this post was submitted on 04 Mar 2025
510 points (96.9% liked)

simpsonsshitposting

3212 readers
629 users here now

I just think they're neat!

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And yet the army of Al Qaeda was in Afghanistan. Osama Bin Laden was in Afghanistan at the time of the attacks.

If I as an American write checks to a buddy in Mexico who rounds up cartel members in Mexico to invade Belize should the army of Belize look to stop the army fighting them in the nation of the guy who wrote checks or in the place where the army actually is located.

Anyone who thinks we should have attacked Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (KSA) is really displaying how little they know about this conflict and conflicts in general.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

And yet, when we finally got bin laden, it wasn't in Afghanistan. He moved, easily, with Saudi money. Thousands of Americans were killed with weapons paid for by Saudi money, held by troops recruited and trained with Saudi money. Seems like if we had cut off the Saudi money this thing would have been over a hell of a lot faster.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

He didn’t need Saudi money to walk across the border.

It’s weird how much certain people want to blame Saudis for this.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 0 points 20 hours ago (1 children)

How dare they blame the country most directly involved

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Why would the blame the nation that was their primary target? Why would we blame the nation that some were born in rather than the nation that housed and protected the army?

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (1 children)

Why would we blame the nation that some were born

Perhaps because it's the same nation that funded them

Also lol at "some". Yeah, 15 out of 19 is "some".

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Are you under the impression that Al Qaeda had 19 members total? If not why would you state 15 of the 19 hijackers being Saudi as if that was significant?

The USA fought the group that attacked them in the nation that army was in. You seem to think they should have attacked the nation where they were not actually located. Why should they have attacked the nation that wasn't sheltering them or aiding them rather than Afghanistan which did both?

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I don't think we should have attacked anyone. We should have sanctioned the fuck out of Saudi Arabia. Cut off the funding and al Qaeda dissolves on its own without firing a shot.

[–] RowRowRowYourBot@sh.itjust.works 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

So we should have targeted the people not responsible for these actions as sanctions would hurt regular Saudis the most.

Your entire approach to this subject is baffling.

[–] the_crotch@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 hours ago

As opposed to targeting the people not responsible for these actions with death, as the war hurt regular afghanis the most?

Your entire approach to to this subject is bordering on Bond villlan levels of evil. Why does your breath smell like al saud semen?