141
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 06 Jul 2024
141 points (96.7% liked)
politics
18114 readers
3592 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Very misleading headline. It is easy to interpret that as he won't take a side between Al Qaeda and the US. Even the first tweet makes it clear he's talking about the "debate" about who was responsible. The later clarifying tweet makes even the conspiracy angle more clear.
I don't like stupid conspiracy theories, and the first tweet still makes him look bad. But the headline author had to see how the ambiguity would be interpreted.
For the record, I dislike RFK, Jr. and his stance on vaccines immensely.
Oh, I didn't think for a second he was talking about Al Queda vs US. That dumbass is always chest deep in bullshit. Of course he's agnostic about 9/11 conspiracies.
Like?
The saudis being involved isn’t a conspiracy. The first 9/11 commission report from decades ago at this point talked about them being involved. However the Saudi government is a complex web of different systems and power levels with their own sort of autonomy.
Conspiracies are things like 9/11 being an inside job, or there was bombs planted in the building, or that jet fuel can’t melt steel beams.
It isn't a conspiracy theory.
Some conspiracies are real.
So how did two wrong countries get invaded lol
Iraq was a mistake (well, really more a crime), however Afghanistan was a complicated mess. The Taliban was harboring al-Qaeda. Was it a mistake for us to have spent decades there? Absolutely. However for going after the people who planned 9/11 it was the best area at the time for us to be in.
9/11 wasn’t a government planned operation or done by a group with any one boundary. It was planned by an ideology without borders and with no official uniform or state flag. They simply wanted the US and the west to pay for crimes that went against both their ideology and that were wrongfully committed against their neighbors and friends. It was incredibly complex. We could even go all the way back and blame Bill Clinton for not having arrested Osama when he was given the chance, three times. No one expected them to do what they did to the level it was committed.
The Taliban offered to arrest and hand OBL over to the US after the 98 embassy bombings, and nobody cared or responded, as official US policy was either that the Taliban were lying and/or they were not a real, legitimate government.
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2011/9/11/taliban-offered-bin-laden-trial-before-9
Before we invaded, the Taliban offered to try OBL, then offered to hand him over to a neutral third country to be tried, as we were invading.
The US just demanded he be presented to us, as much of the world warned that a large scale invasion and occupation would be disastrous.
https://www.cnn.com/2001/US/10/07/ret.us.taliban/
https://abcnews.go.com/International/story?id=80482&page=1
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2001/oct/14/afghanistan.terrorism5
While the language of the authorization for use of military force focused on combatting terrorism and spying on US citizens, the language used by Bush and other Admin officials made it plain that we were planning on nation building from day 0.
Both wars were pathetic blunders and the people were misled about reasons why they happened. I guess people got to cope either by larping the koolaid or going full tin foil but never admitting that it was straight mistake. People who made them are still in charge now tho
Having a shitty, or even traitorous, legitimate political opinion is one thing; being unable to tell the difference between reality and fantasy is entirely another. Not taking sides between reality and delusional conspiracy theories is even worse than not taking sides between the US and Al Qaeda!
Damn, for a second I thought he was cool. 😞