Pulling out of Afghanistan

Announcing a 50% withdrawal of US troops while American negotiators are set to meet with Taliban representatives for peace talks is insane.

Imagine if Eisenhower in 1953, while US & allies were negotiating with North Korea/China at Panmunjun, announced the US was withdrawing 50% of troops from South Korea, implying the rest would soon follow 'cause the US can't be the world's policeman? It's the same thing in 2018. A disaster.

I imagine those scheduled negotiations with the Taliban won't last long. Why would they bother? Once the US leaves for good we can expect a Taliban offensive which gives them near-total power as they enjoyed pre-9/11. The horror which awaits Kabul is going to make the Khmer Rouge rule look like a summer picnic.

I never thought isolationism and the US abandonment of all if its allies would occur, at least in my lifetime. It's now happening in real time.

"Leader of the Free World" is one of those expressions, like "British Empire", which belongs to the history books.
 
Day-Tripper said:
Announcing a 50% withdrawal of US troops while American negotiators are set to meet with Taliban representatives for peace talks is insane.

Imagine if Eisenhower in 1953, while US & allies were negotiating with North Korea/China at Panmunjun, announced the US was withdrawing 50% of troops from South Korea, implying the rest would soon follow 'cause the US can't be the world's policeman? It's the same thing in 2018. A disaster.

I imagine those scheduled negotiations with the Taliban won't last long. Why would they bother? Once the US leaves for good we can expect a Taliban offensive which gives them near-total power as they enjoyed pre-9/11. The horror which awaits Kabul is going to make the Khmer Rouge rule look like a summer picnic.

I never thought isolationism and the US abandonment of all if its allies would occur, at least in my lifetime. It's now happening in real time.

"Leader of the Free World" is one of those expressions, like "British Empire", which belongs to the history books.
Click to expand...

I thought Trump’s big issue on the campaign was that he wouldn’t announce military strategy to our enemies anyway?
 
The Leader of the Free World title comes with responsibilities. Many have called for the end of the aircraft carrier. Many cite that the US spends more per percentage of GDP than the next (?) number of countries combined. Keeping the sea lanes open is vital to world commerce. Carriers put steel target at a moments notice. There’s a reason that when the world erupts in crisis, presidents ask, where is the nearest carrier? Comparing US military spending to other countries military spending is like comparing our healthcare to Japan’s. Worthless. Pulling out of just about anywhere now would be disastrous.
 
TeddyPlus4 said:
@tug_boat I understand your perspective but this will likely result in terrorism growing in the area (and US) and a bigger war later.
Click to expand...

The Taliban doesn't have an Air Force, they don't have a Navy, they don't have cruise missiles, they fight us wearing penny loafers. Most terror attacks within US soil has been conducted by home grown citizens with an underlying mental health issue. When you look at the terrorism in other countries its been home grown by first generation migrants. The ideology is already here in our citizens.

When the Obama administration in 2015 closed 15 US bases throughout Europe everyone said Putin will have no resistance to annex whatever he wanted in Europe. It never happened. Putin controls Germany by energy contracts and other parts of Europe.

Afghanistan citizens have no idea what democracy is and really don't care. They only care about putting food on the table through their religious belief system.

Your life is in more danger at a Waffle House in downtown New Orleans.

Push Hard, Press Forward

PS......I apologize to Waffle House and the good folks in New Orleans
 
Those 15 European bases were open in March 2014 & Putin annexed the Crimea anyway so they didn't matter. And Louisiana is open carry! Just my 2 cents.
 
tug_boat said:
TeddyPlus4 said:
@tug_boat I understand your perspective but this will likely result in terrorism growing in the area (and US) and a bigger war later.
Click to expand...

The Taliban doesn't have an Air Force, they don't have a Navy, they don't have cruise missiles, they fight us wearing penny loafers. Most terror attacks within US soil has been conducted by home grown citizens with an underlying mental health issue. When you look at the terrorism in other countries its been home grown by first generation migrants. The ideology is already here in our citizens.

When the Obama administration in 2015 closed 15 US bases throughout Europe everyone said Putin will have no resistance to annex whatever he wanted in Europe. It never happened. Putin controls Germany by energy contracts and other parts of Europe.

Afghanistan citizens have no idea what democracy is and really don't care. They only care about putting food on the table through their religious belief system.

Your life is in more danger at a Waffle House in downtown New Orleans.

Push Hard, Press Forward

PS......I apologize to Waffle House and the good folks in New Orleans
Click to expand...

The US walked away from Afghanistan in 1990 and later regretted it. The Taliban took over the country in 1996 (capturing the president of that nation, put into power by the Soviets, and skinning him alive) & welcomed in every Sunni militant group to set up camp. We then got the 1998 embassy bombings, the 2000 attack on the USS Cole & 2001 air hijacking attacks.

Once the US retreats from Afghanistan, the Taliban will roar back into Kabul & party like it's 1996 all over again. What happens then? US launches another invasion, like it's 2002 all over again, starting from scratch? How many locals are going to risk their lives helping Uncle Sam? What if Pakistan closes the air corridors to US flights? What kind of international coalition will sign up to help the US? Will the 2001-2018 US-Afghan War (or whatever historians will call it) end in humiliating withdrawal by the US, with our 4,000 dead all losing their lives in vain?

The war effort against ISIS in Syria & Iraq over the last four years was a success, though an incomplete one. Now its all thrown away.

The war effort against the Taliban in Afghanistan was less so, but a long way from being a defeat. Now it's going to be a replay of the 1975 Saigon evacuation, only the Viet Cong didn't harbor anti-US terrorist groups aiming to blow up New York & LA while we know that's exactly the game plan of the Taliban.

When did military evacuations in the face of the enemy become sound foreign policy?
 
Wishful said:
Those 15 European bases were open in March 2014 & Putin annexed the Crimea anyway so they didn't matter. And Louisiana is open carry! Just my 2 cents.
Click to expand...

The US had a half million troops, 1000 tanks and a sizeable nuclear deterrent throughout western and southern Europe 1956 and again in 1968, but that didn't stop the Russians from invading Hungary and Czechoslovakia, respectively, and overthrowing governments they didn't like. Russia today keeps troops in Georgia, Armenia, Moldova, Ukraine and elsewhere, sometimes against the will of those countries. US does nothing about it.

Likewise, even at their peak strength, the Soviets never lifted a finger to oppose US military actions in the Dominican Republic in 1965 or Panama in 1989, not to mention the CIA overthrowing governments in Guatemala in 1953 or Chile in 1973 or any of myriad of actions in the western hemisphere.

Spheres of influence are real things.

So is avoiding nuclear conflict.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top