Women and Children! The 'New Crisis' in Afghanistan

Women and Children! The 'New Crisis' in Afghanistan

By Bread | Breadonomics | 24 Aug 2021


'Think of the women and children!' You've probably witnessed multiple media outlets simultaneously focusing on the plight of women and children in Afghanistan.  Where this is coming from and why now?  Let's keep it short and simple.

3ddc94129f2437a61d2fca003450a4b224a89cbe5d863471a50bd3ee237f7f9b.jpg

Wikileaks released leaked CIA documents back in 2010, revealing that intelligence agencies were more than happy to use the cause of feminism to manipulate the sceptical French public into supporting the continuation of the war in Afghanistan. A war in which US and Afghani forces killed more civilians than the Taliban did, where the Swedish military lobbied to join the war so they could 'increase the marketability' of their new fighter jets, where military insiders admitted to each other as early as 2002 that the situation was hopeless but spun the data to show that they were 'winning the war' and just needed more money, more bombs and more men.

615ed8c263ac2758a6b8ae75e28299ae5d04f42f77550810dcf7eb673e7ea48a.png

The public now knows it was for nothing. The Taliban retook the country in just over a week. The aid money that flooded in was stolen by corrupt politicians who have fled. Afghanistan produces more opium now than before the war. Julian Assange, the man who published this information and revealed to us that the War on Terror was a destructive sham, is languishing in prison for revealing the truth. And now the CIA, using the same old tactic, wants you to be worried about the rights of Afghani women who they spent the last 20 years bombing and terrorising.  But why?

Who gained from all of this? Not the Afghanis, they're now worse off now than before the 'War on Terror'. US Major General Smedley Butler wrote in 1931 that war is a coercive, fraudulent racket, the oldest and most profitable racket where a small group of people make obscene fortunes from mass human suffering. So who profited? Consider the trillions of dollars given to military contractors like Boeing, Lockheed-Martin, Northrop-Grumman to build and drop $25000 bombs so their share prices soared (along with the share portfolios of government representatives). That's the same Lockheed-Martin as the one sponsoring articles critical of ending the occupation of Afghanistan. No conflict of interest there, right?

3917e13495697e2fee0220e9c1591ff5203e48b7686925e025fd5619fed173b4.jpg

And what is the cost? Ask Butler: "Gravestones, mangled bodies, shattered minds, broken homes, depression, instability and back-breaking taxation for generations". Read Butler's short book and tell me if anything has changed since 1931.  Who will be held accountable for this?b952435e5caa6a3d5f7155469eaf602b2aedac34c5fceb5b465678ad226e3421.jpg

This 'new crisis' is simultaneously real and a distraction. We can and should genuinely care about the rights of women and children in Afghanistan under the Taliban. At the same time, we should not be distracted from the disaster of the entire War on Terror, and seeking accountability from those responsible. And since our government sent men to fight, we must hold ourselves accountable too by supporting veterans and always opposing war.

If you need a primer on all this, watch Scott Horton's YouTube series on the War on Terror, it will help you understand what 'wars and rumours of war' is all about.  Yes, today's article isn't about crypto, but the principles of sound money and decentralised control of the money supply would go a long way to limiting wars and militarism.

How do you rate this article?


9

0


Breadonomics
Breadonomics

Seeking to make economics and crypto easier to understand. The more we understand, the better we invest.

Send a $0.01 microtip in crypto to the author, and earn yourself as you read!

20% to author / 80% to me.
We pay the tips from our rewards pool.