Afghanistan in the rear view mirror...

Devil Doc

Teufel Doc
5-Year Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2018
Messages
5,546
...but is it? I’m of two minds on our withdrawal. First, we should have been gone long ago. My son was in 8th grade on 9/11 and I was still on active duty. He has since spent a year in the ME as a Marine captain. A common story of military service in this country.

Second, some say Kabul will fall within a year. My prediction is it will fall before this year is over. I’m not worried about that country being the epicenter of terrorist strikes against the US. We have systems in place to take care of that, but still, I hate losing Bagram as a strategic location from which to conduct American/allied operations. But now that we’re gone, we should never go back.

 
I agree with you. We gave the Afghani people more than enough help to build their nation. If they do not want to fight for their own freedom, then we should not be doing it for them.

The test I always use for military intervention is “would I want my own son leading a platoon of Marines in that action?” In the case of any further involvement in Afghanistan, my answer is clearly “No!”

I understand that many or most of those who have served in Afghanistan do not want their service to have been in vain. I would say “hey we did our best.” And we respect and appreciate your sevice. It was a noble effort. But it is clear we do not have the resources to “build a nation” out of Afghanistan and it is time now to leave for good.
 
History has yet to find a foreign power that left Kabul in triumph. Back to the Greeks and Mongols, then to the Brits and Soviets, and now the U.S. — Afghanistan is called the “graveyard of empires” for a reason. Yet it will always be a strategic pivot point for competing interests. So sadly, I believe it will again figure into our national-security interests and actions. History, after all, has a way of repeating itself.
 
Just because the US is leaving Afghanistan doesn't mean that the service there was in vain. We tried to build a free society. That is never a wasted action.
It does have to be acknowledged that some cultures do not understand freedom in the same way that America or the American people do. Philosophy and culture run very deep in persons and societies. There is a reason why the effort to overturn the philosophy and culture of a land is called revolution.
 
I agree with you. We gave the Afghani people more than enough help to build their nation. If they do not want to fight for their own freedom, then we should not be doing it for them.

The test I always use for military intervention is “would I want my own son leading a platoon of Marines in that action?” In the case of any further involvement in Afghanistan, my answer is clearly “No!”

I understand that many or most of those who have served in Afghanistan do not want their service to have been in vain. I would say “hey we did our best.” And we respect and appreciate your sevice. It was a noble effort. But it is clear we do not have the resources to “build a nation” out of Afghanistan and it is time now to leave for good.
Just to highlight what one of the real issues here is the fact that just saying "The Afghani People" is somewhat misleading as Afghanistan is made up of so many very different peopleS who are just not willing to work together. I could compare it to the post Revolutionary War/pre Civil War USA where the different states were more like different nations except that Afghanistan has many more factions. For many of them, the immediate and lasting concern is their own area and they have little regard for other regions of the country. When we were fighting in Iraq, the family/clan structure was illuminating for many and Afghanistan is a larger reflection of that. We in the west often looked at the factions being Sunni vs Shia but on the ground, the family/clans such as the Tikriti (Saddam Hussein's power base) were of more import.
.
History has examples where diverse coalitions of groups grew to be somewhat cohesive such as the US but there are probably more examples where this did not happen such as Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union.
.
Bottom Line: I do not see a strong likelihood of Afghanistan pulling itself together in the near future and expect it to be a "failed state" for the mid and long terms. Kabul (the current government) will fall, it is only a question as to when.
 
Obviously, there is a sizeable percentage of the people who live in Afghanistan who want to live in a fundamentalist Islamic state and who support the Taliban and also a sizeable percentage who do not. The two groups will never reconcile. Thus, building a nation is impossible. However, Nation Building was never the direct reason for our original intervention. The reason for our original involvement was to deny Afghanistan as a base for terrorist operations. (Although unifying the country under a strong central gov’t was thought would help keep terrorists in check.)

As @DevilDoc points out, we have other means to protect ourself from terrorism that are less costly than by occupying Afghanistan. So continuing to have troops in Afghanistan does not serve any current U.S. interest. At least not worth the cost in lives and treasure.
 
Obviously, there is a sizeable percentage of the people who live in Afghanistan who want to live in a fundamentalist Islamic state and who support the Taliban and also a sizeable percentage who do not. The two groups will never reconcile. Thus, building a nation is impossible. However, Nation Building was never the direct reason for our original intervention. The reason for our original involvement was to deny Afghanistan as a base for terrorist operations. (Although unifying the country under a strong central gov’t was thought would help keep terrorists in check.)

As @DevilDoc points out, we have other means to protect ourself from terrorism that are less costly than by occupying Afghanistan. So continuing to have troops in Afghanistan does not serve any current U.S. interest. At least not worth the cost in lives and treasure.

Key question remains, why are some Afghans (Taliban) willing to fight and die for generations for their beliefs and other Afghans (our erstwhile allies) lacking in this?

Similar question existed in the Vietnam War, i.e. why weren't "our" Vietnamese as tough & tenacious as "their" Vietnamese?

If a government can only stand against the resistance of it's own people through the support of the US military then does it really deserve to exist at all?

As the year plays out look for Kabul to start to resemble Phnom Penh circa 1974-1975, i.e. refugees flock from the countryside to avoid the advancing insurgents whose ultimate victory seems inevitable. Let's just hope the Taliban 2.0 regime isn't as genocidal as were the Khmer Rouge.
 
Afghanistan is made up of so many very different peopleS who are just not willing to work together. I could compare it to the post Revolutionary War/pre Civil War USA where the different states were more like different nations except that Afghanistan has many more factions. For many of them, the immediate and lasting concern is their own area and they have little regard for other regions of the country. When we were fighting in Iraq, the family/clan structure was illuminating for many and Afghanistan is a larger reflection of that. We in the west often looked at the factions being Sunni vs Shia but on the ground, the family/clans such as the Tikriti (Saddam Hussein's power base) were of more import.
All of this is made worse by the fact, that each of the major ethnic groups (with the exception of the Hazara) has ethnic/linguistic/tribal connections across borders with nations, none which get along. To make matters worse, each of those countries is at best, unstable and at worst, a borderline failed state itself.

History has examples where diverse coalitions of groups grew to be somewhat cohesive such as the US but there are probably more examples where this did not happen such as Yugoslavia, Czechoslovakia and the Soviet Union.
So true. Like Afghanistan and Iraq, each was an artificial construct.

Bottom Line: I do not see a strong likelihood of Afghanistan pulling itself together in the near future and expect it to be a "failed state" for the mid and long terms. Kabul (the current government) will fall, it is only a question as to when.
Bottom Bottomline: Afghanistan is Natural Resource rich. China has much experience in resource development in poor countries through their Belt and Road Initiative. Most important, the Chinese government doesn’t care about human rights.

In any event, it is very sad for those Afghanis who aspired for little more than an education and an opportunity for a marginally better life.

On a side note: I first met Mrs cb7893 at a party in my dorm in Krakow, Poland in the fall of 1978. She and a male protector had spent the previous summer traveling to Asia. After flying to Baku, they travelled overland to No. India, through Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan. This was a path, well beaten by Polish kids, because they could trade their way from the USSR to India and load up on things that folks wanted back home. One of her strongest impressions was of how many Russians there were in Kabul and how easy it was to communicate in the bazaars. There had been a Soviet backed Coup the previous Spring and the Russians had embarked on their lastest quest for a warm weather port. It took about 5 min. for me to see, that this was the girl for me—which ended up being the case.

In that short period of time between that summer and when we met in the fall, the Shah was deposed, the Soviets were pouring into Afghanistan and bundles of US national security resources were being showered on the Pakistani ISI. I remember the future Mrs cb7893 looking at her traveling companion and saying, “Andrzej, we were really lucky to go when we did.”
 
We accomplished our military objectives in Afghanistan fairly quickly - eliminating terrorist training camps.

After that, someone came up with the idea of nation-building, but never came up with an explanation of how we could succeed when so many others failed. Whether a noble endeavor or stupid idea, if you can't build a nation in five years, it's time to go. 20 years? That's lunacy.
 
HUBRIS!
 

Attachments

  • the ultimate of technology.jpg
    the ultimate of technology.jpg
    8.6 KB · Views: 28
  • OIP (2).jpg
    OIP (2).jpg
    16.1 KB · Views: 28
  • E4nECoYXMAINylM.jpeg
    E4nECoYXMAINylM.jpeg
    155.1 KB · Views: 28
We accomplished our military objectives in Afghanistan fairly quickly - eliminating terrorist training camps.

After that, someone came up with the idea of nation-building, but never came up with an explanation of how we could succeed when so many others failed. Whether a noble endeavor or stupid idea, if you can't build a nation in five years, it's time to go. 20 years? That's lunacy.
Honestly, I would love an audit of the expenditures.
 
I agree with the sentiments of other posters. I don't think we can want something for another nation's citizens more than they want it for themselves. Whatever that 'it' is, freedom, democracy, education for women, protection of civil rights etc.

I do worry about the mineral resources that others (not our allies) will take and use. The core samples of very desirable minerals indicate huge ore deposits. Someone (China) will take advantage of that. Whether they use those resources to gain greater advantage militarily or economically could be a problem.

The thought of the Taliban raising Hell all over the country and instilling their terror on the Afghani people makes me sick. But we cannot possibly be expected to stay and sacrifice indefinitely when they cannot seem to invest in their own freedom and future.
 
What i dont understand is how the Afgan military which has had US support and training for 15 years or more just lies down with the Taliban shows up. I mean they have superior training (i assume) and superior weapons over the Taliban and it just seems that the Taliban just rolls over them. I even understand the Afgan forces losing, but they don't seem to be putting up any fight. We had to send out B-52 bombers to the ME to protect US troops as they started leaving because Afgan troops couldn't protect the US troops backs as they left
 
It must be a numbers game. There just aren’t enough people who want to fight against the Taliban.

It’s a shame that all the effort we put into that country not to mention the lives lost appears to have been in vain. But for anyone who thinks we are pulling out too fast, the rapid takeover by the Taliban just goes to show that if we could not help them build a nation in 20 years it would never have happened matter how long we stayed.

My only regret is that we did not do more to pull out the people who helped us. It would’ve required bringing out tens of thousands. That’s OK and it would’ve taken time, but we should’ve planned for it and we did not. It is shameful how this exit is going down.
 
Biden said the withdrawal was unconditional. and in war, you never do anything unconditionally, except when demanding a surrender.
Besides, I think it was pretty tone deaf to set a deadline of 9/11 for the troop withdrawal. leaving a country that houses those same mfers (thereby letting them regain control), and using that date as a pretext for success?
The administration tried to score political points, and well, it was mucho stupid on their part.
Expect some sort of significant re-intervention, by the middle of next year (if not sooner).
 
Back
Top