Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

ToughQuestions9465 t1_j24suc7 wrote

Unfortunately most of them are ok with state of affairs. Resettling ones wishing to leave would not be all that difficult.


Gekokapowco t1_j2553x7 wrote

the world at large traditionally does not handle refugee relocation well. We should, but I think it'll be difficult.


I__LOVE__LSD t1_j25e7hm wrote

There are some good examples of mass refugee relocation though. Vietnamese were virtually nonexistent in the US until the post-war refugee surge, and they have since settled and integrated quite well. Median household income for Vietnamese Americans is now $72k, which is well above the average, and even above the $66k for White Americans.

Obviously income is not the end all be all number for how well it was all handled, but I think it's a pretty decent proxy.


NewPCtoCelebrate t1_j25v159 wrote

I don't really see a flood of Afghans settling in anywhere near as well as Vietnamese. The Vietnamese that left Vietnam were educated, well off, and cultural values aligned with success.


AllAmericanSeaweed t1_j27myp4 wrote

I don't think that the Vietnam War is a great example of good refugee evactuation

Many of those "rescued" children were kidnapped from their homes.


WikiSummarizerBot t1_j27mzva wrote

Operation Babylift

>Operation Babylift was the name given to the mass evacuation of children from South Vietnam to the United States and other western countries (including Australia, France, West Germany, and Canada) at the end of the Vietnam War (see also the Fall of Saigon), on April 3–26, 1975. By the final American flight out of South Vietnam, over 3,300 infants and children had been evacuated, although the actual number has been variously reported. Along with Operation New Life, over 110,000 refugees were evacuated from South Vietnam at the end of the Vietnam War. Thousands of children were airlifted from Vietnam and adopted by families around the world.

^([ )^(F.A.Q)^( | )^(Opt Out)^( | )^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)^( | )^(GitHub)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)


arlaarlaarla t1_j2633jv wrote

We've had one yes, but what about second refugee crisis?


DreamMaster8 t1_j27pm2b wrote

Because for every refugee walking away from this there's also one that is just take advantage and bring their outdated value with them.

Les us have a value test for everyone and il be ok with it.


38384 t1_j25uzn3 wrote

Stop talking out your ass. As someone who has worked there and is in close contact with people I've worked with there, the state of affairs is beyond horrendous for almost the entire population. Almost nobody likes it, except for the top Talibs in power.


KinzuuPower t1_j26imh4 wrote

They had all the means to resist the taliban, if they didn’t it’s because they didn’t want.


38384 t1_j26jova wrote

They actually did. 3 months of heavy fighting, thousands of fighters killed on both sides, civilians including women even volunteered to defend against Taliban.

The international headline was that Kabul fell in one day without a bullet fired. It's very misleading not to take into account all the events that led to it in the months prior to it. Unless you were closely following the war, you wouldn't know of the lengthy battles fought in the provinces and border crossings.


AuroraFinem t1_j26v8hi wrote

No, it’s not just the headline. The afghani military gave up very quickly and surrendered in many areas. The harder battles fought were almost exclusively civilians picking up arms or small regional areas who wanted to remain independent from the taliban.

The military and defense fell faster than even the most conservative international estimates for how long they would hold out and it’s the main reason why we were scrambling at the end to get out before Kabul and the airport were entirely overrun. We had planned to have at a minimum months longer until they got anywhere near the capital.


Lubadbitches t1_j26wy81 wrote

The worlds top military tried to help for 20 years and couldn’t


38384 t1_j2fs83i wrote

To be fair they did weaken the Taliban considerably in 2001 and had the upper hand for the next few years until the fuck ups started that led to Taliban growing again and eventually winning. If Bush didn't have the "we don't negotiate with terrorists" mindset, they could've made peace with the weakened Taliban in 2001 and potentially prevent the 20 year headache.


Strident_Hood t1_j26tkiq wrote

3000 people died (including both civilian and military deaths). Given that they had 300,000 troops that should have been fighting for their country’s survival, this is quite a small number of casualties. Evidently they didn’t put up much of a fight at all..


krneki12 t1_j289zyf wrote

If you want to know how much efforts it takes to have a free and Democratic country, look at Ukrainians.

Nothing less will do when you deal with fanatics.

The Afghan had their chance and they gave up. Now they will have to deal with the consequences of their actions as no one will go there and die for them.


Relevant_Monstrosity t1_j2901xc wrote

They folded like pussies in months. You have to fight for your rights! A nation of 40 million people enslaved with only a few thousand dead -- with American backing? These people are craven and deserve no nation at all. Their modus operandi is child rape and opium abuse. Living under harsh Islam is their just returns.

Contrast with the Ukrainians.


foki999 t1_j25nuie wrote

This is honestly just opening your arms up to widespread terrorism if anything too unfortunately


APsWhoopinRoom t1_j283u9g wrote

What else are we supposed to do? Invade again? Unfortunately, this seems to be what Afghanis are OK with.


foki999 t1_j285hgw wrote

The real answer is nothing unfortunately.


Yourmamasmama t1_j268xdu wrote

No, the vast majority WANT the current state of affairs. Only a very small minority living in the cities were anti-taliban. People have to remember that Afghanistan was a stone age society 20 years ago. We cannot force idealogical change.


rexo12 t1_j28p4wb wrote

>Afghanistan was a stone age society 20 years ago

Yeah no it wasn't.


FlairUpOrSTFU t1_j27dusj wrote

I'm gonna go ahead and say 50% of the rural population also is anti Taliban (women). But they have no power.


Yourmamasmama t1_j27s52w wrote

I wouldn't be so sure about that. If you watch some of the early 1900s interviews of women talking about the right to vote, a surprising number were anti-suffrage. An entire system of oppression cannot be maintained without participation from both genders. Maybe 50% of young women in Afghanistan are anti Taliban but women in general are probably not anti Taliban.


THAErAsEr t1_j2645sp wrote

Hahaha. 95% of all countries would deny all help and the other 5% would face national backlash because their population hates foreigners.


Lilybaum t1_j263qtm wrote

What? The majority of the country is facing extreme food shortages, how are they ok with the situation there?