How many countries has USA ruined so far?

[I6MTW]

3 hours ago, sandeep said:

how the eff is America to blame for 'ruining' Afghanistan?  Even before America came anywhere near it, that country was a mess.  

 

Did the US make a whole bunch of mistakes once they got involved? Sure.

 

But America didn't "ruin" something that was already ruined.  

Afghanistan was quite modern and liberal, and quite progressive in the 60s and 70s before America used them as a pawn, and the soviet-afghan war.

 

Afghanistan was developing quite well before USW interfered. It has never been the same country since. 

[Singh bling]

Actually there is another side of this argument. How many wars are avoided because of fear of USA and other powerful nations. China is conflict with many nations but did not directly attack them because of fear of USA and economic retribution. India and Pakistan would had fought like mad dogs . Only fear of superpowers earlier Soviet and USA and now USA and EU is the reason they are not fighting war. Israel and Arabs also has same story .

[rangeelaraja]

17 minutes ago, I6MTW said:

Afghanistan was quite modern and liberal, and quite progressive in the 60s and 70s before America used them as a pawn, and the soviet-afghan war.

 

Afghanistan was developing quite well before USW interfered. It has never been the same country since. 

 

There is a larger cold war story to that.

 

USSR was instrumental in propping and arming the communists during the Vietnam war - which was brutally expensive for the US.

 

The US saw USSR's invasion of Afghanistan as an opportunity to get back at USSR and play their own game on USSR.

 

Many countries have gotten "ruined" in the cross-hairs of the 2 cold war camps.

 

The story is like this...( according to Hussain Haqqani the former Pak ambassador to the US )....

 

When Zia Ul Haq imposed death sentence on a sitting Prime Minister , ZA Bhutto, the Western democratic world was outraged and Pakistan was sitting in international dog house.

 

Zia Ul Haq then thought that if Pak could show its "usefulness " to the West in the cold war against USSR, it could again freeload and become relevant.

 

He was the one who started a systematic program to create radicals ( in Pak's NWFP and Afghanistan )  to wage war on the Soviets and cozy up to the west.

 

Zia ul Haq is the primary cause of radicalization in Afghanistan.

 

 

 

[sandeep]

42 minutes ago, I6MTW said:

Afghanistan was quite modern and liberal, and quite progressive in the 60s and 70s before America used them as a pawn, and the soviet-afghan war.

 

Afghanistan was developing quite well before USW interfered. It has never been the same country since. 

 

America "used them" after the USSR invaded.  i.e. America didn't start the mess.  And just because Afg was relatively more liberal back then, doesn't mean it wasnt' a mess.  Please go and do some reading.  It has historical fault-lines with ethnicity, and has never been a cohesive nation - always one step away from a internecine warlord-infested mess.  

[Khota]

1 hour ago, rangeelaraja said:

 

There is a larger cold war story to that.

 

USSR was instrumental in propping and arming the communists during the Vietnam war - which was brutally expensive for the US.

 

The US saw USSR's invasion of Afghanistan as an opportunity to get back at USSR and play their own game on USSR.

 

Many countries have gotten "ruined" in the cross-hairs of the 2 cold war camps.

 

The story is like this...( according to Hussain Haqqani the former Pak ambassador to the US )....

 

When Zia Ul Haq imposed death sentence on a sitting Prime Minister , ZA Bhutto, the Western democratic world was outraged and Pakistan was sitting in international dog house.

 

Zia Ul Haq then thought that if Pak could show its "usefulness " to the West in the cold war against USSR, it could again freeload and become relevant.

 

He was the one who started a systematic program to create radicals ( in Pak's NWFP and Afghanistan )  to wage war on the Soviets and cozy up to the west.

 

Zia ul Haq is the primary cause of radicalization in Afghanistan.

 

 

 

Zia ul Haq was the worst thing that happened to Pakistan and best thing to India. He sigle handedly setthe country back by decades.

[Khota]

Op the answer to your question is Zero.

 

What is happening in Afh=ghanistan has more to do with Pakistan than US.

[Mariyam]

12 minutes ago, Khota said:

Zia ul Haq was the worst thing that happened to Pakistan and best thing to India. He sigle handedly setthe country back by decades.

Just out of curiousity I wiki-ed Zia ul Haq. The guy looks like the desi version of a hybrid between a dracula and a zombie. Creepy critter.

[Lone Wolf]

6 hours ago, rangeelaraja said:

I am not justifying anything. 

Since time immemorial there have been invaders and imperial powers.

 

You are totally ignoring world history before WW2.

 

How many countries did Imperial Brits ruin and plunder ? You don’t even have to go further than Indian subcontinent. The loot over 200 years is unimaginable. Turned India from the richest nation on the planet by FAR to one of the most impoverished. Killed 2-3 million Indians in 1943 alone by a forced Bengal Famine by that imperial ba$.tard Winston Churchill. 
 

Other European imperialists looted and destroyed Africa, Asia, Latin America just not for 10-20 years - but for centuries. 
 

 

Well Brits did loot entire subcontinent massively one most has to look at the standard of living of common Indian people.

Did British brought an end to tyrannical Muslim rule?  Yes

Did frequent devastating invasions stopped in their rule?  Yes.  You know India has been invaded frequently over the course of history & especially folks in Northern India were not safe.  From Greeks to Huns to Abdali..  All these were devastating.  And people took a sigh of relief during British rule...  Case of lesser evil. 

Reason why 1857 revolt failed coz those kings had f*** all support from common public as everyone knew these folks were fighting for their own gain. 

 

[DeepSpace]

America is the modern day Britain in terms of global imperialism.

Edited August 22, 2021 by DeepSpace

[rangeelaraja]

36 minutes ago, Lone Wolf said:

Well Brits did loot entire subcontinent massively one most has to look at the standard of living of common Indian people.

Did British brought an end to tyrannical Muslim rule?  Yes

Did frequent devastating invasions stopped in their rule?  Yes.  You know India has been invaded frequently over the course of history & especially folks in Northern India were not safe.  From Greeks to Huns to Abdali..  All these were devastating.  And people took a sigh of relief during British rule...  Case of lesser evil. 

Reason why 1857 revolt failed coz those kings had f*** all support from common public as everyone knew these folks were fighting for their own gain. 

 

 

 

Nothing that worked out well in the end was due to the "goodwill" of the British. They could care less.

 

The world had dramatically changed post WW2 and so those invasions were not going to happen.

 

The subcontinent's fate was sealed after centuries of Invasions from Central Asia and the subsequent large scale conversions to Islam.

 

It is a sad reality that most Indians are not aware of ..( the seeds that led to the creation of Pak were not sown in current day Lahore or Pindi or Karachi ) ....they were sown in. Aligarh Muslim University in our on Uttar Pradesh. That university still exists and is well funded.

 

We may be angry about the partition - but it was the greatest thing to happen to the subcontinent with 35 % muslims. 

 

Had we not gotten partitioned, there would have been endless civil wars in undivided India. 

 

These people are intolerant and do not get along well with anyone - even their own, the amount of bloodshed that Sunnis and Shias have caused amongst each other is more than all the  Western imperial powers combined.

 

Now left as the only serious Hindu nation on the planet  - It is the duty of every Indian to ensure that if we are to survive and thrive - this business of proselytization in India has to end, I believe it is going to become a law soon.

 

Just see how the religious demography has been changing in Kerala. This needs to be put to a harsh abrupt end.

 

Political Islam is a dangerous disease that has gobbled up many great civilizations.

 

The moment these people reach a certain " ratio" , a Jinnah type character emerges and says that they are different and want their own homeland.

 

RSS understood this decades and decades ago.

 

I greatly fear the cancer of pseudo secularism in India - where the second largest majority constantly tries to portray itself as the minority.

 

Whereas, the true minorities are the Sindhis ( less than 2 % ), Jains ( 2 % or less ) , Sikhs ( 2 % ) , Parsees ( negligible % wise, they are barely 70,000 ) 

 

 

 

 

  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited August 22, 2021 by rangeelaraja

[Ranvir]

They have the best weapons and armed forces in the world and will continue to do these invasions until someone surpasses them. It's been like that throughout history.

 

This is how Europeans/whites have been able to conquer so many countries. They have been investing in science for hundreds of years, this has allowed them to build the best weapons.

 

The Muslims on the other hand are too busy praying to Allah 5 times a day or expecting a miracle.