#15188706
ckaihatsu wrote:
Whatever. You *could* stick to politics, instead of playing interpersonal games of 'oneupmanship'.



It's a reminder, about talking long walks off short piers.
#15188715
ckaihatsu wrote:
Veiled threats. Nice. Bully-ism. Keep it up, see what happens.



Threats???

I used to treat you with kid gloves, but you wore them out. Pointing out you'd jumped in bed with a War Lover is doing you a favor.
#15188730
ckaihatsu wrote:
And who are *you*, exactly -- ?



A minor god of information.

Don't worry, the last thing I want is followers or worshipers. I don't even want to be a god, but one doesn't get to chose these things.
#15188734
late wrote:
A minor god of information.

Don't worry, the last thing I want is followers or worshipers. I don't even want to be a god, but one doesn't get to chose these things.



Uh-huh. Is all your paperwork in order?


= D

I would bet you have very strong feelings about DE[…]

@Rugoz A compromise with Putin is impossibl[…]

@KurtFF8 Litwin wages a psyops war here but we […]

[usermention=41202] @late[/usermention] The[…]