Just because those men have turbans on they’re the enemy? Just because they have dark skin? Beards?
Reagan met with the Mujaheddin. The fighters who were at war against the invading Soviets. The enemy of my enemy. If that’s too complicated of a concept I’ll be more than happy to explain the cold war and the usage of proxy wars.
Let’s set the timeline straight.
- Reagan meets with Mujaheddin 1983 (Pictured above)
- Soviets withdraw from Afghanistan in 1989
- The Taliban doesn’t even become an active militia until 1994
- The Taliban doesn’t take primary control of Afghanistan until 1996 (13 years after the photo above)
- During the rise of the Taliban the US backs the Northern Alliance, a Islamic Democratic group dedicated to fighting against the totalitarian Taliban.
So let’s review.
- You’re racist.
- You don’t understand history.
- You clearly took a photo out of context
History is not a strong point of the left, because it is so often against them.
You did forget to mention that the Mujahideen had offshoots that became al Qaeda and the Taliban. So he is indirectly meeting with the enemy.
Edit: In addition, it was a stupid move to radicalize the Mujahideen. We ended up causing way more problems for ourselves than was necessary. Also, Reagan kinda sucked at foreign policy.
Soda is something you used in baking, coke is a brand of pop, pop is a beverage.
Well I guess John Pemperton is just gonna have to deal with it because I will always call it pop…
Baking soda is something you use in baking. Pop is something you do to bubble wrap.
Then what the fuck do you call it!
What do you call Pepsi products then? It is soda.
Thank you. Well said anonymous sir/ma’am.
First of all, those two factors are one-and-the-same. Second, the problem with looking at JUST mental illness is that often it is not clear until AFTER the incident. Yes, you can go back and see some warning signs in many of these cases, but hindsight is 20/20. There are tons of people who have these “warning signs” but never do any harm to anyone else. We liberals take mental illness incredibly seriously, and fuck you for saying otherwise. We can’t just lock up anyone who shows signs of mental illness just because they MIGHT be a threat to others. Also, these pathological criminals have no warning signs before committing their first crime. I definitely think the justice system needs to be improved, but I can’t think of any way to realistically catch pathological criminals before their first offense. If you can think of a realistic way, I am completely open to them. If you can think of any way to realistically pinpoint people with mental illness who are a threat to others without locking up or institutionalizing a bunch of people with mental illness just because they have a mental illness, I am all ears. Yes, gun violence is caused, in part, by mental illness, and to a much lesser extent, pathological criminality. However, gun violence is also caused by guns. I am not saying we need to take guns away from people, but we do need to put some restrictions on what kinds of guns people are able to get, and how quickly they can get them. That, as far as I have seen, and as far as the Supreme Court has ruled, is NOT unconstitutional, despite what conservatives would like for us to think.
And you should have an ID for pretty much everything, but not for voting.
If you want voter ID, let’s do what all other countries that require voter IDs do. We give everyone a free government issued photo ID when they turn 16. That way, we can cut down on the non-existent voter fraud while making sure we don’t disenfranchise anyone. If y’all are serious about voter fraud, this will be a perfect solution.
Why don’t you apply that to the second amendment too, loser?
What a fucking hypocritical bitch
Typical liberal maneuver to say that the rights they care for are actually unalienable and ones that they don’t like or care for are negligible
No, where the argument about the second amendment comes in is because there is absolutely no clear consensus on what the amendment actually means fully. We are not trying to take all guns away, but it never says that we cannot regulate guns.