Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

zsreport t1_j9ucet5 wrote

You had to be pretty nuts to have been donating to them in the first place.

300

pegothejerk t1_j9umse5 wrote

“Religion has actually convinced people that there's an invisible man living in the sky who watches everything you do, every minute of every day. And the invisible man has a special list of ten things he does not want you to do. And if you do any of these ten things, he has a special place, full of fire and smoke and burning and torture and anguish, where he will send you to live and suffer and burn and choke and scream and cry forever and ever 'til the end of time!

But He loves you. He loves you, and He needs money! He always needs money! He's all-powerful, all-perfect, all-knowing, and all-wise, somehow just can't handle money!”

-George Carlin

241

leilaniko t1_j9v6ob3 wrote

If I see ANOTHER George Carlin quote today lol Reddit loves quoting him and I see why, but I feel like I'm in a deathloop reading the same comments on different threads.

30

pegothejerk t1_j9v8elf wrote

“Never underestimate the power of stupid people in a large group.” — George Carlin

70

leilaniko t1_j9v8s20 wrote

"The planet is fine. The people are fucked" - George Carlin

49

Zhang5 t1_j9vk1rt wrote

"Go fuck yourself"

  • George Carlin
25

SpiritPaper t1_j9z7pmu wrote

"Sir Topham Hatt was cross."

  • George Carlin as Mr. Conductor
7

zsreport t1_j9uo5jw wrote

I'm sure there's plenty of good charities connected to Islam, so if people want to donate for religious reasons, they can donate to those, not the fucking Taliban, which is just men using religion to justify their regressive patriarchal fantasy.

13

blahbleh112233 t1_j9uqugb wrote

Its the conundrum we face with NK too. On one hand, 90% of the money probably goes towards the ruling elite, but on the other hand, that 10% is still preventing some people from starving.

14

zsreport t1_j9uru1f wrote

Your comment reminded me of this old incident involving giant rabbits that were meant to set up a breeding program to help alleviate famine in North Korea:

"Bunny boiler: Kim Jong-il ate my giant rabbits"

14

pegothejerk t1_j9usi4q wrote

> Pyongyang's embassy in Berlin has denied the rabbits are dead.

No, no, 'e's uh,...he's resting.

16

Valyrian_Kobolds t1_j9v7phm wrote

There's lots of places to donate to that will alleviate human suffering more efficiently than donating towards regimes that will obviously steal the money to enrich themselves.

Unfortunately, we can't help everyone, so we reach the ones who are closest or easiest to lend a hand to.

6

blahbleh112233 t1_j9vao9y wrote

With places locked down like NK and the Taliban? Not really since they won't let them in. But that's the rub I guess.

2

Valyrian_Kobolds t1_j9vax3a wrote

I mean like... Mosquito nets in Africa (although malaria is less of an issue) because they're cheap and there wasn't bureaucracy preventing the help. or helping dig wells in those places.

3

blahbleh112233 t1_j9vbhlk wrote

Yeah. I'm more specifically referring to totalitarian regimes that won't let NGO's in. Like NK is suffering massively from COVID, but they won't let the red cross do their thing independently at all.

And don't forget that the entire Black Hawk Down episode happened because Somali warlords were essentially robbing people of their food allotments right after they got out of sight of the UN peacekeepers.

5

swheels125 t1_j9wsolw wrote

I’d imagine it’s the same problem the international community is facing in trying to help earthquake victims in Syria. How many aid workers would even go? And who would donate money to the “government” of a failed state where we know the money wouldn’t be going to the right places?

1

the_unkempt_one t1_j9vesxr wrote

Oh hey, you’re either getting downvoted for suggesting there may be good charities connected to Islam, or for suggesting the Taliban use religion to keep men in power.

I legit wonder which it is?

2

IceColdPorkSoda t1_j9w71gg wrote

I think it’s for suggesting that their faith is being used in a cynical fashion, and that it has little to do with genuine religious fervor.

3

chadthecrawdad t1_jabhrv0 wrote

Maybe not exactly that , maybe nothing to do with the Bible at all, but I’m telling you , better watch it, the world is a strange place and we don’t even know much about the reality we’re in or can’t even explain how quantum entanglement works, double slit experiments, premonitions, etc so it may very well be some learning thing is the only reason you’re in that physical body in this physical world and I really high right now I’m going to go on and babble about blackholes or something now

1

BridgetheDivide t1_j9v83wu wrote

The Sauds were bankrolling them, just like they're funding most Islamic extremists around the world. America is no longer being kept occupied in the region so there's no longer a reason for them to fund a failed state.

60

Sanpaku t1_j9usdix wrote

Depends on what you're donating.

Buying food in-country or elsewhere, so that fewer Afghans starve, might be justified on short term ethical grounds. But spending money on bribes and other corruption in country, ultimately to prop up this anti-human, anti-modernity state, is unproductive.

Back up and look across nations, and over longer timespans, and it may be a net benefit to humanity if Afghanistan under the Taliban rule becomes a cautionary tale, despite the humanitarian cost within the country. Also, if a nation cannot afford to feed itself without resort to opiate exports that harm the rest of the world, perhaps its citizens should be left to solve this without external assistence.

13

reconrose t1_j9widdr wrote

>Back up and look across nations, and over longer timespans, and it may be a net benefit to humanity if Afghanistan under the Taliban rule becomes a cautionary tale, despite the humanitarian cost within the country. Also, if a nation cannot afford to feed itself without resort to opiate exports that harm the rest of the world, perhaps its citizens should be left to solve this without external assistence.

I think this kinda assumes Afghanistan has not been significantly influenced by outside forces that have helped put it in the place it's in today. The opiate trade doesn't exist without consumers after all, especially those whose governments kept it alive.

The outside world came and took what it wanted from Afghanistan and propped up extremist organizations while it did so and now gets to peace out and go "beware"?

3

MeatsimPD t1_j9wlfi6 wrote

> You had to be pretty nuts to have been donating to them in the first place

If you read the first paragraph of the article it's about donations to people and causes in Afghanistan, not donating to the Taliban

−1

clgoodson t1_j9ym7l8 wrote

You think, those things are different?

3

MeatsimPD t1_j9yocs5 wrote

I used to work in humanitarian aide on Afghanistan, yes they are very different

−3

billpalto t1_j9uamf3 wrote

It reminds me of North Korea. The people are starving, and the leadership spends the money not on food but on weapons to threaten their neighbors. Should the neighbors enable this by providing food to the starving people?

The Taliban made the decision that they would rather their kids starve than let them be fed by a woman who won't cover her head. Should we enable their behavior?

126

passinghere t1_j9uq31v wrote

> Should the neighbors enable this by providing food to the starving people?

Even if the neighbours try that you can guarantee that almost everything they provide will be taken and used or sold elsewhere by the wealthy in charge and fuck all will get to the poor / starving that really need it

44

burningphoenix77888 OP t1_j9ud5gp wrote

That’s the problem. Both options are complete shit.

Frankly what should be done is giving aid to the remaining Republican resistance groups. But seems politicians are too cowardly to do that.

And aiding the Taliban also indirectly aids Al Qaeda since the Taliban went back on their agreement in Doha. So if we help stabilize the country, thats more money that could go to Al Qaeda. It’s completely fucked.

26

successful_nothing t1_j9ur6lp wrote

> Frankly what should be done is giving aid to the remaining Republican resistance groups. But seems politicians are too cowardly to do that.

I don't know if that really is that case, as there might be some covert support still provided to internal resistance groups in Afghanistan. But, overtly funding a resistance group would be a pretty bold move after leaving the country and seeing the Taliban easily take over, and it would undoubtedly be met with international condemnation for continuing to stoke instability and war in Afghanistan. I mean, let's be real here, even just on reddit, how many smug comments about "U.S.-funded terrorists" would you imagine seeing on any given thread? Moreover, overtly funding a resistance would only serve to give the Taliban more legitimacy, because that's where the Taliban thrives -- in fighting a foreign enemy. Now they've been largely denied that boogeyman, they're in shambles.

9

burningphoenix77888 OP t1_j9utxy7 wrote

That’s true. It would be better for it to be covert. Tajikistan is also not so secretly giving them safe harbor as well as bank access where the online donations to the NRF go.

Still. I feel if they were getting any significant amount of support beyond what Tajikistan is doing that they wouldn’t be getting crushed the way they are.

Remember that the US didn’t send any material support to the Northern Alliance until after 9/11 happened (the lack of aid arguably indirectly led to Massoud’s death). Had we in the 90’s covertly sent to the northern alliance the level of material aid we are sending Ukraine, the invasion may never have been necessary.

I’m worried we are making that same mistake again and that history may rhyme once Al Qaeda central rebuilds. We should have sent a fuckload of support during the battle for Panshjir. But we didn’t and the rebels were forced to resort to hit and run tactics now.

3

Mushroom_Tip t1_j9uz66y wrote

>instead arguing for Western countries to find a “liminal space between pariah and legitimate status” to respond to the ongoing humanitarian crisis.

The Taliban just banned birth control of any kind which means birth rates will go up in a country already plagued by hunger.

Sorry but Western countries can't bail them out with this. Their government is just making things worse. And when that happens all you can do is wait for people to destroy the government or for the government to collapse.

Reminds me of countries aiding brutal dictatorships in Africa with aid, which only helped them stay in power. Or giving humanitarian aid to North Korea which they used to feed their army rather than your average person.

Systems like this need to be allowed to fail even if it causes great suffering. Propping them up doesn't solve any problems.

Aid should be reserved for unexpected disasters like, say, the Turkey earthquakes.

70

GlitteringPear9761 t1_ja20hmd wrote

> the Turkey earthquakes.

Much of the damage was traced back to their president who gleefully said on record that he took bribes from builders wanting to avoid building codes....

3

abletofable t1_j9vi41a wrote

Delighted to hear it. To give donations to men who wish to relegate their women back to the status of being worthless chattels and slaves is a waste of resources.

32

Snoo_28055 t1_j9whs34 wrote

Wait, are you talking about giving money to the republican party or the taliban?

8

MpVpRb t1_j9vx3ta wrote

The Taliban are cancer. The Afghan people need to kill it

20

StifleStrife t1_j9wq6v0 wrote

It's always painful for everyone who is involved in the lives of extreme notions and theocracy. People truly can not see what is wrong with them. People turn to religion because they are in pain and scared and religion causes pain and fear.

6

givemeabreak111 t1_j9yb5va wrote

Many people were only donating to the Talib because they are blackmailing with starving their own women and children .. hoping somehow to feed them .. then they take the donations for themselves .. reminds me of Fatboy Kim .. maybe someday the women in Afghan will see Iran and rise up but until then

.. no solution to this

2

Nightchade t1_j9w0558 wrote

Good. Fuck the Taliban, backwards, bigoted savages.

18

SapientRaccoon t1_j9v0vew wrote

Let them pray for manna from their sky buddy who supposedly loves them most. Bit let no human raise a finger or send a penny to support them. Let the parents of starving babies hunt and eat the Taliban.

16

Stuthebastard t1_j9v1dxu wrote

I'm not saying it would ever be justified to withhold humanitarian assistance to anyone, even the Taliban. I am saying that, we're free to set the priorities for the finite assistance that exists. I see no reason to put Afghanistan high on that list.

14

kemosabe-84 t1_j9vg5bh wrote

It's a shit dilemma. The last time the only one to help them was bin laden. They do it to themselves I get that but damn.

9

CustardAccurate1540 t1_j9w4ync wrote

Bin laden is personally responsible for causing the US invasion of afghanistan and iraq by conducting the 9/11 attacks. If anyone, its Bin laden who is responsible for what happened to afghanistan.

If it wasnt for bin laden and al-quaeda, afghanistan would propably be a fully functional country today with a bright future instead of a dead wasteland stuck in perpetual agony.

If it wasnt for his sociopathic delusions of grandeur, 9/11 wouldnt have happened and the US wouldnt have bombed the country out of existence for 2 decades.

−7

capt_fantastic t1_j9wdfqo wrote

> If it wasnt for bin laden and al-quaeda, afghanistan would propably be a fully functional country today with a bright future instead of a dead wasteland stuck in perpetual agony.

???

the taliban were in control of the country before 9/11, it was fcuked up then. they emerged from the civil war after the soviets left. i've not seen anyone suggest that afg would today be a normal country were it not for obl and aq. you spelt al qaeda wrong btw.

10

kemosabe-84 t1_j9wjnud wrote

The taliban made Afghanistan a bad place before bin laden came around hence why nobody wanted to talk to them to begin with.

6

Warm-Boysenberry3880 t1_j9x514g wrote

Afghanistan has always been a sh*t country. The US trained Bin Laden and his cronies to fight the soviets and bit them in the ass.

3

Coolley t1_j9zvb2u wrote

There are other wealthy islamic nations that can help them, not sure this is our problem anymore.

3

InsomniaticWanderer t1_j9wfyx6 wrote

The Taliban will just switch from accepting donations to demanding them. Nothing will change.

2

Warm-Boysenberry3880 t1_j9x4mdn wrote

They preach that Allah is all you need so get him to help you. I’ll wait. The first time atheism became something it was after a tsunami and earthquake in Portugal. They all went to the church for safety and it collapsed and killed a lot of people. Maybe that’s what needs to happen in Afghanistan for people to open their eyes and throw out religious theocrats.

1

popecorkyxxiv t1_ja3syiz wrote

Oh course. The Taliban has established a theocracy and are no longer bleeding the US of resources so why on Earth would the Saudis still want to support them? I think it is so funny, the US has spent 20 years fighting against Terrorists, all of which just happened to have been equipped and paid by the same Saudi princes the US would turn around and ass kiss in exchange for a little cheap oil.

1

TheFan88 t1_ja6j7bp wrote

These people are all crazy. Women are beautiful. I can go to the grocery store, the park, the mall, the post office and see beautiful women every day. My life is brilliant. These guys have to look at women dressed like sand people. I would never want that life. Sounds mega depressing.

1

TarantinoFan23 t1_j9x7lo9 wrote

I invented a way to get food over borders.

0

DragoonDM t1_j9w3inh wrote

A lot of people in this thread seem to be under the impression that the headline is talking about donations to the Taliban. It's talking about donors to NGO humanitarian efforts directed at the Afghani people, the civilian population suffering under the Taliban's rule.

−5

DelightfulAbsurdity t1_j9z67uq wrote

If a warlord has one ton of food he refuses to share to his starving people, and outside individuals donate two tons of food to the starving people, the warlord now has three tons of food and his people are still starving.

This is the challenge with donating anything to a country controlled by a group like the Taliban.

6

DragoonDM t1_j9zarw3 wrote

True if they're just dropping aid packages off with the local authorities to do as they please with, but less true if the NGOs are sending workers to directly distribute aid to the population -- which is what I'm under the impression most NGOs are doing. One of the major reasons for the drop in donors was the Taliban's ban on female NGO workers, which made it more difficult for NGOs to operate effectively in the country; not an issue you'd run in to if you're just dropping off pallets of resources.

0