Given that President Joe Biden is feverishly reversing almost every policy of President Donald J. Trump, I’m saddened he is following Trump’s foolish policy of abandoning Afghanistan on a day announced to our adversaries.
I know this is a devisive subject.
Avoiding the phrase that was turned against President George W. Bush, Biden basically claimed “mission accomplished” when he said we had pushed out the Taliban, the administration that protected Al-Qaeda that had launched the devastating 9/11 attack on America, and broken up the Caliphate.
First, the Caliphate was taken down on Trump’s watch. He gets credit for that, as President Barack Obama gets the credit for killing mass murderer Osama bin Laden.
The part about having driven out the Taliban, just who does he think is relentlessly marching forward in the hinterlands?
The Afghan army is 300,000 armed with modern weapons, said Biden, opposing 75,000 insurgents.
Many in the Afghan army are surrendering those modern weapons when they face combat with the Taliban, who are religious fanatics happy to die for their cause. I suspect many in the Afghan army figure — what the hell if these guys are in charge? If women don’t go to school or work, do I really care? No, I don’t. Here’s my AR-15, can I go home now?
Here’s my over/under: Labor Day. Do you think the Taliban will have taken Afghanistan back by then?
When it does, that sinks Biden’s No. 1 cheerful assessment. After 20 years and maybe $3 trillion, the same blagards will be in control.
You may ask, if the Afghans don’t care, why should we?
That is a fair question and I can answer only by saying the strong — us — have a moral obligation to protect the weak, the half of Afghanistan that is not male.
Please do not use as an argument that this has been our longest war. That is a meaningless measure. Ask about achievement. As long as we are there, we prevent a Taliban takeover. When we leave, it is inevitable. A debacle will follow.
World War II ended in 1945. We still have troops in Germany, Japan, and about 100 other nations. Why? To keep the peace.
And it works.
Biden asked now long we should keep our sons and daughters in Afghanistan. As long as it takes, as in Germany and Japan. We lost 10 soldiers in Afghanistan in 2020, only 4 in combat. We mourn each loss, but these numbers are extremely small.
Under pressure to be out of there, Obama pulled troops out of Iraq, pretty much setting off an insurgent offense that had to be countered by a return of troops. (Obama was following a withdrawal timetable laid down by President Bush.)
And here we go again.
Biden said he has confidence in the Afghan army. Based on what — the number of green on blue attacks? (Those are attacks by Afghan military on Allied forces.)
Biden is either criminally optimistic, or just plain lying.
And in the waning days of our involvement there — initially to end on the insanely tone deaf chosen date of 9/11 — we have made a vague promise to extract Afghan natives who supported us — as translators, drivers, administrators, or staff.
Biden says he wants to, but needs Congress to rewrite some laws.
Mr. President, if you are allowing tens of thousands of unproven “asylum seekers” into this nation at our southern border, you can get our Afghan friends to a friendly Mideast country, or perhaps to a territory like Guam, to await vetting.
C’mon, man.
Ask yourself what your military veteran son Beau would do.
HAPPY SATURDAY !!!
pallie,
There you go again. Writing words of wisdom. Preaching to the choir. Trying to make some sense of all of this.
Many times, I have said, if the world wants us to be the peacekeepers, pay us, then shut your collective mouths and get out of the way. This war has been seen on television, but it certainly is not a movie script. John Wayne is not in a starring roll, only to die as a soldier and resurrect as a pilot, to die and resurrect again. The results are real. We see it in everyday life. People get maimed . Physically and mentally. That’s called the horrors of war. From my experience, when you got at it half hearted, you pay an even high price to accomplish your goal.
As you pointed out. After the previous wars, we stayed where we invaded. We turned to humanitarian resources and efforts while keeping the peace. The middle ease, more than anywhere else is a must for occupation. Those tribes have been fighting with or against each other since the dawn of time. Of course they will pick up right where they left off.
There is no easy solution, only commitment.
Tony
It is a tough call and I don’t know who the “choir” is in this case.
Stu,
First, it’s a shame that there is not an edit button to push. I see some ( more ) mistakes in my reply.
even high price should be ‘higher’ . middle ease, obviously not ease but EAST.
And as the saying goes. We, your followers are the choir.
Tony
I, too, wish for an edit button, but we can read through typos.
This is a mixed choir, and not everyone is open to the same page in the hymnal.
Yo, Stu, that was one sharp ending with that last sentence (regarding son Beau), not that it wasn’t deserved.
Regarding our nearly 80 year post WW2 commitment to Germany and Japan as well as a host of other smaller countries – there is one big difference between those still-protected countries and Afghanistan – the still protected countries are (a) highly industrialized (for the most part), and (b) not run by a religious extreme.
All your points, good and bad, are well taken. But for us to keep troops there, with the only practical result being to keep the Taliban on the outer fringes of the country – that does require some deeper consideration.
Generally, I’m with you. I think a troop contingent should be kept there to keep at least some semblance of “normal” life going on. But with a government that is so corrupt, and that cannot be “trained” (like the troops are), then it does give pause to the whole of being there.
I freely acknowledge the down side of staying there. There is no easy right or wrong.
I may be wrong but at one time did our Government tell us that when we came to the aid of whoever was in charge at that time that we would pay for the war with oil and other minerals in the country. Two-point two trillion dollars later all we have to show is a resurgence of a religious fanatical group who were in charge when we first jumped in to allegedly save a country after Russia failed. We entered a culture, not a country that for thousands of years has crawled into a mostly illiterate society that answers to Allah and not any outside country. The question to me is simple: Does our presence in any way show the progress that in the future they could become a stable independent country contributing to the world at large or will they remain illiterate, Islamic controlled hoping that our influence can teach and motivate enough to make a difference. I would agree with keeping a presence there for the purpose of saving lives and the empowerment of women but a continued loss of American lives will be a mandate for whoever is President to pull out.
Our presence there has made it possible for women to be emancipated and educated, for kites to fly, for music to play.
Is that “enough”? That is a question for individuals to answer. I say “yes.”
d’accord, and you could argue it was a short war followed by a 20-yr occupation
Good one, but not occupation as we are there with permission of the government.
I forgot to add earlier….
Iran is now in a strange panic over this. To wit: They want the U.S. out of the area, AND they are at total odds with the Taliban because of religious differences. And now the Taliban have just captured a key outpost at the Afgan/Iran border.
What to do? What to do? How do you want to place your bets regarding how soon we’ll be back there?
That is my fear, as happened in Iraq, due to a withdrawal made for political reasons rather than military.
This is a country that has been at war since Kublai Khan and the golden horde.At some point a country must rise up on their own and overthrow these religious fanatics destroying the country.We never should have been there in the first place and should have left at least 15 years ago.With Marxism taking over our own country and all our other domestic problems we can no longer afford to be policeman of the world.
Our entry was to go after al-Qaeda, being protected by the Taliban. So we should have let al-Qaeda get away with the attack?
Thank you. Your points and position are mine exactly.
If I am not mistaken, there is a 5,000 year summery of the endless wars in that area. It’s called The Old Testament. If it hasn’t happened in 5,000 years,
chances are it ain’t gonna happen in our lifetime.
Save those unfortunate people that have put their lives in the greatest jeopardy; bring them to the USA to be processed legally as citizens!! Don’t make the same mistakes as we did in Vietnam.
And, just maybe, these folks will someday be able to go back as missionaries to educate the opposition little by little…pipe dreams, I guess, but we can pray.
Thank you, Stu, for your always good and rational ideas! I wish that our current leaders would read your blog!
We should have never gone into Afghanistan (or Iraq for that matter) as “nation builders.” I don’t quibble with going there to take out Bin Laden and his people (who were actually in our “ally” Pakistan), but history has shown that large empires (USA, USSR, Britain and before them probably a few others) can’t govern there without committing atrocities. It’s the “asshole of the world” and the sooner we get out and let them live in the 15th century, the better. If I had a 20-something year old offspring in the military would I feel proud that they died fighting for the people of Afghanistan? Likely not. That being said, the interpreters and other people who have assisted us over the past 20 years ought to be given at least a temporary if not permanent US residency status. Once that country falls back under complete control of the Taliban in the next year or so their future will not be very bright. We saw the same with the influx of “boat people” out of Vietnam in the 1970’s.
Like Tricky Dick said after he pulled us out of Vietnam, “Peace with honor”.