TexasScientist said:
Harrison Bergeron said:
GoldMind said:
Harrison Bergeron said:
Jacques Strap said:
Harrison Bergeron said:
This has got to be the biggest display of U.S. foreign policy incompetence in history. Granted, it may not be the largest in terms of total impact, but considering:
- Actual cost of forfeited military weapons and technology
- Long-term of giving that technology to our enemies including terrorists, the Taliban, China, Iran, and others
- Unnecessary human lives lost
- Strategic stupidity of giving up Bagram AFB given China's threats
- Worse of all just completely unnecessary - it is not like there was a Black Swan or anything that could not have been reasonably predicted
When you combine those factors and literally unbelievable incompetence, I cannot think of a worse blunder. Yes, something like Bay of Pigs was a cluster, but to not strategic cost to the U.S. Of course, our foreign engagements since WWII mostly have been dubious but they were generally some reasonable justification given contemporary thinking / reality (easy to look at Korea and Vietnam with current lens but can't totally fault Ike / JFK given 50s/60s cold war.
It may not be the worst but if Biden had withdrawn civilians then military in the winter during the "non-fighting season" it surely would have gone better.
Fair enough. Just seems like a totally avoidable. My kid could have provided a better plan:
1. Quietly get the weapons out even if it take a year
2. Quietly get all non-essential personnel out over a month or two
3. Use appropriate channels to ask other Americans if they want to leave
4. Beat the crap out of the Taliban so they will not feel like fighting for a bit
5. Then leave with a few arms, few people and as you said most obviously when the Taliban was not fighting
And still - keep Bagram. Why leave? We're still in myriad countries.
Because its a useless, massive drain on our economy to keep us in myriad countries.
I do not disagree with you, but that is a separate question. I would easily argue having a presence in Afghanistan makes more sense than having a presence in Japan or Europe.
It's foolish not to have kept a pesence there, at least until, we could determine they were holding their own. Especially as tech dependent they were. Perhaps we should have focused on trainig them with lower tech capabilities for them also.
That day would not come, not even in another 10 years. The ANA suffered over 65k casualties (could be wrong but I think that number may only represent KIA, not missing or wounded) since 2018
with our air support and while the Taliban was also rooting out ISIS factions. Even without our air support, they still had their own airforce (half of it flew away to Uzbekistan), outnumbered the Taliban supposedly 2:1 on the ground, had equal or better equipment and a massive advantage in mechanized transport. Despite that, their generals decided it was best to stand aside, because at the end of the day the Taliban has the local support. I cannot stress enough that this latest Taliban summer offensive was coming no matter what, our air support
may have delayed its ultimate success some, but this cake was baked in February 2020.