While the Western world is talking Afghanistan and arguing who's to blame, here's what you're not being told

Intro:

'Would you please think of the women there', said this boy here who supports proven Al-Qaeda linked terror groups in Syria as we speak
https://twitter.com/Charles_Lister/status/1425919859955834881?s=20

'Damn men, you are the cause of the disaster in Afghanistan' shouted the little girl here, who misgendered Thatcher :)
https://twitter.com/RasnaWarah/status/1426784290159923201?s=20

English PM Margaret Thatcher telling radical terrorists that "the free world is with them"
https://skwawkbox.org/2021/08/15/1981-thatcher-tells-afghan-fundamentalists-the-hearts-of-the-free-world-are-with-you/

This CNN reported summarized the total cost of the war in Afghanistan, US and Nato deaths including journalists and aid workers, but just casually forgot the almost 250.000 Afghans bombed to death.
https://twitter.com/ananavarro/status/1427017365926076416?s=20

In the midst of this debacle, let's remember they never really cared for civilian life over there to begin with, how else could they possibly report so condoning at the start of these wars.

The United States left and right are boringly predictable, blablabla something bla Trump's fault, blablabla Biden's fault. And though some lay blame a little closer to where it belongs
https://twitter.com/AliciaSmith987/status/1427182815234469892?s=20
in truth, that's also not where the current Afghanistan issues started. So where did it all begin?

The Beginning:

The year was 1978, Afghanistan had what their neighbor Iran used to have the 1950's, namely a religious free, socialist government and was stable, prosperous and above all peaceful. But this did not last in Iran beyond 1953, when a foreign initiated coup killed Iran's last truly democratically elected PM Mosaddegh
https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/briefing-book/iran/2017-08-08/1953-iran-coup-new-us-documents-confirm-british-approached-us-late

The Western supported monarch aka dictator Reza Shah (translates to King Reza) that took full control didn't last beyond 1979 when the Islamic revolution took place, which is ironically enough the same year when the trouble started to escalate in Afghanistan with the murders on Mohammed Daoud Khan and Mir Akbar Khyber. Ironic because what this meant back then in real time, was that the United States and England were condemning the events taking place in Iran and advocating for all sorts of "freedoms", while at the exact same time recruiting, sending, arming, and training radical Islamist terrorist to Afghanistan to kill those very same freedoms they claimed to stand for, knowing full well that if one day the Taliban (back then Mujahideen) actually managed to achieve victory, the once religious free socialist state, would overnight turn into a sharia state 'a la' Saudi Arabia. You really couldn't make this up, opposing the exact same thing in the exact same year for one country, while pushing for it in the neighboring country. But to not digress, let's focus on Afghanistan and who Mohammed Daoud Khan was.

Daoud Khan was of royal blood, his pro-socialist views led him to eventually renounce his title and effectively end that dictatorship some still insist on calling "a king" under Zahir Shah, and transformed Afghanistan into a republic which eventually earned him the nickname "the red prince". But Daoud wasn't a puppet unlike the one ruling post 1953 coup Iran. Though there were obvious ties and relations to Moscow, he believed in a more neutral Afghanistan not particularly allied to solely one side, often showing his dismay at Soviet attempts to unite the 2 main Communist parties in Afghanistan, the Parcham (flag) and the PDPA.

With this position both sides were worrying the other might soon convince him to one day end this belief. But the crucial fact here, is that the support he got for transforming Afghanistan thus far, was from pro-communist military officers who were not tolerant to any Nato rapprochement, and thus far, Daoud Khan seemed to edge more towards them and anti-Soviet states such as Saudi Arabia and Iran under Reza Shah.

It all started to come crumbling down when Mir Akbar Khyber, leader of the Parcham socialist party was murdered. His death ignited the spark that led to the more socialist Parcham party and the Marxist PDPA party in jointly condemn Iran under Reza Shah and the US for their possible involvement. Though this was never proven, their joint discontent, suspicious and mourning of the loss of Akbar Khyber was enough for Daoud Khan to start panicking start a crackdown on the Communist parties and order the arrest of several Communist leaders. Some say this was the start of the downfall of Afghanistan, some say he overreacted, some say he didn't do enough, nevertheless fact remains that this led to his own coup and subsequent more Communist ruled Afghanistan, which was the core reason for the United States to start panicking and starting the by now infamous Saudi American "freedom fighter" program to achieve ever lasting "peace" for both Afghanistan and entire world :)

For the sake of time, I'm not going to rehearse the events in 2001, but just note that at the base of this support the US and England gave the fundamentalists was to go and fight "the evil godless Communists trying to destroy your religion".
https://www.margaretthatcher.org/document/104715

15 of the 19 hijackers were Saudi and either had connections or were trained in that very same Afghanistan
http://www.historycommons.org/timeline.jsp?the_alleged_9/11_hijackers=complete_911_timeline_alleged_hijackers__flight_training&timeline=complete_911_timeline

Who knew, Rambo was a terrorist and helped set up the attacks of September 11 ;)

The Beginning of the End:

But the important 2 questions no one is asking is why now and why all at once? Why withdraw all of Nato at once, since it's obvious it's the United States who wants to quit and why are they doing it so abruptly now? And by abrupt, I really mean abrupt, no planning, no logistics just leave the equipment behind,
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/taliban-parade-new-weapons-seized-afghan-military-u-s-withdraws-n1273081
no care whatsoever for the Afghan women and children or even the men who helped a foreign military against the Taliban and most certainly WILL be a target once they take Kabul.
https://twitter.com/hxhassan/status/1427273539032424461?s=20
https://twitter.com/alihashem_tv/status/1427184588204478468?s=20
https://twitter.com/Partisangirl/status/1427545109831192585?s=20

No, none of that, just round up your dogs and get out everyone.
https://www.rt.com/usa/532197-us-saved-dogs-over-afghan/

The Grand Finale:

Would you use your most powerful non-nuclear weapon for the very first time ever in a place you were about to cut loose and leave behind to it's destiny just a few short years later? That's what the United States did when Russia initiated international meetings regarding Afghanistan together with China, Iran, Pakistan and India. The third round of these meetings also saw Central Asian countries join and was scheduled to be held on April 14th 2017, just 24 hours before this third meeting took place, the US bombed Afghanistan with the MOAB. Though the Trump admin claimed it was "used against isis/daesh", it was obvious that they were trying to send a message; We control Afghanistan.
https://www.voanews.com/east-asia-pacific/us-wary-russian-role-afghanistan-moscow-holds-talks

And for those who'll claim "yeah but 4 years is not just a few short years" you need to note that the current Taliban leader Mullah Beradar about take control in Kabul, was released from a Pakistani prison just 1 year after they used the MOAB, signaling they gave up on Afghanistan under president Ashraf Ghani way back in 2018, when they switched tactics and started playing both sides (again). Whatever it was that Russia and regional powers agreed on in 2017, it was enough to make the United States quit their show of force, create a lifeline with the Taliban and start preparing for the end. They even sent their top diplomat to meet Beradar in 2020
https://twitter.com/travisakers/status/1427008000498225153?s=20

Obviously, there would be no Nato troops hanging around in Kabul once the Taliban took over, meaning that the US actually started to give up on an Afghanistan without Taliban rule way back in 2018 when they decided to release Beradar, but this was not unanimous among Nato member states who also spend billions of Euros and 20 years in Afghanistan. There are serious disagreements not only within Nato regarding Afghanistan, but internally in the United States as well. For Europe, the geographic implications of an Afghanistan returning to Taliban rule are far more severe than for the US. Libya 2011 Deja Vu anyone?
https://twitter.com/georgeeaton/status/1427344154883985417?s=20

So why doesn't Europe do it themselves? Though the idea of an 'EU army' is rather unpopular among many, why not set up an independent military alliance within the EU, apart from Nato and be at least able to make your own choices and not be dependent on a US controlled Nato? Well, cause they can't, not yet anyway
https://www.dw.com/en/us-warns-eu-over-13-billion-defense-spending/a-48738562

Outro:

Anyone know who the man on the left is? It's the man who coined the by now famously accurate phrase "Afghans keep making the same mistake" regarding foreign powers and Afghanistan. His name was Mohammad Najibullah and he was the Russian supported president of Afghanistan when the Taliban was about to take Kabul in 1996. He was held captive and eventually executed when the Taliban took full control.

The man on the right, was the US supported president of Afghanistan when the Taliban was about to take Kabul in 2021. His name is Ashraf Ghani and was last seen stuffing 4 cars full of money before escaping and leaving the country behind to the Taliban, the very same people he once supported against that very same Mohammad Najibullah.
https://www.rt.com/news/532183-ghani-afghanistan-collapse-soviet-regime-article/