US withdrawal from Afghanistan - your thoughts?

[Lethaface]

I'm thinking about

Really, it seems the only one way to stand against an insurgency, and it's always ineffective.

The arabian invaders in the Middleage lost their religious passion very soon.
The communist regime in Russia was an outlaw only in first several years, then it evolved and became a full participant of foreign relations.

Every revolution has its end. The question is, will it be killed (like ISIS) or die itself (like USSR and, maybe in future, Taliban?).

In my memory the only long term 'successful' interventions / occupations by a foreign power are those where the original population is 'replaced' by newcomers (usually goes with massacres, also more a thing of the past fortunately), or where the occupiers remain on station for decades. For Afghanistan from what I have learned, much power is still in tribal hands. Or in other words local/regional 'warlords' who have control over the (limited) means of productions.

Until enough wealth and power is in the hands of the 'middle class' and they can get organized with rule of law that is actually enforced and righteous / inclusive for most people, the Taliban might be only tangible group which can provide some form of stability.

 

[Bulletpoint]

I would like to know if and to what extent the Taliban is a sock puppet of Pakistan.

 

[Lethaface]

I would like to know if and to what extent the Taliban is a sock puppet of Pakistan.

Some backgrounds. I think the answer is a bit more complex than a yes or no, but definitely there are some shared interests and connections.

The ISI and Terrorism: Behind the Accusations

Pakistan’s intelligence agency, the ISI, faces persistent accusations of links to terrorism, despite repeated denials.

www.cfr.org

https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/117472/DP%2018.pdf

 

[Bulletpoint]

Was 09/11 the real reason for the intervention, or only an excuse?

There was a lot of outrage after 9/11, and a demand that the people behind it be brought to justice and/or killed. I don't see how any US president could ignore that demand.

Also, I wonder what the real reason would be for invading Afghanistan, if not for the stated purpose?

Maybe expecting to turn the country quickly into a strong US ally in the region and split and isolate Iran and Pakistan?

I don't think the US was so naive as to think they could turn Afghanistan from a oppressive tribal militia hell into a stable democracy that quickly.

 

[Lethaface]

I don't think the US was so naive as to think they could turn Afghanistan from a oppressive tribal militia hell into a stable democracy that quickly.

Like others said, what else have they been doing all that time?
Many other countries were involved in Afghanistan to help build the state on request of the USA. For example our military and police had a mission to train the Afghan military and police forces.

I understand Biden now wanting to save face telling that 'building a democracy was never a goal', but it sure looked like they were trying to do so. He would have been stronger, at least to me, if he'd just admit that they tried but failed to create something durable and made the decision to pull the plug on the 'project'. It won't make much difference for those involved, they are left bungling in between worlds. At least it would have been honest.

He is probably right though that staying another 5 years wouldn't have changed much.

 

[Bulletpoint]

Like others said, what else have they been doing all that time?
Many other countries were involved in Afghanistan to help build the state on request of the USA. For example our military and police had a mission to train the Afghan military and police forces.

I don't doubt that they have been trying, but I think mostly it has been to try to save face. It would have been a public relations disaster if they had left after a couple of years leaving Afghanistan in chaos and ruins. People would have said "why didn't you try?" Now on the eve of the 20 years anniversary, they can say: We tried.

 

[Lethaface]

I don't doubt that they have been trying, but I think mostly it has been to try to save face. It would have been a public relations disaster if they had left after a couple of years leaving Afghanistan in chaos and ruins. People would have said "why didn't you try?" Now on the eve of the 20 years anniversary, they can say: We tried.

Fair point.

 

[A Canadian Cat]

Now that the Taliban has taken over again, I wonder how many US supplied weapons fell into their hands? And what kinds?

I saw a news report showing a Taliban helicopter flying and my first reaction was "what they don't have people with the training to get one of those off the ground" but then I realized it just they guy trained by NATO trainers who is now working with the Taliban. F'ing hell. The only silver lining is they will not be able to get parts - maybe?

 

[A Canadian Cat]

In my memory the only long term 'successful' interventions / occupations by a foreign power are those where the original population is 'replaced' by newcomers

It can work when the population actually wants to be "liberated" Kosovo is an example. Yes, I am aware that things are not perfect and there are lots of people opposed but that's life where free speech is allowed.

 

[A Canadian Cat]

I don't doubt that they have been trying, but I think mostly it has been to try to save face. It would have been a public relations disaster if they had left after a couple of years leaving Afghanistan in chaos and ruins. People would have said "why didn't you try?" Now on the eve of the 20 years anniversary, they can say: We tried.

Indeed. Also the calculus could have been different if Bin Laden and Mohammed Omar were killed or captured within the initial invasion. It could have allowed a moment of we did what was needed now we are out. I am not sure if that would have happend because I think we might be forgetting the public pressure to help the Afghani people. I remember when I was younger stories and petitions about the treatment of people in Afghanistan by the Taliban. There are a lot of gen Xers who grew up hearing about the appalling treatment of human beings perpetrated by the Taliban. There was a lot of pressure there to fix things since the invasion was already a reality.

 

[Stafford]

This is worth watching. Also incredibly depressing but demonstrates a lot about why this happened.

 

[Rico]

It can work when the population actually wants to be "liberated" Kosovo is an example. Yes, I am aware that things are not perfect and there are lots of people opposed but that's life where free speech is allowed.

Problem is age old structure and geography of Aghanistan ... as much as urban and valley folk would like to liberate and move into the 21st Century (but with a corrupt client state govt in charge that's always problematic) -- if you have a the highly-motivated bandit hill tribes (and a willing recruiting pool) with medieval ideology which are impossible to suppress (without a completely genocidal campaign... and then only marginally possible) -- it's pretty much insoluble. One thing the Taliban have in all the world is: time... lots of it. They would outlast anybody.

 

[Lethaface]

This is worth watching. Also incredibly depressing but demonstrates a lot about why this happened.

watched this back in the day but indeed well worth a watch.

 

[Sgt Joch]

The problem with the war is that no one was ever willing to put in what was required to really transform the country into some western-lite clone. Early on, every one was saying you would need 500,000 ground troops to provide security and trillions of dollars to rebuild the infrastructure, economy, govt institutions, education system, etc. Of course, no NATO country was willing to come even close to that.

So for the past 20 years, US/NATO has just been trying to get by with the minimum, which was just enough to keep the place from blowing, while pretending everything was fine and there was nothing to worry about.

Best example is Opium. Local farmers switched to Opium production during the 80s when they needed quick cash to finance the Taliban war against the Russkies. In 2001 when the U.S. invaded, Afghanistan was supplying 90-95% of the world's Opium/Heroin demand. At one point, there was talk of helping local farmers to grow other crops and subsidizing the difference, but the cost would have beeen enormous and there was the additional problem that most rural areas were contested. Fast forward 20 years during which most of Afghanistan was supposedly under government/NATO control. in 2021, Afghanistan is still supplying 90-95% of the world's Opium/Heroin demand, most of which is grown in areas controlled by the Taliban. The profits of the sale of Opium are one of the main sources of financing for the Taliban.

U.S./NATO should have left years ago.

 

[Meat Grinder]

We are now witnessing what is arguably the worst example of a "superpower" troop withdrawal.....ever. Whether or not the U.S./NATO had any real mission or reason to occupy Afghanistan these past decades is debatable. The withdrawal itself has been a fucking disaster of epic proportions.

 

[Lethaface]

The problem with the war is that no one was ever willing to put in what was required to really transform the country into some western-lite clone. Early on, every one was saying you would need 500,000 ground troops to provide security and trillions of dollars to rebuild the infrastructure, economy, govt institutions, education system, etc. Of course, no NATO country was willing to come even close to that.

So for the past 20 years, US/NATO has just been trying to get by with the minimum, which was just enough to keep the place from blowing, while pretending everything was fine and there was nothing to worry about.

Best example is Opium. Local farmers switched to Opium production during the 80s when they needed quick cash to finance the Taliban war against the Russkies. In 2001 when the U.S. invaded, Afghanistan was supplying 90-95% of the world's Opium/Heroin demand. At one point, there was talk of helping local farmers to grow other crops and subsidizing the difference, but the cost would have beeen enormous and there was the additional problem that most rural areas were contested. Fast forward 20 years during which most of Afghanistan was supposedly under government/NATO control. in 2021, Afghanistan is still supplying 90-95% of the world's Opium/Heroin demand, most of which is grown in areas controlled by the Taliban. The profits of the sale of Opium are one of the main sources of financing for the Taliban.

U.S./NATO should have left years ago.

One could argue that if the 'sponsor(s)' of the project weren't willing to come up with the required investment, it shouldn't even have been started. Obviously plenty did argue that back when and or arguing about it now. Media will seek to blame the whole thing on someone who is in power now, because that's how it works.
Without getting into politics or blaming, these events are also why I'm personally against almost all interventions (the exception being for example bombing IS, however without earlier interventions that problem probably wouldn't have existed at all). Even if, and I'm not saying that's always the case, interventions are done for all the right reasons and with purely 'good Samaritan' intentions, in the end it's often the question whether the subject would've been better off after all, without the whole endeavor.

The saying is 'teach a men how to fish'. Perhaps a bit cynically but I think it often should be 'leave a man the honors of learning how to fish to himself'. Now we have left Afghanistan teaching a bunch of people to fish like 'us', and it probably ain't going to be pretty for most of them. Which will also negatively reflect on 'us'.

Anyway I've seen enough of the sad news today and had my dinner, so off to play some CM

 

[Bulletpoint]

Media will seek to blame the whole thing on someone who is in power now, because that's how it works.

Depends on what media you read. I've read some pretty balanced pieces that included the background with the actions of several US presidents.

 

[Sgt Joch]

Problem as I see it is that politicians do not understand the limitations of military power and tend to see it a quick solution for any international problem.

Militaries like U.S./NATO are great for defeating enemy armies and occupying territory quickly, but they are not designed for nation building, they do not have the skill set and resources for that.

 

[Bulletpoint]

We are now witnessing what is arguably the worst example of a "superpower" troop withdrawal.....ever. Whether or not the U.S./NATO had any real mission or reason to occupy Afghanistan these past decades is debatable. The withdrawal itself has been a fucking disaster of epic proportions.

The moment I read the US troops had left quietly in the dead of night, I thought something wasn't right. I thought they'd do a ceremony in full daylight, salute, fold the flag, play the bugle etc. to mark the end of 20 years and all the losses suffered. Instead, they slinked away hoping nobody would notice them.

Also, I'm wondering if this marks the end of the US superpower status. It's not enough to have a powerful army to be a superpower - you also need to have the capacity and the determination to project that power globally. I don't see any US presidents ordering anything like the invasion of Afghanistan in the forseeable future.

 

[chiquichops]

The problem with the war is that no one was ever willing to put in what was required to really transform the country into some western-lite clone. Early on, every one was saying you would need 500,000 ground troops to provide security and trillions of dollars to rebuild the infrastructure, economy, govt institutions, education system, etc. Of course, no NATO country was willing to come even close to that.

So for the past 20 years, US/NATO has just been trying to get by with the minimum, which was just enough to keep the place from blowing, while pretending everything was fine and there was nothing to worry about.

Best example is Opium. Local farmers switched to Opium production during the 80s when they needed quick cash to finance the Taliban war against the Russkies. In 2001 when the U.S. invaded, Afghanistan was supplying 90-95% of the world's Opium/Heroin demand. At one point, there was talk of helping local farmers to grow other crops and subsidizing the difference, but the cost would have beeen enormous and there was the additional problem that most rural areas were contested. Fast forward 20 years during which most of Afghanistan was supposedly under government/NATO control. in 2021, Afghanistan is still supplying 90-95% of the world's Opium/Heroin demand, most of which is grown in areas controlled by the Taliban. The profits of the sale of Opium are one of the main sources of financing for the Taliban.

U.S./NATO should have left years ago.

I understand that opioids such as oxycodone and fentanyl are now more prevalent in developed countries than heroin so the revenue from poppies is much less relevant today.