Jump to content

World Politics / Affairs Thread


mtutiger
 Share

Recommended Posts

56 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

this is what it all comes down to. I've been reading stuff from Cordesman and CSIS for a number of years and he has consistently hit on the fact that DOD had long since gone into hunker down mode, cutting off all information flow required for the public to see the real situation beyond the ever sunny just around the next corner about to be turned narrative.

I give Biden a lot of credit for being able to look the US defense and FP establishment in the eye and say "the Emperor has no cloths here." Unlike Obama, Biden's been listening to the Generals and the neo-cons  for too many years not to see through the shtick.

As was posted earlier (Rob?), even Johnson knew at heart that he was being lied to about VN but he didn't have the balls to pull the plug because he was too afraid of the blowback - and even then it wouldn't have been public political blow back as much as the tsk'ing from the Washingtion Chattering Class of FP and defense 'professionals.'  The same scowling and tsk'ing we are getting now from guys like Kagan and Patreus. EDIT: also Thiessen apparently.

A lot of the uproar of this needs to be segregated out based on whether it pertains to how the departure is occurring versus the overall policy / choice of staying or leaving.

The Biden Administration, I suspect, will be asked a lot of questions about how they planned the departure, as they should. That is important. Full transparency, regardless of the politics.

But out of this, we really need to have a broader conversation about how, after upwards of 20 years, a military that we trained and supplied weapons with basically folded with almost no resistance. That's a global error that spans administrations... probably back to the very decision to enter Afghanistan to begin with. And it makes me worry about the credibility that our military leaders have when they make their judgments...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BetMGM Michigan $600 Risk-Free bet

BetMGM Michigan Sports Betting
Michigan online sports betting is now available! Start betting at BetMGM Michigan now and get a $600 risk-free bet bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan Now

5 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

A lot of the uproar of this needs to be segregated out based on whether it pertains to how the departure is occurring versus the overall policy / choice of staying or leaving.

The Biden Administration, I suspect, will be asked a lot of questions about how they planned the departure, as they should. That is important. Full transparency, regardless of the politics.

But out of this, we really need to have a broader conversation about how, after upwards of 20 years, a military that we trained and supplied weapons with basically folded with almost no resistance. That's a global error that spans administrations... probably back to the very decision to entire Afghanistan to begin with.

I think any hand wringing over the withdrawal will be overdone. 'Orderly withdrawal' is an oxymoron for a collapsing army. There was no kind of planning that could have fixed this. If anything the fact that the US has not been caught with numbers of US troops or dependents on the wrong side of the line or under fire argues that they planned pretty well for exactly what did happen even if they never admitted it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I think any hand wringing over the withdrawal will be overdone. 'Orderly withdrawal' is an oxymoron for a collapsing army. There was no kind of planning that could have fixed this. If anything the fact that the US has not been caught with numbers of US troops or dependents on the wrong side of the line or under fire argues that they planned pretty well for exactly what did happen even if they never admitted it.

We were told about a week ago that it was about 30 days out that Kabul would fall. And then it fell today.

I would like to know why the administration told us that. What they were going off of

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, mtutiger said:

We were told about a week ago that it was about 30 days out that Kabul would fall. And then it fell today.

I would like to know why the administration told us that. What they were going off of

The problem is the premise of the statement. Afghanistan and Kabul did not fall. Fall implies they were in some way being held up and has been a terribly misleading word use by the media. There has not been a fall, there has hardly been even anything you could call a battle anywhere. The Afghan 'government' and its 'defense forces' simply dissolved themselves. If anyone believes that anyone in the Pentagon was willing to have stated clearly to anyone in the Admin that that was what was going to happen (while simultaneously arguing that we should stay because we could make these forces into something.....not much contradictory?) they really need to study the history of the US government since WWII. And to be honest. it was probably beyond the imagination - or probably the better word being self-delusion, of the people within DOD running the policy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, mtutiger said:

We were told about a week ago that it was about 30 days out that Kabul would fall. And then it fell today.

I would like to know why the administration told us that. What they were going off of

I think it's probably because they believed it. I think it's likely that every western government did - otherwise they wouldn't all be scrabbling around trying to get their people out of there.

I know it's crap, but I think everyone expected the Afghan army to put up more of a fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Blue Square Thing said:

I think it's probably because they believed it. I think it's likely that every western government did - otherwise they wouldn't all be scrabbling around trying to get their people out of there.

I know it's crap, but I think everyone expected the Afghan army to put up more of a fight.

"More" is doing a lot of heavy lifting here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Blue Square Thing said:

I think it's probably because they believed it. I think it's likely that every western government did - otherwise they wouldn't all be scrabbling around trying to get their people out of there.

I know it's crap, but I think everyone expected the Afghan army to put up more of a fight.

It goes back to US obfuscation. The reality is that there were never more than a couple of brigades of Afghan special forces that ever actually fought anyone as cohesive independent units. What was generally passed off as the illusion of the Afghan army "fighting" was the US Air force pummeling any major Taliban force to dust if they got within range of Afghan forces.

Despite the supposed 'learning of lessons' by US DOD after VN, the real lesson that needed to be learned was by US Civilian leadership that DOD reporting from the field is not to be trusted and that lesson was apparently not learned very well at all, other than by Biden and oddly enough, intuited by Trump.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, Buddha said:

i guess as long as you consider the united states to be a "problematic democracy" for most of its history too, lol.

It most definitely has been. The rights of entire classes of people were long considered fungible and subject to the whim of the majority. It’s because that idea has been so long embedded in the DNA of huge swaths of America that such a high percentage of people in this country is now eager to replace electoral democracy with autocratic statist rule.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, chasfh said:

It most definitely has been. The rights of entire classes of people were long considered fungible and subject to the whim of the majority. It’s because that idea has been so long embedded in the DNA of huge swaths of America that such a high percentage of people in this county are now eager to replace electoral democracy with autocratic statist rule.

which some deranged minority attributes to religious authority. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

 

good take on the personal side. I think that same issue plays with the US commanders in the field and some of the people they have worked with. I'm sure there were a few good officers in the Afghan corps at the level of interface with US commanders, but there was never anything of substance below them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the other thing to note is that how fast the Taliban took over and how fast the US got out were always going to be directly tied together. It was our pace that dictated their pace. If we had been pulling people out faster (or slower), the Taliban simply also would have been moving faster. That's why the level of chaos at the end was always going to look the same, whether on a slower or faster schedule. The Taliban were never going to leave a buffer zone for the sake of the US's Afghan allies in time or space between where we left and where they filled.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I stay out of foreign affairs but my take on afghanistan is we went in because we "had to do something", then we just stuck around for 20 years because no President wanted what happened this weekend to happen on their watch.  It would have happened.  

Fox News is all over it but I have to imagine if this took place a year ago they'd be talking about Portland or Chicago or some crazy professor somewhere that asked their students what their name would be if they transitioned.

and I'm sure there'd be an element of Both Sidesing it from MSNBC and CNN.... 

at some point we had to put the arm back in the socket and it was going to hurt.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gehringer_2 said:

I think the other thing to note is that how fast the Taliban took over and how fast the US got out were always going to be directly tied together. It was our pace that dictated their pace. If we had been pulling people out faster (or slower), the Taliban simply also would have been moving faster. That's why the level of chaos at the end was always going to look the same, whether on a slower or faster schedule. The Taliban were never going to leave a buffer zone for the sake of the US's Afghan allies in time or space between where we left and where they filled.

and other point - the Taliban also had their own imperatives for staying right on our heals because they didn't want to leave any vacuums for tribal Warlords to organize themselves into before the Taliban could grab the local levers of power.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Oblong said:

I stay out of foreign affairs but my take on afghanistan is we went in because we "had to do something", then we just stuck around for 20 years because no President wanted what happened this weekend to happen on their watch.  It would have happened.  

What really fries me watching a lot of the reaction to this is that what is occurring right now appears, for some, to be an argument for staying even longer term in Afghanistan. 

Again, there are legitimate questions about whether the departure has been handled in the best way possible.... God knows there are going to be a lot of hearings and questions asked. And probably books written about the chaos on the ground as well.

But I'm not sure how anyone could look at this and come away with the conclusion that staying longer was the right move.... if anything, it sort of validates both Biden and Trump and their skepticism of being committed long term to this fight. And I say this as someone who has been pretty deferential to the military on this question for a long time.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Oblong said:

I stay out of foreign affairs but my take on afghanistan is we went in because we "had to do something", then we just stuck around for 20 years because no President wanted what happened this weekend to happen on their watch.  It would have happened.

 

12 minutes ago, mtutiger said:

But I'm not sure how anyone could look at this and come away with the conclusion that staying longer was the right move.... if anything, it sort of validates both Biden and Trump and their skepticism of being committed long term to this fight.

QFT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

One other thing you can probably count on, Biden is going to clean house on the sections of DOD and State that were telling him what has happened wasn't going to. 

That's another reason you can count on a lot of self-serving narratives being fed the press as these folks try to create softer landings for themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

one of the few things Trump got right was getting out. Now, he came to correct conclusion for all the wrong reasons (no way to monetize the situation to his benefit).

but Biden had the guts to do what Obama and Trump did not: get out and pay the political price for getting out.

all the people who said W and Chaney and Rumsfeld were full for sh|t and we should have never stayed were correct.

- someone pointed out that the US could have given every Afgani a suitcase with $1,000,000.00* US - and it would have cost us less.

EDIT: $100k per Afghani is $3.8T, so $1M is an exaggeration

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


Michigan Sports Betting Offer

Michigan launched online sports betting and casino apps on Friday, January 22, 2021. We have selected the top Michigan sportsbooks and casinos that offer excellent bonus offers. Terms and conditions apply.

BetRivers Michigan - Get a 100% up to $250 deposit bonus at their online sportsbook & casino.

Click Here to claim $250 deposit bonus at BetRivers Michigan For Signing Up Now

FanDuel Michigan - Get a $1,000 risk-free bet at FanDuel Michigan on your first bet.

Click Here to claim $1,000 Risk-Free Bet at FanDuel Michigan

BetMGM Michigan - Get a $600 risk-free bet at the BetMGM online casino & sportsbook

Click Here to claim $600 risk-free bet at BetMGM Michigan

   


  • Forum Statistics

    • Total Topics
      97.1k
    • Total Posts
      3.1m
  • Who's Online (See full list)

    There are no registered users currently online

  • Upcoming Events

    No upcoming events found
×
×
  • Create New...