Terrible mistake in Afghanistan.

[jclay]

The best cheerleaders get promoted, not the ones that say things like "hey, I see some problems; let's think this thing through more fully".

Once in a quarter of a century I actually had a project manager call me back, a year or so "after" and say "you were right"; there were quite a few more that shoulda. While not good for promotions, poor design decisions always made more $ for our company. Go figure.

But the worst sin is being right about poor decisions made by others.

[classtimesailer]

Those who sided w/ the US left behind. Not to mention it could be the new haven for terror against the US.

Those who sided with the us are left in control. Mission accomplished. Next?

[j44ke]

Yep.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ting-generals/

[classtimesailer]

Dbl Yep. Biden/Trump/Obama/Bush/...shoulda listened to the generals. Funny unless you didn't brainwash your kids that, "US wars are stupid."

[jclay]

Yep.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ting-generals/

A retired US army general was hired to run the mid-sized, national environmental engineering company I worked for; late 90s if memory serves. The company was obviously hoping to cash in on DoD projects. Pleasant enough fellow but no value added; and I don't recall getting any projects from the DoD as a result. He was invited to leave after a couple of years.

I don't get the fantasy of "hero" worship.

[j44ke]

...

I don't get the fantasy of "hero" worship.

It's a daddy thing.

[BBB]

I don't understand this!

[htwoopup]

This post could have gone in that old/other articles to read thread.

But it is very very appropriate here.

For those of you who don’t read the Washington Post or missed this article, a highly recommended use of a bunch of time to read this and ruminate on it.’

Apropos of this entire thread….

https://wapo.st/3jQFEJR

[fastupslowdown]

What part of my post that you're quoting does your comment address? The US was maintaining peace with 2500 troops, not tens of thousands. Trump made a deal with the Taliban, but the Taliban was violating the agreement so there was no reason to honor it to the point of meeting a withdrawal deadline. I was deployed eight days after 9/11, we had the overwhelming support of Congress and the people of the US. We also had NATO. Our battle group had US, French, British, and Italian carriers, Canadian, Australian, and Japanese surface combatants, and aircraft of many nations. Our mistake was nation-building and mission creep.



To post now that the invasion was a mistake 20 years ago only means a person has an ability to predict the past in ever-increasing accuracy.

Saying that Biden could have kept 2500 troops in Afghanistan because the Taliban weren't honoring the deal ignores a big reality. The Taliban were already in control of half the country and would have begun attacking U.S. troops again. It doesn't matter whether it was the U.S. or the Taliban that broke the agreement. Fact is there would be U.S. deaths and the three U.S. Presidents had failed to make the case to the American people that we had a national interest in being there. Joe Biden is absolutely correct that deciding to stay would have meant a significant reversal of previous troop declines and would have required bringing in tens of thousands of U.S. troops. The status quo was not a viable option -Mike G

[fastupslowdown]

The ISI, the Pakistani intelligence services provided part of the Afghan Taliban funding,
and secure refuge in Pakistan. The Pakistani civil government has little control over the ISI.
The Pakistani interest in Afghanistan is to keep India out, to avoid being surrounded
by India and an Indian aligned Afghanistan. When the US went into Afghanistan, we joined
a war already in progress with a goal that was somewhat inconvenient to our Pakistani 'Allies'.

The U.S. was never going to defeat the Taliban. George W Bush dropped his focus over the Iraq war, Obama foolishly provided a U.S. timetable during his ramp up which encouraged the Taliban to hide in Pakistan till Obama's self imposed deadline passed. The U.S. was never going to increase the theater of war and hit inside Pakistan. It was game over right there. Trump only accelerated the defeat by winding down even further and signing his "surrender treaty". Somewhere along the way we gave up on the original mission of getting rid of the Taliban and ISIS and instead focused on nation building with a corrupt government No amount of time would have accomplished that.

Maybe in hindsight had Obama ramped up harder and not given a timeline the U.S. could have stamped out the Taliban but that's a great deal of supposition and coulda woulda shoulda logic. And in the end there was never an end game. Anytime you go in there must be an exit plan and the U.S. didn't have one.

[fastupslowdown]

Yep.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...ting-generals/

Were U.S. companies trying to buy contracts by hiring ex-Generals or were they seeking to hire good talent with managemnet expertise. Seems all those years of management experience in the military ought be the equivalent if not more than an Ivy league MBA and a few stints at Fortune 500 companies

[jclay]

Were U.S. companies trying to buy contracts by hiring ex-Generals or were they seeking to hire good talent with managemnet expertise. Seems all those years of management experience in the military ought be the equivalent if not more than an Ivy league MBA and a few stints at Fortune 500 companies

Serious question?

In the context of corporations who go after retired DoD brass, and at it’s root, they’re hiring those folks in the hopes of getting connections and institutional knowledge that will lead to winning contracts. Sure, skilled leadership is usually desired but Job 1 is getting contracts; and Job 2, whatever it is, is rarely on the same lap.

At that strata only suckers believe in a free and fair competitive marketplace.

[j44ke]

Were U.S. companies trying to buy contracts by hiring ex-Generals or were they seeking to hire good talent with managemnet expertise. Seems all those years of management experience in the military ought be the equivalent if not more than an Ivy league MBA and a few stints at Fortune 500 companies

Any examples you can think of? Generals who've been hired to actually run a corporation - not just be a figurehead and phonebook - and have improved the stature of the corporation financially and paid good returns on shareholder investments?

You use Ivy League MBA as a pejorative, so I am assuming you aren't one or had bad experiences with one or don't realize that there are Ivy League MBA's here on VSalon.

[bigbill]

Saying that Biden could have kept 2500 troops in Afghanistan because the Taliban weren't honoring the deal ignores a big reality. The Taliban were already in control of half the country and would have begun attacking U.S. troops again. It doesn't matter whether it was the U.S. or the Taliban that broke the agreement. Fact is there would be U.S. deaths and the three U.S. Presidents had failed to make the case to the American people that we had a national interest in being there. Joe Biden is absolutely correct that deciding to stay would have meant a significant reversal of previous troop declines and would have required bringing in tens of thousands of U.S. troops. The status quo was not a viable option -Mike G

It was a viable option because the US troops had air cover. Your "Fact" isn't backed up by the actual numbers from the last five years. It didn't matter if the Taliban has superior numbers, they had no close air support. I don't know how to explain this to you if you've never been involved in a military campaign, but a few dozen aircraft are equal to tens of thousands of boots on the ground. Biden owns this, the withdrawal was a colossal clusterfuck that alienated our allies and devastated our world standing. Next year the Democrats will lose both houses because of his actions.

[j44ke]

It was a viable option because the US troops had air cover. Your "Fact" isn't backed up by the actual numbers from the last five years. It didn't matter if the Taliban has superior numbers, they had no close air support. I don't know how to explain this to you if you've never been involved in a military campaign, but a few dozen aircraft are equal to tens of thousands of boots on the ground. Biden owns this, the withdrawal was a colossal clusterfuck that alienated our allies and devastated our world standing. Next year the Democrats will lose both houses because of his actions.

We’ll see I guess. Covid numbers are not going down in Republican majority districts in most states. In fact, they are getting worse. Idaho just started rationing medical services.

And next fall? Could just as easily be Republicans claiming Biden was too slow rolling out boosters and not vaccinating rural whites quickly enough.

I’ve pretty much given up trying to make sense of what is going to happen even a month from now.

[72gmc]

It's pretty easy to blame the people who accept the blame. But there's still a difference between doing the right thing the wrong way, and not having the will or desire to do the right thing in the first place.

[johnmdesigner]

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/21/w...-refugees.html

[gregl]

Any examples you can think of? Generals who've been hired to actually run a corporation - not just be a figurehead and phonebook - and have improved the stature of the corporation financially and paid good returns on shareholder investments?

I can't go into specifics, but I've seen the opposite happen. A retired general brought in as a CEO who failed so miserably that the BOD fired him within six months. The general in question "bounced back" to become a high-ranking appointee in the DoD. His services were no longer needed at the Pentagon effective January 20 of this year...

Greg

[j44ke]

I can't go into specifics, but I've seen the opposite happen. A retired general brought in as a CEO who failed so miserably that the BOD fired him within six months. The general in question "bounced back" to become a high-ranking appointee in the DoD. His services were no longer needed at the Pentagon effective January 20 of this year...

Greg

I'm in the same quandary. Only negative examples.

This article is long but worth reading.

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2...r-afghan-women

[BBB]

That was a depressing article.

It's hard to work out who to feel annoyed by. Two superpowers for blundering into Afghanistan for different reasons. Regional leaders using violence to control their patch of turf. Or religion, or the extremist interpretation that renders women second class citizens.