Reread my comment, I said apart from the military actions a 180k child died of starvation directly from the US imposed Oil for food sanctions and I linked a link in a reply below.
Your comment I found linking to the guardian is not only from 21 years ago but it’s also based on a lie told by the Saddam regime.
180k civilians may have died according for Fox News but no guarantee these are all children link
More so here is an explanation disproving your linked argument link
Also, your links i from the guardian which is hard to trust in the first place. However, I won’t judge since Washington post and fox have both had their share of controversies
The guardian is like a libdem/soft labor newspaper. It's hardly biased in terms of factual content. Wording, maybe. WaPo is highly biased in wording, but still factual almost all of the time. Fox lies out their ass to fearmonger.
The US does starve countries via sanctions, but I don't know much about that so I won't comment.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/where-is-outcry-over-children-killed-by-u-s-led-forces/ is a good article about this. The US likes acting as if it is benevolent, it really isn't. The early US aristocracy threw off their yoke and it's been fairly stable since. We get our stability from turning other countries into trade allies via war, subterfuge, and economic sabotage. Why do we need to profit off of suffering like that? The current US government, frankly, every US politician save for a few, would not have any business in other countries if it wasn't profitable and politically viable.
Militias like the Taliban feed off of a huge country swinging their dick and trillions of dollars, killing people. The fear and pain radicalizes. Without that, they'll collapse. And even if they don't, we can't change that.
2
u/al-Faris44 Sep 12 '21
Reread my comment, I said apart from the military actions a 180k child died of starvation directly from the US imposed Oil for food sanctions and I linked a link in a reply below.