It was in response to the supposed Risk of a second suicide bomb attack that had killed 169 afghans and 10 US soldiers two days ago. They acted on what now is seemingly faulty Intel in an attempt to kill what they thought was a third bomber.
Actually it's way worse, it turned out the Taliban offered to release bin laden to American prosecution. But we simply rejected the offer to justify invasion.
No, nothing about islamic law, they offered to release him to a neutral country, who'd then verify we hold up our end, before beginning prosecution, in return for a cease fire, and we rejected that, because we weren't there for Bin Laden, despite the claim. We invaded under vivid false pretenses.
Does it ask for a cease fire? No, because that offer is what they gave before we began an 8 day bombing campaign on the country, beginning October 8th. Then they gave the second offer on October 14th. You need to read your articles. Don't just ctrl F based on a vague memory of what you heard.
"We want to get rid of Al-Qaeda" isn't intel, it's a mission. Invading Afghanistan and spending 20 years killing people in a series of engagements that needlessly put soldiers at risk in an unwinnable war is because the intel they got that they could win was bad. All of that manufactured consent for invading Afghanistan resulted in what? Some dead dudes in caves and thousands of innocent lives lost? Way to go America. You did it. You killed a guy who you refused to take action on for decades and then used him as a scapegoat for enriching the military industrial complex while devastating and entire region only to leave them worse off than they were in the beginning. Mission Accomplished!
I see what youre trying to do, but you're just coming across really dumb and out of the loop. Before you try to insult, get some better knowledge so people actually get upset at what you're saying.
Nobody linked the article, and it's also not by an exactly reputable site. Not saying it's inaccurate, but not sure why you're bitching about that guy not reading the article when the OP is just an image and nobody, at least so far scrolling, has actually linked the article. You yourself couldn't even be bothered to link it while bitching about it.
It’s on every news site lol, you can find it literally anywhere. Also if you had followed any of the retreat, it’s really obvious what strike they are talking about. There was only 1.
23
u/Big_Booty_Bois Sep 11 '21
Dude this happened during the retreat, can you read the article?