US strikes deal w/ Taliban to remove troops from Afghanistan (1 Viewer)

So AP is reporting that basically the Taliban is telling the nation that they plan on upholding their end of the bargain and will not seek retaliation on those that helped Americans and speak specifically to women’s rights.

I am sure some will roll their eyes at the prospect. But before we do we might want to remember they aren’t the ones that got left out to twist. Making some small concessions and not seeking retribution against a terrified public can create a massive swell of local support.

I am choosing to be cautiously optimistic

Poison said:

Wait until you find out about the Old Testament, you’re in for a treat.

Click to expand...

Really?

coldseat said:

Yes, and they would have continued to gain ground even if we hadn't started evacuating. There was deep rooted corruption and dysfunction in the Afgan government and military that was doming it for collapse regardless of our support. We would have eventually had to have another US troop surge in order to beat back the Taliban, make them retreat into Pakistan and diminish their capabilities. Another trillion dollars and many more American lives lost. That's what Biden saw coming (because he had already seen it under Obama when he was Vice-President. That was the reality he was no longer willing to accept, so he pulled us out.

I suggest that anybody that believes that we could have help maintain Afghanistan in status quo situation with just 3,000 troop do a deep dive in the Pentagon Papers from the Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/grap...istan-war-confidential-documents/?tid=top_nav It really makes clear just how much we were mislead and how deep rooted the problems were in Afghanistan.

Click to expand...

Amen. Anyone who has read these Washington Post articles knows that it was a no-win situation in Afghanistan.

Well, let me re-phrase -- It was a no-win situation because the U.S. government was not willing to do what was necessary to address the rampant corruption and dysfunction in the Afghan government. There is a poisonous culture in the upper echelons of the Dept of Defense and U.S. government where generals and senior civilian leaders don't want to deal with systemic problems and bad news and they just bury it under the rug. And no amount of additional money and additional troops in Afghanistan was going to solve the corruption problem.

Lapaz said:

Everywhere in the world there are ideological factions. You don’t have to commit genocide. I don’t believe that Afghanistan was hopeless. Their army was fighting as long as they knew we had their back, and many citizens were helping.

Click to expand...

were they? How much of a "fight" would they put up?

The Afghans were the drunk guy at bar picking a fight with 3 others while his friends held him back. Then the friends let go.

We would have had to stay, defend and shed blood for the next 10-15 years in order to MAYBE bring about change. Thats AFTER already investing nearly 20 years. Undoing centuries of thinking and living isnt done in 20 years.

It was hopeless because we were never going to be a permanent presence in Afghanistan.

meanwhile in boebert land

zztop said:

meanwhile in boebert land

Click to expand...

Well....at least she is conceding that the Repug Party also eats shirt.

coldseat said:

The Afgans were losing that war even with American military support. The Taliban had already capatured 50% of the country. They weren't going to stop. It's a myth to think that we could have indefenitly provided stability for a government and military that was never going to stand on their own two feet with just 2,500 troops.

Click to expand...

I totally agree with above. I mean we would have had to have a permanent military presence in Afghanistan to make a real difference....and that real difference would have cost more US lives (both military and contractors) eventually. Sadly, Afghanistan wasn't ready to be anything but what they were before we got there....and I hate that but it is reality IMO....

Lapaz said:

Interesting that you think Islam is inconsistent with civilized society. There are about a billion Muslims in the world, at least half of which don't live in the middle east, that would disagree. I get that Islam has more extremists than other religious sects, but they also have moderates among them.

Besides, they didn't have to become a western country. They just needed to have a society that doesn't behead people and grants them some freedoms. As bad as Iran, Saudi Arabia, and some of the other countries are, they are far better than the Taliban.

Click to expand...

Well, first of all, "civilized society" is in the eye of the beholder. "Civilization" is a combination of many things. But speaking of Islam and civilization, there used to be that the area between the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers was known as "the cradle of civilization", because of their advances in science, philosophy, the arts, agriculture, etc. Mathematics alone: algebra, algorithm, heck the numbers we use are Arabic numbers. But then, something happened in the 12th century in that area of Asia, while the people of Europe where kicking off the first Inquisition: an Imam codified what a "good Muslim" was supposed to be. declared working with numbers the work of the devil, and that was it for the cradle of civilization. And they have not bounced back ever since. Sure, rich oil producing countries may give you that impression because they have bought the tech. And they still behead people (Saudi Arabia) and even stoning (UAE).

Lapaz said:

Also, fighting civil guerrilla wars isn't the same as have a professional fighting force.
Also, most of the people that have been fighting in Afghanistan were the Taliban. The Afghan army was probably composed mostly of dispossessed people that were tired of living under the Taliban, so they probably had not been involved in fighting.

Click to expand...

Of course

Sure, guerrilla warfare is not the same as a standing army, but it is still fighting, and a style of fighting that works very well in the Afghan terrain.

So the Taliban were the only ones doing the fighting all of those years? Including the multiple civil wars? Interesting....

Sure, the army was probably composed of blind, deaf people over 60 with only one leg

Seriously...

Poison said:

This is really an artificial distinction.

Click to expand...

If you say so.

Poison said:

Militant Islamists/terrorists trained in Afghanistani camps were on various occasions dispatched from Afghanistan to other locations including the US and ended up being involved in terrorist attacks.

Though the 9/11 pilots completed their flight training in the US, quite a few of the hijackers were products of these Al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan.

See, for example: Wail Mohammed al-Shehri and his brother

Wail al-Shehri - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

Click to expand...

And what sort of training do you think they got in Afghanistan that helped them carry out the attack? How to use box cutters to threaten flight attendants?

This article has reinforced my beliefs that the Afghanistan "government" is responsible for its own failure.

How the Afghan military came to disintegrate first became apparent not last week but months ago in an accumulation of losses that started even before President Biden’s announcement that the United States would withdraw by Sept. 11.

It began with individual outposts in rural areas where starving and ammunition-depleted soldiers and police units were surrounded by Taliban fighters and promised safe passage if they surrendered and left behind their equipment, slowly giving the insurgents more and more control of roads, then entire districts. As positions collapsed, the complaint was almost always the same: There was no air support or they had run out of supplies and food...

Click to expand...

Soldiers and police officers have expressed ever-deeper resentment of the Afghan leadership. Officials often turned a blind eye to what was happening, knowing full well that the Afghan forces’ real manpower count was far lower than what was on the books, skewed by corruption and secrecy that they quietly accepted.

And when the Taliban started building momentum after the United States’ announcement of withdrawal, it only increased the belief that fighting in the security forces — fighting for President Ashraf Ghani’s government — wasn’t worth dying for. In interview after interview, soldiers and police officers described moments of despair and feelings of abandonment.

Click to expand...

efil4 said:

were they? How much of a "fight" would they put up?

The Afghans were the drunk guy at bar picking a fight with 3 others while his friends held him back. Then the friends let go.

We would have had to stay, defend and shed blood for the next 10-15 years in order to MAYBE bring about change. Thats AFTER already investing nearly 20 years. Undoing centuries of thinking and living isnt done in 20 years.

It was hopeless because we were never going to be a permanent presence in Afghanistan.

Click to expand...

Perhaps reports are wrong, but according to the AP, 66,000 Afghan troops have been killed.

"THE LONGEST WAR:

Percentage of U.S. population born since the 2001 attacks plotted by al-Qaida leaders who were sheltering in Afghanistan: Roughly one out of every four.

THE HUMAN COST:
American service members killed in Afghanistan through April: 2,448.
U.S. contractors: 3,846.
Afghan national military and police: 66,000.
Other allied service members, including from other NATO member states: 1,144.
Afghan civilians: 47,245.
Taliban and other opposition fighters: 51,191.
Aid workers: 444.
Journalists: 72."

Also, there are reports in the New York Times about daily fights. It's behind a paywall, but here are two particularly bloody days from about 2 weeks ago, which also states how many died in July:

"July 30-31, 2021​

At least 34 Afghan security forces and 13 civilians were killed in the two last two days of July, with several incidents reported in and around the provincial capitals of Helmand and Herat provinces. The deadliest attack occurred in Samangan Province, where the Taliban attacked Firoz Nakhchir district, killing eight pro-government militia members. The fighting continued for hours and one outpost fell to the Taliban. In the month of July, at least 335 security forces and 189 civilians were killed, though this is likely an undercount as the deteriorating security has made it increasingly difficult to verify casualties."

Afghans were fighting and dying for their country.

DaveXA said:

Well, I think that's a bit defeatist. We can do better than that. Certainly could have planned an exit better than what is transpiring currently. We should have started evacuating people quietly months ago and not announced full withdrawal until most of the evacuations were complete. This was clearly a failure of intelligence and anticipation. We've all seen this movie before, and I don't really get how Biden wouldn't have known this might happen if he's getting sitreps we're not privy to.

I'm not content to just up and leave without trying to take care of those who helped us there. Now, thousands of people are trapped and can't get to the airport. So unless we go and rescue them, they're on their own.

Click to expand...

Pretty hard for Biden to keep things secret since Trump had already negotiated this outcome with the Taliban in advance. Full withdrawal was already a done deal under Trump, and I am pretty sure any sort of exodus on the scale you suggest would have been noted and reported in the press, probably as a “breaking story”.

We haven’t really seen how this will play out yet. So far, the Taliban have been fairly quiet, and most of the carnage has been due to civilian panic I think. If they continue to allow us to evacuate our allies and personnel, I think all this press reaction could certainly by interpreted as a huge over-reaction. I’m hopeful at this point anyway.

MT15 said:

Pretty hard for Biden to keep things secret since Trump had already negotiated this outcome with the Taliban in advance. Full withdrawal was already a done deal under Trump, and I am pretty sure any sort of exodus on the scale you suggest would have been noted and reported in the press, probably as a “breaking story”.

We haven’t really seen how this will play out yet. So far, the Taliban have been fairly quiet, and most of the carnage has been due to civilian panic I think. If they continue to allow us to evacuate our allies and personnel, I think all this press reaction could certainly by interpreted as a huge over-reaction. I’m hopeful at this point anyway.

Click to expand...

Although the Taliban may be holding back for now, I don't think we're going to get out even half of the people that have been friendly to the U.S. I think they'll get out the obvious people like interpreters, but what about the rest of the people that assisted in any ways? Will the Taliban find the people that were pro-West and execute them? I suspect that will happen.

MT15 said:

Pretty hard for Biden to keep things secret since Trump had already negotiated this outcome with the Taliban in advance. Full withdrawal was already a done deal under Trump, and I am pretty sure any sort of exodus on the scale you suggest would have been noted and reported in the press, probably as a “breaking story”.

We haven’t really seen how this will play out yet. So far, the Taliban have been fairly quiet, and most of the carnage has been due to civilian panic I think. If they continue to allow us to evacuate our allies and personnel, I think all this press reaction could certainly by interpreted as a huge over-reaction. I’m hopeful at this point anyway.

Click to expand...

I think it's been a fairly appropriate reaction even if we're successful in getting many thousands of individuals to safety.

Friday we were told that Kabul was not in imminent danger and today in Kabul we're having to rely on the Taliban's PR stunt here under the guise of their humanity or whatever in the hopes that they won't just start slaughtering people.

Oh, I wasn’t defending the lack of intel about how quickly it all happened. They were absolutely unprepared for that.

But I do think there’s been quite a bit of over the top reporting about the situation. Just listening briefly and skimming the news, I thought there had been a lot of death and destruction. Maybe that was me not paying enough attention, but when I finally figured out that the Taliban had basically just walked into Kabul and took over without firing a shot, I was somewhat surprised. And then today I read that they are encouraging government workers to report and telling them they are in no danger, I’m starting to suspect there is some sensationalism going on in the press. (lol, shocker, I know.)

Looking at the videos shown on the news on a seemingly 24hr loop....all I see is dudes trying to flee. Where are the women? Where are the children? Doesn't this look fishy to anyone else.

Hell, this dude is out here having a blast:


/tinfoilhatoff

My take, this was never an "IF" this was going to happen, it was all a matter of "WHEN" it'll happen...be it today, next year, 10 years, 50 years from now, this same scene would've unfolded in some way shape or form.

What would anyone have done differently? other than closing down Bagram last...I'll admit that fault in the withdrawal.

I keep seeing on TV and reading that this was "an intelligence failure". I disagree. I think it was well-known in the U.S. intelligence community that the Afghan government and military would rapidly collapse. Maybe many people in the intel community thought it would happen in a few weeks instead of a few days, but that is not an intelligence failure.

This was a "wishful thinking" failure by the Biden Administration -- they hoped that the collapse of the Afghan government would not occur as quickly as it did, but they were wrong.

MT15 said:

Oh, I wasn’t defending the lack of intel about how quickly it all happened. They were absolutely unprepared for that.

But I do think there’s been quite a bit of over the top reporting about the situation. Just listening briefly and skimming the news, I thought there had been a lot of death and destruction. Maybe that was me not paying enough attention, but when I finally figured out that the Taliban had basically just walked into Kabul and took over without firing a shot, I was somewhat surprised. And then today I read that they are encouraging government workers to report and telling them they are in no danger, I’m starting to suspect there is some sensationalism going on in the press. (lol, shocker, I know.)

Click to expand...

I'm in more of a wait and see mode. I'm not about to trust the Taliban considering their history, so, if they allow people who want to leave access to the airport, I'll be happy to admit I'm wrong about them. We'll see.