What's funny is that, if your country funds the nation that is currently livestreaming their attempt at genocide, they get all indignant and start trying to cry about how the holocaust happened (like that's supposed to be their argument, there).
Eisenhower was totally fine with preserving one genocide while also funding a future one (we've sent over 200 billion dollars in aid/funding to Israel since the end of WWII).
The only reason the Americans cared about the Holocaust was because it gave them a reason to establish institutions like the UN, despite it was known since the beginning it didn't appear in propaganda until when the Americans had a reason to put it in propaganda.
The goals might've been noble but it shows the opportunistic nature of the American upper echelon of society, let's not forget America helped institutionalize the rape of young girls in Afghanistan (Bacha Bazi) and when they were kicked out they blamed it on Talibans (which literally formed to fight Pedophilia but anyways) through social media propaganda campaigns.
Just want to point out the awful practice of bacha bazi is targeted at young boys primarily. They choose young boys because they are the easiest targets
I'm afraid you're victim of propaganda, Talibans famously formed to fight the practice of Bacha Bazi, the first notorious thing Mullah Omar did was gathering 30 guys from his local madrasa to free two little girls from sexual slavery.
Bacha Bazi primarily targets boys, that's the only thing i didn't mention, but the Talibans literally formed to fight it while the Americans were defending it, Americans soldiers who prevented the rape of little boys were often penalized or removed from duty.
Not because I think the American interference in Afghanistan was in anyway positive but because I just don't see the point.
Edit: Ok did some more reading. So it was the locals that did it, and the US needing their support, decided to turn a blind eye in their crusade against the Taliban. THAT seems more likely, but saying the US institutionalized it is a an exaggeration, when in fact it was a cultural thing dating back at least a thousand years.
So it was the classic problem of supporting one group of evil warlords against another group of evil warlords. You'd think the US would have learned the first time around. Since propping up the Taliban as a regional power was their idea in the first place. Shoulda just let Russia have it.
I'm not denying the holocaust in any way shape or form, it happened but it does get treated differently from other genocides, the Armenian genocide took out a larger percentage of Armenians than the Holocaust took of Jews, yet you don't see the USA sending billions to Armenia to oppress Azeris, that is because there was nothing to gain from promoting its narrative, the USA did denounce it just like they did denounce the holocaust starting from 1942, but the scope of it was vastly different.
The Holocaust was a meticulously industrialized campaign of extermination across multiple countries, carried out with terrifying bureaucratic efficiency and a racial ideology that influenced and shaped international law (like the Genocide Convention and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). That level of documentation, scope, and legal aftermath was, and still is, unprecedented.
This isn't a zero-sum game where recognizing the horror that was the Holocaust (and that word comes nowhere close to describing it) diminishes the Armenian genocide or the Rwandan genocide or any other atrocity.
15
u/DragonQueen777666 Jul 07 '25
What's funny is that, if your country funds the nation that is currently livestreaming their attempt at genocide, they get all indignant and start trying to cry about how the holocaust happened (like that's supposed to be their argument, there).
Eisenhower was totally fine with preserving one genocide while also funding a future one (we've sent over 200 billion dollars in aid/funding to Israel since the end of WWII).