Afghan War ending, foretold by The Onion 10 years Ago [DT thread ruined by politics]

[GW Hayduke 1953]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

We already verified the Taliban broke the terms on the agreement, specifically the verbiage about the Al Queda.  Further, it was stated by the earlier administration that they would be retaining control of Bagram airbase until ALL Americans were withdrawn.  A decision that was immediately reversed by Biden when he handed the airfield over.  

No, you didn’t verify that the Taliban broke the terms of the DOHA agreement. 

[BabaYaga 15304]

1 minute ago, wildcat09 said:

Sure, it had phases. That doesn't make the obligations undertaken by the United States in the agreement conditional.

The fuck it doesn't.  You don't get to B until the terms of A are satisfied.  Full stop.  

Either way, this is pointless as the agreement was non binding.  Biden had ZERO obligations to use any of it and had 8 months to get his shit together.  As stated above, the prior administration publicly stated that they would be retaining control of Bagram Air Base until all Americans were withdrawn from Afghanistan.  Again, full stop.  Biden reversed this, removing the critical air support piece of the entire withdrawal and arguably removing the most critical support piece for the entire ANA.  

[BabaYaga 15304]

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

No, you didn’t verify that the Taliban broke the terms of the DOHA agreement. 

The fuck we didn't - the report below outlines that the Taliban and AQ ""remain closely aligned and show no indication of breaking ties.”

UN report on AQ

The agreement stipulated commitments the Taliban were expected to make to prevent terrorism, including obligations to renounce al-Qaida and prevent that group or others from using Afghan soil to plot attacks on the U.S. or its allies.

The NYT published that the AQ were operating is as many as 15 different regions 

AQ operating in as many as 15 provinces

[wildcat09 29362]

8 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

The fuck it doesn't.  You don't get to B until the terms of A are satisfied.  Full stop.  

 

Bless your heart, that's not how contracts work at all. 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

The fuck we didn't - the report below outlines that the Taliban and AQ ""remain closely aligned and show no indication of breaking ties.”

UN report on AQ

The agreement stipulated commitments the Taliban were expected to make to prevent terrorism, including obligations to renounce al-Qaida and prevent that group or others from using Afghan soil to plot attacks on the U.S. or its allies.

The NYT published that the AQ were operating is as many as 15 different regions 

AQ operating in as many as 15 provinces

Yeah, no. That isn’t verification that the taliban violated conditions of the Doha.  Read the summary of the UN document you linked. Either you are an idiot or acting in bad faith. 

[wildcat09 29362]

2 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Yeah, no. That isn’t verification that the taliban violated conditions of the Doha.  Read the summary of the UN document you linked. Either you are an idiot or acting in bad faith. 

It’s both. 

[Pam Cummings 9651]

You guys know how this works. When his position is proven to be false and dumb, he will just accuse yall of groupthink. Because there's no way more than one person could possibly think that he's being dumb. Clearly he's right and everyone else is wrong.

[DDD Dad 14346]

1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:

JFC you are pedantic.  We already verified the Taliban BROKE the terms.  Further, the plan included a withdrawal, where the U.S. military would leave the country in increments if the Taliban met certain conditions. The Taliban were required to reject and repudiate Al Qaeda, and would have to negotiate in good faith. Additionally, the U.S. would keep a special operations contingent in place and would hold the capacity to launch air strikes under specific circumstances. 

I think we all understand your position.  You don't need to keep repeating it.

[BabaYaga 15304]

11 minutes ago, GW Hayduke said:

Yeah, no. That isn’t verification that the taliban violated conditions of the Doha.  Read the summary of the UN document you linked. Either you are an idiot or acting in bad faith. 

As stipulated by the agreement Biden was never bound to in the first place:

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will not allow any of its members, other individuals or groups, including al-Qa’ida, to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies.

2. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will send a clear message that those who pose a threat to the security of the United States and its allies have no place in Afghanistan, and will instruct members of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban not to cooperate with groups or individuals threatening the security of the United States and its allies.

3. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will prevent any group or individual in Afghanistan from threatening the security of the United States and its allies, and will prevent them from recruiting, training, and fundraising and will not host them in accordance with the commitments in this agreement.

 

From the UN report:

As reported by the Monitoring Team in its eleventh report (S/2020/415, paras. 32–44), the Taliban and Al-Qaida remain closely aligned and show no indication of breaking ties.

Member States report no material change to this relationship, which has grown deeper

According to Member State information, Al-Qaida is resident in at least 15 Afghan provinces,

 

[GW Hayduke 1953]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

As stipulated by the agreement Biden was never bound to in the first place:

The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will not allow any of its members, other individuals or groups, including al-Qa’ida, to use the soil of Afghanistan to threaten the security of the United States and its allies.

2. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will send a clear message that those who pose a threat to the security of the United States and its allies have no place in Afghanistan, and will instruct members of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban not to cooperate with groups or individuals threatening the security of the United States and its allies.

3. The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan which is not recognized by the United States as a state and is known as the Taliban will prevent any group or individual in Afghanistan from threatening the security of the United States and its allies, and will prevent them from recruiting, training, and fundraising and will not host them in accordance with the commitments in this agreement.

 

From the UN report:

As reported by the Monitoring Team in its eleventh report (S/2020/415, paras. 32–44), the Taliban and Al-Qaida remain closely aligned and show no indication of breaking ties.

Member States report no material change to this relationship, which has grown deeper

According to Member State information, Al-Qaida is resident in at least 15 Afghan provinces,

 

I get it. You think that is evidence showing the taliban broke the conditions in the DOHA.  It isn’t.  

[BabaYaga 15304]

23 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

Bless your heart, that's not how contracts work at all. 

The agreement that Biden was not bound to in any form or fashion outlines a series of sequential steps.  It's IF -> THEN terms.  

[wildcat09 29362]

Just now, BabaYaga said:

The agreement that Biden was not bound to in any form or fashion outlines a series of sequential steps.  It's IF -> THEN terms.  

And yet the word "if" doesn't appear anywhere in it.

Funny, that.

[RomaVicta 29957]

1 hour ago, BabaYaga said:

Wait, you mean like having a fucking conditions based extrication that can and will change based upon conditions and intel on the ground?  Perish the thought....

As for left behind, we don't even have an accurate head count nor fixed locations for these NGO's that are literally in hiding - first told to get to the airport, but the troops could not and would not guarantee their safety.  Now it's so god damn dangerous, they are being told NOT to come to the airport.  So how in the holy hell are they getting out?  What exactly is the plan here?  Many are scattered all over the country, not just in Kabul.  

You seem to think that the fall of a government and the implosion of a country can be controlled like a moon landing.  

People in Afganistan knew the US was pulling out eventually and were given an approximate date by Trump and the moved back by Biden. If you don't have a deadline in just about any endeavor, people aren't motivated to prepare. A viable government and army in Kabul had ample opportunity for strategy. Sadly, there was no viable government in Kabul.

There is inevitable tragedy in a failed state. You just try to minimize it. According to posts above which you choose to ignore, the evacuation performance of the allies seems to be, indeed, adjusting to the situation. 

I feel your main point aside from fairly legit criticism on some points is to exploit the hysteria about the fate of those who we may not get out. I don't like to contemplate the fate of the women in Afghanistan nor the US sympathizers or payrollees. It's ugly. It's sadly part of the cycle of failed invasions and failed nation-building.

This disaster would have happened under any president. Details about planning can be explored and deplored, but it was never going to end nice. 

Since Vietnam, Dems have been more cautious about using the miltary. You can disagree with when the military was used by Dems, but we never got stuck anywhere. Sadly, the Dems are timid when the war drum is beating and the insecure teenager that is the American psyche wants to puff up and kick some ass vicariously to feel good about themselves.

GOPs beat the macho emotional drum for everything. Their most important although small constituency makes huge money from these disastrous policies. I'll give HW Bush credit for being wiser than me when he did not press to Baghdad. I remain uncertain that we should have fought Iraq either time that we did, but the first operation was carried out admirably.

Otherwise, you have the Beirut disaster and the Iraq mega-disaster. Even when a GOP wants out of a war, you have Trump abandoning comrades in arms on what was basically a whim and maybe a Turkish bribe.

Baba, you're mostly being partisan in your hysteria, but at least you're criticizing policy in your frenzy to discredit Biden. When you run into arguments and facts as strong or stronger than your own, you project your partisanship on those whom you disagree.

[RomaVicta 29957]

1 hour ago, babysdaddy said:

cross posted from DT but Taliban also said no dice on moving the deadline.

 

 

 

We could threaten to bomb them to smithereens, but smithereens would be an improvement.

Some of our toys just aren't as fun as we thought they were.

[BabaYaga 15304]

4 minutes ago, wildcat09 said:

And yet the word "if" doesn't appear anywhere in it.

Funny, that.

So the agreement that Biden was not bound to in any form or fashion clearly stipulates that "“they will not recognize any government in Afghanistan that is imposed through the use of military force.”

The Taliban seized power by force so, under the agreement reached in Doha, they would therefore be in breach of the agreement along with the AQ partnership provisions.  

Even before it was inked, the day before the Doha deal, the chief U.S. negotiator Zalmay Khalilzad said the agreement was not irreversible, and “there is no obligation for the United States to withdraw troops if the Afghan parties are unable to reach agreement or if the Taliban show bad faith” during negotiations."

[babysdaddy 2726]

[BabaYaga 15304]

8 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

You seem to think that the fall of a government and the implosion of a country can be controlled like a moon landing.  

I think there are very clear steps that need to be taken that were not.  I think there were very clear indications and intel giving us a much longer runway that this was going to be a disaster that were completely disregarded.

 

10 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

People in Afganistan knew the US was pulling out eventually and were given an approximate date by Trump and the moved back by Biden. If you don't have a deadline in just about any endeavor, people aren't motivated to prepare.

Motivated?  Motivation is not part of the military's lexicon.  They follow orders.  How about you utilize these resources to first identify thousands of NGO's across the country first BEFORE you set any deadlines in place to avoid painting yourself into a corner as well as securing billions in military hardware from falling into foreign hands.  THEN you talk dates.  Not the other way around.  

 

12 minutes ago, RomaVicta said:

This disaster would have happened under any president. Details about planning can be explored and deplored, but it was never going to end nice. 

This newest "aw schucks" defense is laughable in that this is really all that there is left.  The "everyone else" defense.  We had warnings.  We had a historical precedent in Saigon.  We had time.  Yet nothing was done.  

Answer me this - we still have thousands of NGO's spread out all over the country.  What is the plan for them?  Do we even have an accurate headcount or location for them?  This simple fact would have this echo chamber frothing at the mouth were Trump leading this and you god damn well know it.  They were first told to get to the airport, but without any means of support.  Now they are told to avoid the airport.  Thousands.  So now what?  The Taliban is just waiting for air assets to be out of reach, then once gone, they know there is nothing we can do short of launches off carriers minus assets on the ground to direct them.  Pakistan airspace?  Iran?  What?

[RomaVicta 29957]

1 minute ago, BabaYaga said:

I think there are very clear steps that need to be taken that were not.  I think there were very clear indications and intel giving us a much longer runway that this was going to be a disaster that were completely disregarded.

 

Motivated?  Motivation is not part of the military's lexicon.  They follow orders.  How about you utilize these resources to first identify thousands of NGO's across the country first BEFORE you set any deadlines in place to avoid painting yourself into a corner as well as securing billions in military hardware from falling into foreign hands.  THEN you talk dates.  Not the other way around.  

 

This newest "aw schucks" defense is laughable in that this is really all that there is left.  The "everyone else" defense.  We had warnings.  We had a historical precedent in Saigon.  We had time.  Yet nothing was done.  

Answer me this - we still have thousands of NGO's spread out all over the country.  What is the plan for them?  Do we even have an accurate headcount or location for them?  This simple fact would have this echo chamber frothing at the mouth were Trump leading this and you god damn well know it.  They were first told to get to the airport, but without any means of support.  Now they are told to avoid the airport.  Thousands.  So now what?  The Taliban is just waiting for air assets to be out of reach, then once gone, they know there is nothing we can do short of launches off carriers minus assets on the ground to direct them.  Pakistan airspace?  Iran?  What?

[DDD Dad 14346]

54 minutes ago, BabaYaga said:

I think there are very clear steps that need to be taken that were not.  I think there were very clear indications and intel giving us a much longer runway that this was going to be a disaster that were completely disregarded.

 

Motivated?  Motivation is not part of the military's lexicon.  They follow orders.  How about you utilize these resources to first identify thousands of NGO's across the country first BEFORE you set any deadlines in place to avoid painting yourself into a corner as well as securing billions in military hardware from falling into foreign hands.  THEN you talk dates.  Not the other way around.  

 

This newest "aw schucks" defense is laughable in that this is really all that there is left.  The "everyone else" defense.  We had warnings.  We had a historical precedent in Saigon.  We had time.  Yet nothing was done.  

Answer me this - we still have thousands of NGO's spread out all over the country.  What is the plan for them?  Do we even have an accurate headcount or location for them?  This simple fact would have this echo chamber frothing at the mouth were Trump leading this and you god damn well know it.  They were first told to get to the airport, but without any means of support.  Now they are told to avoid the airport.  Thousands.  So now what?  The Taliban is just waiting for air assets to be out of reach, then once gone, they know there is nothing we can do short of launches off carriers minus assets on the ground to direct them.  Pakistan airspace?  Iran?  What?

Well you could always post this in the DT thread.  Wait, you did that already.

[Sawbonz 27580]

Are people here arguing that we are sticking to this because it’s written in a contract somewhere? Bullshit, we’re sticking to it because it is what Biden wants. I happen to agree with him, but the idea that we are leaving in the manner and on the timetable that we are because we are bound by a contract is ridiculous 

[DDD Dad 14346]

1 minute ago, Sawbonz said:

Are people here arguing that we are sticking to this because it’s written in a contract somewhere? Bullshit, we’re sticking to it because it is what Biden wants. I happen to agree with him, but the idea that we are leaving in the manner and on the timetable that we are because we are bound by a contract is ridiculous 

Well we might also be sticking to it because the alternative (sending in a fighting force to fight the Taliban to stay there) is something that no one appears to want.

[wildcat09 29362]

4 minutes ago, Sawbonz said:

Are people here arguing that we are sticking to this because it’s written in a contract somewhere? Bullshit, we’re sticking to it because it is what Biden wants. I happen to agree with him, but the idea that we are leaving in the manner and on the timetable that we are because we are bound by a contract is ridiculous 

Nobody thinks we're "bound" by the agreement. International agreements are never really binding as there is no court with the power to enforce them. But countries still enter into them, and generally abide by them, because they get something out of it. In our case, we get the Taliban not shooting at American troops so long as we show that we're getting out of Afghanistan.

I don't really care about the terms of the agreement. I was simply pointing out Baba's constant lies about what it says.

[Tuco 5077]

3 hours ago, GW Hayduke said:

Yeah, no. That isn’t verification that the taliban violated conditions of the Doha.  Read the summary of the UN document you linked. Either you are an idiot or acting in bad faith. 

It was explained to him a few days ago.  He is acting in bad faith.  

[wildcat09 29362]

9 minutes ago, Tuco said:

It was explained to him a few days ago.  He is acting in bad faith.  

I honestly think he's one of those guys who immediately believes whatever pops into his head.

[Willfully Horn 8042]

Think this can’t get worse?

 

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

That dude watches other dudes ride trains on his wife. 

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

1 minute ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

That dude watches other dudes ride trains on his wife. 

Well.... finally a topic you can speak on authoritatively.....

[Mole 4333]

Political Twitter is just competing propagandas. I guess it’s fun to hear the Republican war monger hits again. It harkens back to better days and better football, but man it’s a beating to follow those Twitter links.

Also, anyone who has some simple or complex plan to leave without starting a crisis isn’t being honest. Talking about the problems or missteps is fine and great, but your plan sucks too. Your way would have started a slightly different crisis — maybe a little better or maybe a little worse, but still terrible. Stop pretending.

My reading between the Biden lines is that their analysis was that there’s no good way to leave, so let’s just get out. Leaving is bad, staying is worse, so pick any terrible plan because none of them will work well and they still beat the alternative. The Clash taught us that 40 years ago.

Edited August 25, 2021 by Mole

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

9 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

Well.... finally a topic you can speak on authoritatively.....

That was funny. It took over a decade but you did it, man.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

Just now, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

That was funny. It took over a decade but you did it, man.

I took a shot.

[workswithseed 2109]

17 minutes ago, Onboard 2.0 said:

I took a shot.

On his wife?

[washparkhorn 9939]

1 hour ago, Willfully Horn said:

Think this can’t get worse?

 

That is very bad form, to say the least, with boots on the ground and evac underway. Un-American puts it mildly. Dangerous.

[Mole 4333]

The audio is far worse than the caption. The worst part is that it’ll probably eventually work.

[mchookem 16346]

nm lol wrong thread 😜

Edited August 25, 2021 by mchookem

[Bullneck 19192]

13 hours ago, BabaYaga said:

Here's a wild idea - you identify all critical human and physical assets on the ground and a logistical plan to extricate them long before "talks" happen.  We did this entire fuckup of an extraction ass-backwards.  We announced, thus painting ourselves in a corner with the date, and THEN tried to deal with the logistical challenges.  Utterly fucking stupid.

 

We call that contingency planning.  Just like our military and intel leaders were telling us for months that we couldn't count on the ANA.  You bake that shit in to you exfil plans.  

 

This is the new talking point centered around a false choice - leave or stay, as if those are the only two options.  Everyone agrees on the need to leave (for the most part).  It's HOW we left.  Stranding thousands of people and tens of billions of taxpayer funded gear.  

You make a plan to extricate and you dictate the timeline, it doesn't dictate you.  If you need another month, you take it.  There had been zero US casualties in the region for 18 months.  You think another 30 or 60 days matter?  No - our idiot in Chief wanted a fucking photo op so he could say he ended the fighting on the symbolic 20yr anniversary of 9/11......ignoring all feedback that put a damper on not making that date.  

I've read the Taliban say we need to be out on the 31st.  What do you think of that?

You act as if we can't decide whether to leave our car in the garage walk a little farther than we'd like or drive off and get a new space at our next destination, wherever we find it. 

Is it possible this is more complicated than that?  Do you know what those complications are?

Edited August 25, 2021 by Bullneck

[Bullneck 19192]

2 hours ago, Willfully Horn said:

Think this can’t get worse?

 

He's a boy, and always will be.  He's a liar, and always will be.  

Imagine him voting to send your child to die in a place we already know we can't win.  

[InkaUtexas 26026]

1 hour ago, Mole said:

Political Twitter is just competing propagandas. I guess it’s fun to hear the Republican war monger hits again. It harkens back to better days and better football, but man it’s a beating to follow those Twitter links.

Also, anyone who has some simple or complex plan to leave without starting a crisis isn’t being honest. Talking about the problems or missteps is fine and great, but your plan sucks too. Your way would have started a slightly different crisis — maybe a little better or maybe a little worse, but still terrible. Stop pretending.

My reading between the Biden lines is that their analysis was that there’s no good way to leave, so let’s just get out. Leaving is bad, staying is worse, so pick any terrible plan because none of them will work well and they still beat the alternative. The Clash taught us that 40 years ago.

So your girl dumped you tonight? I kid, I kid... but that is what the song is about. At least Spanish 1 in Garrison hall should teach that. Their worst Spanish happens to be Spanish Bombs. 

Kabul is not all of Afghanistan. This is overlooked a lot. We got people all over the country. 

Nothing is simple in Afghanistan. But there could have been a better plan. There are 6 air fields you secure. 1 C-17 full of troops goes in and secure. They are augmented by a second aircraft. Combat aircraft and drones start watching. Once secure notifications go to the people in that region. If they don't register well fuck em. You tell the Taliban, right, we are leaving, here is what we are going to do. We have 800 coming from Herat to the airport. Leave them alone. If you don't, well..... 

That is just one plan I have been told today. 10,000 troops for 2 weeks, open corridors. But nah, lets just say it all sucks and we quit. 

 

 

[InkaUtexas 26026]

12 minutes ago, Bullneck said:

I've read the Taliban say we need to be out on the 31st.  What do you think of that?

You act as if we can't decide whether to leave our car in the garage walk a little farther than we'd like or drive off and get a new space at our next destination, wherever we find it. 

Is it possible this is more complicated than that?  Do you know what those complications are?

I say fuck em and we will enforce access corridors. Not for everyone, but for our people, which for me includes the families of those who worked for us. I am involved in this and have had a few tonight, but force works in this region. We told the G7 nah, we are leaving. 

I prefer the other thread, but how do you think our counterparts, ya know, NATO, sees us right now in Burkina Faso? Small to you, big to them. 

Edited August 25, 2021 by InkaUtexas

[Bullneck 19192]

3 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

I say fuck em and we will enforce access corridors. Not for everyone, but for our people, which for me includes the families of those who worked for us. I am involved in this and have had a few tonight, but force works in this region. We told the G7 nah, we are leaving. 

I prefer the other thread, but how do you think our counterparts, ya know, NATO, sees us right now in Burkina Faso? Small to you, big to them. 

I appreciate your posts more than you know. Let me ask, what is the downside risk to Americans to set up these access corridors, and man them on September 1st?

[Bullneck 19192]

Quote

• Aug. 24, 2021, 9:51 p.m. ET

 

Two members of Congress secretly flew to Kabul without authorization on Tuesday to witness the frenzied evacuation of Americans and Afghans, infuriating Biden administration officials and prompting Speaker Nancy Pelosi to urge other lawmakers not to follow their example.

The two members — Representatives Seth Moulton, Democrat of Massachusetts, and Peter Meijer, Republican of Michigan, both veterans — said in a statement that the purpose of their trip was “to provide oversight on the executive branch.” Both lawmakers have blistered the Biden administration in recent weeks, accusing top officials of dragging their feet on evacuating American citizens and Afghan allies.

“There is no place in the world right now where oversight matters more,” they said.

 

Representative Seth Moulton, Democrat of Massachusetts.Credit...Erin Schaff for The New York Times

 

Representative Peter Meijer, Republican of Michigan.Credit...Anna Moneymaker for The New York Times

But administration officials were furious that Mr. Moulton and Mr. Meijer had entered Afghanistan on an unauthorized, undisclosed trip, arguing that efforts to tend to the lawmakers had drained resources badly needed to help evacuate those already in the country.

 

The trip was reported earlier by The Associated Press.

Mr. Moulton and Mr. Meijer said that they had left Afghanistan “on a plane with empty seats, seated in crew-only seats to ensure that nobody who needed a seat would lose one because of our presence,” and that they had taken other steps to “minimize the risk and disruption to the people on the ground.” They were in Kabul for less than 24 hours.

Still, Ms. Pelosi warned other lawmakers on Tuesday night not to do the same.

“Member travel to Afghanistan and the surrounding countries would unnecessarily divert needed resources from the priority mission of safely and expeditiously evacuating Americans and Afghans at risk from Afghanistan,” Ms. Pelosi wrote in a letter. She did not refer to Mr. Moulton and Mr. Meijer by name.

In their statement on Tuesday night, the congressmen sharpened their criticism of the administration’s handling of the evacuation, saying that “Washington should be ashamed of the position we put our service members in” and that the situation they had witnessed on the ground was more dire than they had expected.

“After talking with commanders on the ground and seeing the situation here, it is obvious that because we started the evacuation so late,” they wrote, “that no matter what we do, we won’t get everyone out on time.”

Editors’ Picks

 

 

 

 

[InkaUtexas 26026]

Nothing. The Talibs do not want to fuck with us. They just don't want all the smart, educated Afghans to leave. 

[Mole 4333]

12 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

Nothing is simple in Afghanistan. But there could have been a better plan.

There absolutely could have been a better plan and this whole thing really sucks. There’s a bit of a difference between discussing the shortcomings — some avoidable and some unavoidable — and their possible solutions vs. the breathless magical thinking hot takes that have become the political side of this discussion.

I’ll listen all day to informed thoughts and plans, but even those pretty words don’t really convey the uncertainty and problems they introduce. I never served in Afghanistan so I don’t understand the region at all, but I spent enough time in the military to understand that any kind of operation is mostly sausage making that often looks pretty disastrous in the moment. The closer you look, the uglier it seems. Everyone always seems to have a brilliant plan for how it should be done better.

I don’t know anything about how Afghanistan works, but I know how we work, and it’s messier than we like to pretend. Add in all the competing interests of everyone involved and the sudden power vacuum, it’s guaranteed chaos.

If you or someone else who understands what’s going wants to tell me their proposed solution, great, but that’s a bit different than the political hackery/brilliant plans this version of the thread keeps cyclically slipping into. In the alternate universe where the “right” plan happened, we’d by having a similar thread for whatever crisis that plan caused and the same hacks would be complaining about those problems and proposing their obvious magical solution.

I’ll definitely admit to too much nihilism about this issue. I should work on that. I think Biden might share my nihilism. He should work on that too.

[WhatTheBuck 28794]

3 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Nothing. The Talibs do not want to fuck with us. They just don't want all the smart, educated Afghans to leave. 

Is referring to the Taliban as the “Talibs” something a smart, educated American would do? Or maybe the “Talis?” I’ve seen both. They both sound stupid.

Sorry if I’m being a beating, wildcat. But I think it’s a legitimate question.

[DigglerontheHoof 21209]

2 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Is referring to the Taliban as the “Talibs” something a smart, educated American would do? Or maybe the “Talis?” I’ve seen both. They both sound stupid.

Sorry if I’m being a beating, wildcat. But I think it’s a legitimate question.

Can't speak for wildcat but, yes, you continue to be a fucking beating of gargantuan proportions. 

[Shady Ray 1633]

Translation of an absolutely outstanding long-form article in Der Spiegel from highly-esteemed and award-winning German war correspondent, Christoph Reuter, who lived in Afghanistan for years during the war.

 

Trillion Dollar Illusion: The Entirely Predictable Failure of the West's Mission in Afghanistan

 

There isn't any petty political point-scoring for Team D or Team R since it is written from a foreign perspective, but it is a brutal and thorough look into how poorly this entire thing was managed by political, civilian and military leadership for essentially the entirety of the war. 

 

And to echo @InkaUtexas great post on the other thread, it is all too easy for the decision-makers (and ultimately responsible parties) in the Government/Military to lay this debacle completely at the feet of Afghan "incompetence" or "will to fight", but truth be told this was clearly institutional failure across the board, comprised of equal parts institutional incompetence and institutional deceit.

 

One can only dream that once the dust settles from the urgent issue of safely evacuating our people and allies that the country can at least attempt to hold some of these institutions and individuals accountable for this debacle.

 

Quote

 

The Entirely Predictable Failure of the West's Mission in Afghanistan

In early July, I met with a leading Taliban military commander. I asked when his fighters would arrive in Kabul. His answer: "They are already there." How the Afghanistan mission failed and what happens next.

Numerous witnesses in various neighborhoods of the capital following the fall of Kabul had similar stories to tell. "It started in April," says a longtime acquaintance from the western part of the city. "More and more outsiders were suddenly in the neighborhood. Some had beards, others didn’t. Some were well dressed, others wore rags. Completely different. That made them difficult to notice. But all of the locals realized: They aren’t from here." They had silently infiltrated Kabul. The outsiders also appeared in the northern and eastern parts of the city, telling those who asked that they had come to Kabul for a new job or for business reasons.

Then, last Sunday morning, "they came out of the buildings holding white Taliban flags, some of them armed with pistols," says a resident of an eastern district of the city. It was the ultimate victory over America’s high-tech military, whose air surveillance proved powerless against this army of pedestrians and motorcyclists that would overrun Kabul from within and from outside in the ensuing hours. Later that day, they would drive through the city streets in captured police cars – from the air, an image of perfect confusion.

 

 

 

Edited August 25, 2021 by Shady Ray

[WhatTheBuck 28794]

59 minutes ago, DigglerontheHoof said:

Can't speak for wildcat but, yes, you continue to be a fucking beating of gargantuan proportions. 

Now go quote BabaYaga, Texie. 

[Bullneck 19192]

5 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Is referring to the Taliban as the “Talibs” something a smart, educated American would do? Or maybe the “Talis?” I’ve seen both. They both sound stupid.

Sorry if I’m being a beating, wildcat. But I think it’s a legitimate question.

I think it's something guys who lived in-country for a while do.

[Bullneck 19192]

9 hours ago, Bullneck said:

 

 

9 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

Nothing. The Talibs do not want to fuck with us. They just don't want all the smart, educated Afghans to leave. 

OK, let me get into the head of Biden for a moment.  He asked the first question ("what's the worst thing that can happen?").  His most senior advisor says "Nothing, the Talibs don't want any shit from us.
 

Then Biden wonders if that really be true and which other presidents have heard similar things, then checks his notes on how many deaths, how many years, how much money was wasted.  He looks farther down the list at his domestic agenda, which is a beating (voting rights, virus control, the economy, etc.)

He then asks himself, "how many voters really, really give a damn about this and will make it my defining moment, or will have forgotten by Nov 2022?"

 

Edited August 25, 2021 by Bullneck
added some stuff

[Lat22 4015]

I'm not going to read a single other post in this thread so forgive me if this has been discussed.  This is for non gun people.  In all of the pictures and video I see of the Taliban, 90% of them are carrying new American rifles.  Some of them have thermal rifle scopes, laser sighting systems and other technology that they could never dream of having.  Overnight, they went from 50 year old AK47s with shot out smooth bore barrels to the latest greatest weapon systems.  Whenever we have to go back, and we will, our troops will be fighting against our own weapons.  Just another one of the many fuck ups of this withdrawal. 

[InkaUtexas 26026]

2 hours ago, Shady Ray said:

Translation of an absolutely outstanding long-form article in Der Spiegel from highly-esteemed and award-winning German war correspondent, Christoph Reuter, who lived in Afghanistan for years during the war.

 

Trillion Dollar Illusion: The Entirely Predictable Failure of the West's Mission in Afghanistan

 

There isn't any petty political point-scoring for Team D or Team R since it is written from a foreign perspective, but it is a brutal and thorough look into how poorly this entire thing was managed by political, civilian and military leadership for essentially the entirety of the war. 

 

And to echo @InkaUtexas great post on the other thread, it is all too easy for the decision-makers (and ultimately responsible parties) in the Government/Military to lay this debacle completely at the feet of Afghan "incompetence" or "will to fight", but truth be told this was clearly institutional failure across the board, comprised of equal parts institutional incompetence and institutional deceit.

 

One can only dream that once the dust settles from the urgent issue of safely evacuating our people and allies that the country can at least attempt to hold some of these institutions and individuals accountable for this debacle.

 

 

 

Thanks Ray.