|
DesideriScuri -> RE: Do you remember when... (8/23/2017 10:07:35 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:
ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
quote:
ORIGINAL: tweakabelle
quote:
ORIGINAL: Greta75
I believe Taliban/ISIS are in league or at least BFF with each other.
Actually they are busy killing each other in Afghanistan. Both groups are intent on wiping the other group out completely.
Truth.
quote:
As this false claim appears to be central to your reasoning on this issue (ie justifying Trump's broken promise to get out of Afghanistan) you might like to reconsider your position on this issue
What was Trump's 'promise to get out of Afghanistan?' Did Trump give a deadline for us getting out of Afghanistan? If he gets us out in, say, 3 years, then he still lived up to the whole "get us out of Afghanistan" thing, no?
There are also times when an increase of manpower will result in a speedier withdrawal process. If there is a list of things that need to get done prior to full withdrawal, more hands working on that list makes sense, doesn't it?
[snip]
I do think there needs to be a deadline, but it can't be an announced deadline. I think the boost to the enemy combatants overrides the sense of urgency it can bring to the Afghan government. If we reach that deadline, we simply pull out and leave. At some point in time, the Afghan government has to stand up on its own two feet and not rely on foreign powers to rule (which is why Russia left; the Kremlin finally got tired of the Afghan regime not pulling its own weight, so they up and left).
The US has been in Afghanistan since just after 9/11. The original goal - to get Osama bin Laden - ceased to apply some years ago. But the US (and other Western countries, including Australia) are still there, trying desperately to figure out a way of getting out without losing face. That may sound cynical but I think it's true in this case - if someone had figured out a way of getting out without losing face years ago, it would have happened with not a second thought for the eventual fate of the Afghanis.
Saving face? We went in with two goals: 1. Get bin Laden, and
2. Depose the Taliban (only because they opposed us going into Afghanistan for goal #1)
Goal 2 happened quite quickly. Goal 1 did not. Both are done. I've long said, the Taliban is not a US military concern, unless they are attacking the US military, or other US Citizens. But, the powers that be decided that training and strengthening the Afghan regime we helped put in place is prudent, while also helping rebuild the infrastructure we helped destroy.
quote:
Western forces are there supposedly to train Afghanis to a point where they can defend their country successfully. But there doesn't appear to be any prospect of reaching that point now or in the foreseeable future. And if it hasn't happened after over 15 years of 'intensive training' one is reasonably entitled to ask when is it going to happen?
The number of troops, while not specified by Trump, but leaked to the media, requested by military advisers is 4K, which is almost a 50% increase to the 8.4K we have there already. The new 'surge' of troops are for support of the Afghanis, and for "counter-terror operations." Maybe it's newer soldiers who are more capable of teaching the Afghans how to use an XBox controller to for drone control? [:D]
quote:
If Western forces stay, they face the prospect of being forced out of the country by the Taliban (just like the Russians were).
The Russians weren't forced out by the Taliban. The Russians were only there to assist the pro-Russian regime that was ruling Afghanistan at the time. When Russia figured out and got tired of being the de facto Afghan military, and had enough of the Afghan regime not doing anything, they said, "Трахать тебя" and left.
quote:
The war in Afghanistan is unwinnable militarily.
We accomplished both our initial goals. What is the war in Afghanistan now?
quote:
Afghani forces, despite the years of training and billions of $ invested, are in a weaker position now than they have been for years. Desertion rates are (IIRC) in the area of 50%. They are riddled with Taliban sympathisers. The Taliban controls more of Afghanistan than it has in years. It seems able to strike at will inside Kabul, where the Govt's position is at its strongest. At the end of the day, the Taliban know that for them simply surviving is winning. They're not going anywhere while they know that the West's political will to stay in Afghanistan will eventually exhaust itself and the West will abandon Afghanistan leaving with its tail between its legs, in exactly the same manner as all invaders of Afghanistan have done.
Cite, please.
We deposed the Taliban quite handily and continued into Afghanistan after bin Laden. Do you agree or disagree that the US has some responsibility to help rebuild the Afghan infrastructure the US had a big hand in destroying?
https://www.usaid.gov/afghanistan/infrastructure (linked right after the article is the July 2016 fact sheet, so I'm assuming the data in the article is from that time)
Looks like things may be a little better than when we got there.
quote:
Unless Trump magically pulls a rabbit out of the hat, this equation isn't going to change. Is it reasonable to talk of "winning" as Trump does when everyone knows that winning (in any conventional meaning of the word) in Afghanistan is impossible? No one can put a date on when "the Afghan government ... [can] stand on its own two feet". If current results are anything to judge by, that date will never arrive. There's a good argument that talk of "winning" is irresponsible ...
Sooner or later some POTUS is going to have to face up to this reality. Unless Trump does, the US will stay in Afghanistan for the duration of his Presidency - either the next 3 or 7 years. I wonder if Trump is psychologically capable of taking the hard decision to withdraw, to accept losing and losing very publicly ... because unless he is, the US will remain there fighting an unwinnable war, and US troops, and thousands of Afghanis are going to lose their lives in vain.
Trump is the first US President that can pull out of Afghanistan immediately and not lose face. Obviously, Bush couldn't do it, as we still hadn't completed both of our objectives by the end of his Presidency. Obama could have pulled out immediately, but it would have been a yuuuuge embarassment for the US military (bin Laden was still free), and he would have encountered a ridiculous amount of criticism in the US for not completing the mission. Once bin Laden was taken out, the US role was more of support and rebuilding. Obama's surge locked him into the war, to where he couldn't just pull out without losing face himself. Unless Trump does more than this 4k, he could pull out by the end of the year and not have to worry about his Presidency losing face. If we stay on much into 2018, he won't be able to just pull out and not lose face.
There has to be a deadline, and I'm hoping Trump sets it to fall in his first term (I don't believe he'll be elected for a second term anyway). It has to be a hard line, though. It can't be reversed. It shouldn't be announced, that's for fucking sure.
At some point in time, the Afghan people have to decide for themselves what they want their government to look like. If they want the Taliban to run things, so be it. The US should not be in the business of creating and supporting puppet regimes. We did it in Iran, and it's biting us in the ass. We did it in Iraq, and it bit us in the ass, we redid the puppetry in Iraq, and it's still biting us in the ass.
You are right that the Taliban knows it can outlast the US's political will (let's not kid ourselves, when the US gets out, there will be little, if any, Western/UN forces willing to stay), but that's primarily because it's tough to maintain that political will when there is no clear reason to be there. In the end, though, it would be incredibly stupid of the Taliban to undo much of the physical improvements the US (and other foreign governments) have made to the country if they retake the reins.
|
|
|
|
