Here
and
Now

opinions

Billions spent on overseas counterterrorism would be better spent by involving ex-terrorists

9 Comments
By Bernard Loesi

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© The Conversation

©2022 GPlusMedia Inc.

9 Comments
Login to comment

There are really too many points to strongly disagree within this The Conservation piece - at least with regard to the Taliban in Afghanstan - that I'll just save time and my fingers by just respectfully disagreeing. Strongly.

-2 ( +1 / -3 )

I don't know if those proposals would help, hurt or just cause more problems, but the essential statement that US foreign aid is not helping I can agree with.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

well americans have own experience with funding in past,to stay on topic-in Afghanistan as well.

when soviet forces came to Afghanistan to support afghani gov of Babrak Karmal in seventies-than US have financed "rebels" in Pakistan and they fought against soviet and afghani forces in civil war for long time.just to mention one from "prodemocracy fighters" had name Ossama Bin Laden.

all resulted in exit of soviet forces,changing of regime from pro soviet one to pro american one.than another civil war followed.

than americans have lost own war in Afghanistan and Saigon 2021 afghani ver became reality.

americans have lost control over Afghanistan and now they want to take over country again so want use own experience and finance new fighters who will fight for their interests in area...whoever is okay,may be terrorist as well as long as he will fight for american interests and be paid by USA...really nice "western values"...

-1 ( +4 / -5 )

@Eastman, during the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan the US financed the Mujahideen who were mostly northern Afghans. They were not allied with Bin Laden or the Taliban. They would arrive on the scene later and were mortal enemies of the Mujahideen. Unfortunately infighting among former Mujahideen gave the Taliban the opening they needed to take over Afghanistan.

0 ( +4 / -4 )

America sure does have a lot of money to throw. You'd never know, judging from the state of its own infrastructure, with crumbling bridges and roads, lack of real high speed rail, rampant crime and poverty, lack of affordable or universal healthcare, homelessness, unemployment.

1 ( +5 / -4 )

A better, and cheaper, alternative to combating global terrorism would be to stop what is causing people to radicalize and become terrorists to begin with: American bombings. It's little wonder people want to fight against the empire destroying their home, I think Americans call them freedom fighters if they are white.

I suppose it ends up as a self-fulfilling scenario, the US feels compelled to defend itself by bombing countries only to make even more terrorists. It is a cycle that will only be ended by a massive policy shift in the states, that I don't see any major political party there willing to make.

I agree with the article that overseas spending isn't helping. It probably doesn't hurt either, but you don't throw money at a problem you cause and expect people to love you for it.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

Terrorists were made because of imperialism. They didn't just become terrorists by accident. They became one because of suppression and oppression by richer and abusive countries!

5 ( +6 / -1 )

The United States, meanwhile, has spent approximately $91.4 billion on foreign aid to Afghanistan since 2001, while other countries gave billions more. Most of this money went toward Afghanistan’s military.

And there's the crux of the matter: for the Washington neo-cons and the military-industrial complex these endless wars are highly profitable and don't overly endanger American lives. Tax money is sent in the form of foreign aid, which is then returned to the US arms manufacturers who supply the government in question. It's a tax on working Americans, who are funding these wars. The money spigots in Iraq and Afghanistan were switched off, hence the latest endless war we're seeing in Ukraine now, funded by a lend-lease programme.

2 ( +6 / -4 )

The United States, meanwhile, has spent approximately $91.4 billion on foreign aid to Afghanistan since 2001, while other countries gave billions more.

Most of this money went toward Afghanistan’s military.

There is the answer to the problem.

The US military companies hold sway over the politicians and society in the US.

In a nutshell, the US needs conflicts to power large parts of its economy, from movie making to investment to innovations.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites