• Damarcusart [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    2 days ago

    There is something refreshing about the way Trump always says the quiet part out loud. Makes it much harder for libs to insist that the US isn’t really trying to foment terrorism in Xinjiang or escalate things against China.

  • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    47
    ·
    edit-2
    2 days ago

    Even after getting the base back online there’s 2 years minimum before it gets capability to start putting agents back Xinjiang and then there’s 1-2 years before those agents bear fruit, assuming China doesn’t immediately flag and remove them.

    The best this can produce is some propaganda against China to use in the west when China start arresting agents and population members who collaborate. It can’t hope to harm China itself, so its best possible function is production of anti-China propaganda.

    Xinjiang and Taiwan are the only propaganda in the last 10 years that has had any real impact on views of China. Taiwan is going nowhere and falling off as a tool for impact so they probably believe they really need this or westerners are going to start viewing China favourably.

    It will never actually be successful in destabilising China unless somehow they turn massively incompetent and simply do not react to it which I kinda think is unlikely.

    We’re going to be combatting Xinjiang propaganda again in 3-5 years if they get back in to Afghanistan though.

    • darkcalling [comrade/them, she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think because of the Gaza genocide they’re desperate to at least both-sides the situation.

      The whole world knows they’re guilty of enabling the genocide there, of all but orchestrating it by proxy. But they probably hope to use this situation to rile up the Muslim world against China with the feeling that in 4 years assuming the Gaza situation is “resolved” by the zionoists either completing the genocide or stopping partway and declaring victory, that the Muslim world will be ready to forget yesterday’s news and hated enemy and embrace their new hated enemy China which unlike the US is 100% sanctioned by the gulf state comprador governments and media. And they could be quite right. At the very least it lets them muddy their own involvement by saying “oh that was those Jews, not us, they tricked us, we love Muslims, it was a mistake, we didn’t realize”.

    • AssortedBiscuits [they/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      I think it’s mostly wishful thinking on Trump’s part. Afghanistan is just not going to let the US back in, especially with their various business deals with China or how Russia is the only country to officially recognize the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan as the legitimate state.

      The Taliban is probably the most reactionary national liberation struggle actor, but it’s still a national liberation struggle in the end.

      • I agree, I don’t see the Taliban selling out and letting the US military back into Afghanistan. Besides, Russia/China have a lot more to offer than the US does here: (cheap or free) food and military supplies – and all without any demands of a Russian/Chinese military presence inside the country.

      • Awoo [she/her]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        I am not too sure. The Taliban probably has a price. There’s something you could give them that would make them say “think of everything we could do with that”. The question is just whether the US is willing to offer something big enough.

    • Damarcusart [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 days ago

      I was thinking this was more for military use, have a base west of China that can launch missiles, planes and potentially nukes, or at least threaten to do so, forcing China to spread their defenses thinner. If the new government of Nepal turns out to be a full on US puppet, we’ll probably see them do a similar thing there, allowing US troops into their nation so the US can surround China.

      • IHave69XiBucks@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 days ago

        I agree but I dont think its much to be worried about. Frankly messing with Nepal is just gonna piss India off even more, and if there was ever an actual war with China and India on the same side or even neutral to eachother and China fighting the US then a US backed Nepal would fall in hours. And their base in Afghanistan would be destroyed rapidly too.

        It shows the US is thinking of a long term containment plan for China, but its like trying to build a picket fence to keep in a Tiger. The more China grows the more obvious itll be this containment shit isnt gonna work.

  • Justice@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    ·
    2 days ago

    Bruh, what in the fuck?

    “But why?”

    Obviously it’s not actually about China.

    The conspiracy pipeline quickly leads to “opium production??”

    The MIC pipeline leads to “base for JSOC to operate out of?” (Not totally unrelated to opium… actually directly related)

    The dying brain of an 80 year old stuck in 1990 leads to “we can do anything! And I want that!”

    America and Israel are seriously begging for 100 9/11s with all the bullshit. They’re gonna have fucked over ex-Ukrainian army guys teaming up with Taliban to do shit. Just use a little common sense and little less full blown evil. Goddamn.

    • CrookedSerpent [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      37
      ·
      2 days ago

      Yeah my mind very quickly makes the connection to JSOC and opium it’s not a conspiracy theory, it was just the primary thing the US was doing there.

    • KobaCumTribute [she/her]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      ·
      2 days ago

      It would also provide secretive logistics support for the CIA to move materiel to its Al Qaeda proxies/similar jihadist mercenaries, which they presumably want to start using against China again.

      I’m also assuming that in any practical terms “retaking” the base would mean cutting a deal with the Taliban and reopening it the same way the US keeps bases in allied or “neutral” countries. Get them to start growing poppies nearby too, and the US can “solve” the fentanyl problem by pouring CIA heroin into the market.

      • Justice@lemmygrad.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        2 days ago

        Are the Taliban going to allow that though? It’s my understanding, and maybe I’m wrong, that they take their stance against opium production in the country very seriously. Like when they came to power the first time they immediately shut all of that down. And they did it again when the US finally ran away.

        • KobaCumTribute [she/her]@hexbear.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          17
          ·
          2 days ago

          Who knows? I assume they have a price they’d be willing to become collaborators for: for all that they’re all people who grew up under the terror of US occupation and spent their literal whole lives fighting against it, they’re also reactionaries and so cannot possibly have any real beliefs or convictions that aren’t up for sale for something. The US easing off sanctions and returning some seized assets (or just bribing some officials) might be all it takes to get a lease on the base and some under the table deal to start selling the CIA opium. That’s not say they necessarily would sell out like that, and they may have such justifiably bitter grudges against the US that their price to sell out is higher than the US is willing to pay, but considering the US brought ISIS and Al Qaeda back into the CIA’s fold it’s certainly not unthinkable for the Taliban to join them too.

          Like I can’t see the US managing it without active collaboration from the Taliban, because there’s just not the logistics capacity to invade Afghanistan again just to occupy a single region. They either get them to sell out and become compradors, or it just never happens and becomes something the odd reactionary talking head brings up wanting now and then at the most.

    • freagle@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      26
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      It’s both. The US doesn’t often do single-dimension moves.

      The location is critical for surveillance.

      The location is critical for projecting air power into China.

      The location is critical for continued terrorism in Xinjiang.

      The location is critical to nuclear first strike potential.

      The location is great for producing opium/heroin/derivatives for money which can be used to prop up banks, black ops, and color revolutiona

  • dead [he/him]@hexbear.netOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    2 days ago

    The video clip comes from a joint press conference earlier today with Kid StarverKeir Starmer. I think Trump only mentions it in passing, I watched a longer video and it didn’t seem to have more details.

    In the video Trump says that the US needs to retake the base to prevent China from something nuclear. The SCMP article says that Trump thinks that China controls the airbase, not sure. The dropsite tweet says that the US wants the base to monitor China.

    The US left Bagram Air Base in July 2021 as part of the US withdrawl from Afghanistan.