I'm not talking about speculation, but we CAN see how certain events in history were created as a direct result of actions and policies immediately preceding them. It's not hard to "read" history backwards and connect the dots.
For example, the Taliban were formed by some of the Afghan Mujahideen after the Soviet-Afghan War. The Soviet-Afghan War came about as a proxy battle of the Cold War, which was a continuation of the Vietnam and Korean Wars, etc., etc., etc.
That's not speculation, that's literally scholastic history.
If i flip the coin and it doesn't land on heads, then it will land on tails. Because there are only two possible outcomes we can say this. Technically the coin could lodge on its side but we can give **small** benefits of the doubt.
Invading countries during war is a complex problem with more than two outcomes. Blocking one eventuality does not necessitate the other. One should not give such a **large** benefit of the doubt.
It's not rocket surgery, it's basic critical thinking skills.
"If we didn't have pizza for dinner we would have had hot dogs" says the man who didn't take into account that there's also steak.
You can't just say "X would happen". There should be documentation showing the likelihood isn't just pulled out of your ass.
For example, the Taliban were formed by some of the Afghan Mujahideen after the Soviet-Afghan War. The Soviet-Afghan War came about as a proxy battle of the Cold War, which was a continuation of the Vietnam and Korean Wars, etc., etc., etc.
That's not speculation, that's literally scholastic history.
Quit being a jackass.
Invading countries during war is a complex problem with more than two outcomes. Blocking one eventuality does not necessitate the other. One should not give such a **large** benefit of the doubt.
It's not rocket surgery, it's basic critical thinking skills.
"If we didn't have pizza for dinner we would have had hot dogs" says the man who didn't take into account that there's also steak.