I remember that for Iraq, especially the pallets of dollars part, but not so much for Afghanistan. Can you remind us?
It’s both, unfortunately.
But it’s absurd, as you claimed earlier that Obama may have made the decision, but not the call. Making the decision IS making the call. Maybe you want to explain that further because it makes no sense at all.
If Obama withdraws now and the Taliban take over it will give the Republicans another attack point in the 2016 election. I expect this is why he did it.
Any defeat for the US will lend encouragement to all Islamic radicals, even those who are at odds with each other. We are, potentially, the strongest piece on the board. The chances of all the radicals, individually or collectively, will increase if we depart.
This is not a serious reply. It is, rather, a flat-footed Junior HS-caliber attempt at ironic humor. Try something else.
The boys’ll be home by Christmas.
Easy for you to say, but Junior High was the worst six years of my life!
Not so hot for me either. Only solution was to try to better.
This is an assertion that is unbalanced.
It ignores the Afghan history and their hatred of outsiders.
Rather the longer you stay the longer you are pouring the fuel on the fire and motivating the traditionalistic and xenophobic elements of the Pakhtun who are the core of the Talebans.
I always find it strange, americans get their backs up at foreign comment and touching on their habits and culture or anything at all, but are so blind to the same kinds of reactions elsewhere.
the soviets eventually learned their lesson, like the british did, and so will you.
“If you guys just hang on for fifteen years the U.S. will just cut and run because they are weak willed and unwilling to fight!” oddly i feel ok with sending that message.
Unfortunately, I’m plagued with high arches. Makes buying ski boots a bitch!!
This is accurate–there are some good Op-Eds written by Afghani writers who have talked about some of the positives–for example the highest rate of educated children are coming of age in Afghanistan now, in the entire history of the country. That won’t be a panacea for all wounds, but the idea that Afghanistan hasn’t benefited at all from hundreds of billions of dollars of aid is simply not true, and is disparaging to the concept of foreign aid to suggest otherwise.
We’ve been in Germany for 70 years, Korea for 60. Why does there have to be a magic withdrawal date? There were obvious strategic reasons to stay in Germany (less so in Korea given we had plenty of force projection capability in the Pacific already with our bases in Japan), and maybe there aren’t strategic reasons to stay in Afghanistan. But I don’t get why keeping a troop presence is seen as a “defeat” or why withdrawal is mandatory. I don’t want us engaged in constant war in Afghanistan, but I’m fine with a contingent of soldiers in the 5,000-10,000 range remaining permanently. Put them in a really big, safe base. They will never be out on regular patrols, will be doing lots of training etc. Their only combat role will be in cases of emergency, when requested by the Kabul government. That sort of deployment isn’t outside the realm of what we can do, and would probably cost a lot less than our large deployments in Korea cost for decades.
But the real question is whether or not it’s in our strategic interests to do any of that. Afghanistan is a very peripheral country in every sense of the word. One issue that insurgent groups fighting against the American-backed government have always had is recruiting jihadists from around the globe. The Levant is a much riper area for jihadism, Afghanistan is seen as a back water and largely unimportant to a lot of the more diehard jihadists. It doesn’t have vast oil resources like Iraq. It isn’t located in a super strategically important part of the world.
Actually there was absolutely no way we could not go to war in Afghanistan. We had known for years there were large al-Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan, we ignored them until 9/11/01. We asked the Taliban to let us dismantle them and to turn over bin Laden when al-Qaeda flew planes into buildings and killed 3,000 Americans. They refused. If we had not destroyed the Taliban government at that point we might as well have disbanded the military and replaced it with a Japanese style self-defense force and declared that we were now no longer part of the rest of the world’s affairs.
Now, whether we should’ve stayed after the first 100-200 days or so after we’d eliminated the ability of terrorists to have large, open-air training camps in Afghanistan and tried to “rebuild it” is a strategic question, but going in wasn’t a mistake–it was necessary.
I think he mixed up Iraq and Afghanistan a bit there.
What is your considered opinion of the state of Afghanistan in the years prior to the Saur Revolution? Seems to me that the country was actually showing quite a bit of progress in a reasonably short time. Why do those years not count as Afghanistan being an “organized, discrete entity?”
Not in the least. I quite remember starting a GD thread thoroughly insisting that military invasion by the US in Afghanistan was a really, really bad idea. I’ve never had a more unpopular opinion, I got called things that would shock my Mom, who swore like a sailor.
We allied ourselves with some of the most repulsive warlords to slit a throat. (Google “pallets of cash Afghanistan” for the pics.) And for what? Does the name “Northern Alliance” ring a knell?
If you would like me to amend my statement to the years after 1978, I will happily oblige. I don’t even need proof that it matters, I’ll just do it.
Right. Because you made a very broad statement without knowing a whole lot about the topic. There’s a huge difference between “Afghanistan has never been a country” and “Afghanistan has had a really bad last 40 years.”
But hats off for admitting an error. Not a lot of posters do that, and it should be commended. Seriously.
I did, and they all refer to pallets of cash being sent to Iraq. There is talk of unaccounted for $$ in the Afghan conflict, which is not particularly surprising, but nothing like the “shrink-wrapped pallets of cash” sent to Iraq.
I wasn’t a member here in 2001 when the invasion good place, so I’ll take your word about being unpopular. But I’ll echo what Ravenman said and add: We had near universal approval to go into Afghanistan and clean out the vermin nest of Al Qaeda. Whether we should have stayed once that was done (which was many a year ago) is a different question.
The only way to tame Afghanistan is the Genghis Khan approach. Go there, tell them to submit to our will, and if not then we shall kill every man, woman and child. Then do as you say.
Short of that stay out.