Terrible mistake in Afghanistan.

[theflashunc]

Saying what should have happened twenty years later is pointless. To Godwin this, we should have killed Hitler in the 30's before he began his reign of terror. I'm sure there were Monday morning strategists saying that in the 50s and 60s. Not sure of your 5 million number, here is a link to casualties since 2001. https://apnews.com/article/middle-ea...130cd683e1a38f . Many Afghan civilian casualties were the result of Taliban traveling with their families. Many Taliban strongholds or camps were bombed or the targets of cruise missiles.

Bin Laden was never going to be captured alive or allowed to be tried. To compare it to the end of WW2 is not accurate. Germans surrendered when their cause was lost, some committed suicide and some arranged surrender. The Germans had lost, other than a few pockets of resistance after the war, the main focus was rebuilding. The Taliban was never interested in improving Afghanistan because it took power from them. You can see it now in daily videos coming out the country showing the beating of women and girls who had the audacity to read.

I've stated earlier that nation building was mission creep, but we crept and now we're pulling the rug and leaving our friends to be tortured and executed. It's a moral dilemma and I believe we're in the wrong for doing it in this manner. A small force could have maintained the peace and advances in Afghanistan culture. In the last five years, we've lost 100 service members in Afghanistan, many due to vehicle accidents and training incidents. So far this year we've lost over 500 from suicide in the US. Just some perspective.

Downplays a bit that the Taliban has deliberately avoided violence against U.S. forces for a while now as they knew they were leaving eventually and did not want to do anything to provoke a longer-term stay. There was no credible exit plan from Afghanistan in 2001 any more than there was one in 2021.

[Scott G.]

There was no credible exit plan from Afghanistan in 2001 any more than there was one in 2021.

To lift a quote from today's NYT.....article about Taliban (Baradar) meeting with CIA chief, had this bit of history in it.

In 2009, Mr. Baradar reached out to the Afghan government to explore peace talks, but the Pakistani authorities arrested him in early 2010 and held him for more than eight years.

Pakistan was the Taliban’s chief sponsor and the Americans had long accused Pakistan of sheltering them, so the arrests of Mr. Baradar and other Taliban leaders came as a surprise. But it soon emerged that the Pakistanis, fearing a loss of influence in Afghanistan, wanted to sabotage prospects for a brokered end to the war.


https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/24/w...ghanistan.html

[colker]

I've stated earlier that nation building was mission creep, but we crept and now we're pulling the rug and leaving our friends to be tortured and executed. It's a moral dilemma and I believe we're in the wrong for doing it in this manner. A small force could have maintained the peace and advances in Afghanistan culture. In the last five years, we've lost 100 service members in Afghanistan, many due to vehicle accidents and training incidents. So far this year we've lost over 500 from suicide in the US. Just some perspective.

Good post.

[UnfilteredDregs]

I find it disingenuous to cast this debacle in the light as another American foreign policy mistake when it's blatantly obvious we've wantonly destabilized regions around the world for well over a century in order to establish and secure US strategic hegemony.

"Terrorists," gets a different definition when you broaden out to the actual historical scope of the perpetuated policies.

Signed- A Gulf War Veteran

[Corso]

https://williamblum.org/

It continues on the website. Sadly, and to our detriment, those who most need to read this sort of stuff, won't.

Well, in addition, Osama bin Laden certainly praised Blum...we've all read the quote.

It's not so much about people reading the words of Chomsky and Blum, (I have). It's about what one chooses to believe- via each of our personal political views. And it's not hard to see which way they lean.

Chomsky: Yes, he's very intelligent . No argument. He also lives safely in the world of academia, where he can say whatever he wants with little consequence. I just can't drink all of his kool-aide.

[UnfilteredDregs]

And include the US stops sending ALL aide to other countries. Period.

you make it sound like America does this out of the "goodness of our heart." there's another side to these deals. People are making money. there's no ethical/moral high-ground to stand upon here.

[Corso]

you make it sound like America does this out of the "goodness of our heart." there's another side to these deals. People are making money. there's no ethical/moral high-ground to stand upon here.

Agreed. Everything involves money. But at least some aide files down to those who need it.

Sincerely, Thank You for your service.

[BBB]

Saying what should have happened twenty years later is pointless. To Godwin this, we should have killed Hitler in the 30's before he began his reign of terror. I'm sure there were Monday morning strategists saying that in the 50s and 60s. Not sure of your 5 million number, here is a link to casualties since 2001. https://apnews.com/article/middle-ea...130cd683e1a38f . Many Afghan civilian casualties were the result of Taliban traveling with their families. Many Taliban strongholds or camps were bombed or the targets of cruise missiles.

Bin Laden was never going to be captured alive or allowed to be tried. To compare it to the end of WW2 is not accurate. Germans surrendered when their cause was lost, some committed suicide and some arranged surrender. The Germans had lost, other than a few pockets of resistance after the war, the main focus was rebuilding. The Taliban was never interested in improving Afghanistan because it took power from them. You can see it now in daily videos coming out the country showing the beating of women and girls who had the audacity to read.

I've stated earlier that nation building was mission creep, but we crept and now we're pulling the rug and leaving our friends to be tortured and executed. It's a moral dilemma and I believe we're in the wrong for doing it in this manner. A small force could have maintained the peace and advances in Afghanistan culture. In the last five years, we've lost 100 service members in Afghanistan, many due to vehicle accidents and training incidents. So far this year we've lost over 500 from suicide in the US. Just some perspective.

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Pointless or not, an interest in history does allow us to consider events and opine on what might or might not have been the right course of action with a view to avoiding mistakes in future. For example, and while it might be pointless now, I'm sure a considered view of history would have that appeasement in the 1930s was the wrong choice and the British would have been better off heeding Churchill's call and re-arming earlier than they did.

Likewise, in the face of a horrific terrorist attack and when the US had almost universal global sympathy, maybe a greater diplomatic effort could have been tried with a view to having bin Laden handed over. Use of the UN or third parties (maybe the foreign minister of Indonesia, which of course is the most populous Muslim nation on earth) could have been tried and persisted with in an effort to avoid military action. In parallel steps could have been taken to set up the legal machinery needed to try bin Laden fairly and in neutral territory, which in turn could have been carefully explained to the Taliban (and the world at large) This has been done in the past, while the International Criminal Court started operations less than a year after 9-11. Maybe you are right and the Taliban would have never handed him over, but perhaps greater efforts could have been made before the military button was pushed.

Yes I accept the situation with the Germans was different (and the 5m dead figure was a reference to the Germans). However, what the Nazis did was on a scale and magnitude that was far in excess of anything bin Laden masterminded. As such there was a view (including from Churchill) that it might have just been easier to shoot the perpetrators. Fortunately sanity prevailed and the Nuremberg trials resulted. The trial of Hussain probably wasn't the best advertisement for a fair trial, but the Bosnian war crimes trials were probably a better example of how things can work. Had bin Laden been handed over (noting your scepticism that this could have happened), I think he could have been tried fairly and I think there would have been a lot of symbolism in giving him a fair trial and finding him guilty.

So, while speculation maybe pointless, it is interesting and hopefully it can guide us moving forward.

[bigbill]

Thanks for the thoughtful response.

Pointless or not, an interest in history does allow us to consider events and opine on what might or might not have been the right course of action with a view to avoiding mistakes in future. For example, and while it might be pointless now, I'm sure a considered view of history would have that appeasement in the 1930s was the wrong choice and the British would have been better off heeding Churchill's call and re-arming earlier than they did.

Likewise, in the face of a horrific terrorist attack and when the US had almost universal global sympathy, maybe a greater diplomatic effort could have been tried with a view to having bin Laden handed over. Use of the UN or third parties (maybe the foreign minister of Indonesia, which of course is the most populous Muslim nation on earth) could have been tried and persisted with in an effort to avoid military action. In parallel steps could have been taken to set up the legal machinery needed to try bin Laden fairly and in neutral territory, which in turn could have been carefully explained to the Taliban (and the world at large) This has been done in the past, while the International Criminal Court started operations less than a year after 9-11. Maybe you are right and the Taliban would have never handed him over, but perhaps greater efforts could have been made before the military button was pushed.

Yes I accept the situation with the Germans was different (and the 5m dead figure was a reference to the Germans). However, what the Nazis did was on a scale and magnitude that was far in excess of anything bin Laden masterminded. As such there was a view (including from Churchill) that it might have just been easier to shoot the perpetrators. Fortunately sanity prevailed and the Nuremberg trials resulted. The trial of Hussain probably wasn't the best advertisement for a fair trial, but the Bosnian war crimes trials were probably a better example of how things can work. Had bin Laden been handed over (noting your scepticism that this could have happened), I think he could have been tried fairly and I think there would have been a lot of symbolism in giving him a fair trial and finding him guilty.

So, while speculation maybe pointless, it is interesting and hopefully it can guide us moving forward.

Good discussion. Pakistan was harboring the Taliban and allowing them to strike NATO forces and then run back to Pakistan. Outlaw Platoon by Sean Parnell (who is apparently running for office) is a good read on the frustration the US forces had with Pakistan. Bin Laden was killed in Pakistan and there's no way members of that government didn't know he was there. We had to fly in and out with stealthy helicopters to avoid detection by Pakistan. Bin Laden's body was brought to a carrier Carl Vinson in the Indian Ocean for identification and an autopsy. After that, he was buried at sea to avoid a physical grave. If Bin Laden had been put on trial, even the most even handed trial with Justices from Sunni nations, he would have been convicted. What to do then? I shudder to think of the backlash from the buildup to the execution.

I only wish we could have killed him in the Tora Bora mountain range, seal him up in a cave. We dropped several bunker buster and gas vapor bombs at suspected locations, but he was always a few steps ahead of us, as if he was receiving intel. Donning my tin foil hat, even though there was some genius level intelligence work, I think Pakistan let us have him in the end.

[BBB]

Ah Pakistan. That is a conversation in itself!

[jimcav]

When we 1st remained in Afghanistan, after the initial search and destroy actions against Al-Qaeda, I thought about my college class in low intensity conflict. I shared beers with some FMF corpsman (marine medics) who were there early, and it was just so much wild west stuff. Corruption, entire truckloads of supplies disappearing, so called "intelligence" turning out to be a version of an Afghan Hatfield leader providing "intel": ie using the US to exact revenge on an Afghan McCoy. There was too much similarity for my liking in things I'd read in "A Bright and Shining Lie", and Joe Galloway's (may he RIP) book, whose title sadly escapes me now, for that class.

I served my country another 14 years after we invaded, but by luck and effort (positioning myself whenever I could to be needed elsewhere), I did not deploy there. I'll be honest, I did not want to. They can brand it GWOT, OIF, OEF, etc, to me there was always a disconnect of policy level talking points/marketing and the reality I heard from those who had been there. That forced my wife to move more often, but I felt it was worth it (maybe just to me) to not deploy there. So many had no way to not deploy, and they did it with honor, courage, and commitment (not just a slogan).

The distance from where I sit in SoCal to that sandbox is a good metaphor for the gap between a plan(s) on some desk at the Pentagon or CentCom, and the reality on the ground; and the gap between the simplistic ideas of "they will welcome us with parades" and "spreading democracy" versus the centuries of a very different cultural reality in a land that really defines "foreign" with respect to what is normal for us (in so many aspects of comparison).

This has been an interesting thread to read. The SIV process was obviously a clusterF for several years, and it is easy to post-hoc see the errors. I can ask from now until 2050 why a SLOW, CALM, STEADY evacuation of US, allied, and SIV personnel didn't start the DAY AFTER the administration announced a May 2021 withdrawal date, or, barring that, commencing on 21 January; but it simply didn't. How big a crisis can they manage before things slip. It is pretty easy to say, IF I was president, I'd have managed COVID, the economy, AND figured out the Afghanistan problem (go back 4 presidents and the problem might be defined differently, but our last two had it as leaving).

From what I heard of the tribalism, given the number of casualties (collateral and direct) whose leaders/families want retribution, I'm honestly amazed we've evacuated as many as we have, as cleanly as we have thus far. I hope the rush hasn't been so chaotic as to allow any of the 5k released terrorist/prisoners or other hardliners to "mix in", nothing worse than a "long-con" scenario involving such types. I also hope money continues to talk there, so that anyone who isn't out by the 31st will be smuggled out for King Dollar--I'll donate to that cause sooner than to a political campaign. If I hadn't sold our other house last year, I'd have signed it up as an AirBnB refugee host home.

As I told my wife whenever the specter arose (this is now past-tense for me): I take the check; I volunteered; so I wear the uniform with pride; obey lawful orders; and, just as my parents raised me to do, I do my best, even when I don't like the task. Heck, even if I think it is the wrong way to do something (not to be confused with wrong), I do it and do it well.
In the service, we learn to do the mission. From simple stuff like PMS on equipment, finishing some ship's husbandry work before liberty can commence, or standing at attention in a parade for a change of command or some dignitary when it is 95 and 95% humidity, whatever. It all adds up to a remarkable machine that does hard, difficult, dangerous, and too-often thankless things. At least now a "thank you for your service" is common at Home Depot or wherever, and sincere.

This thread makes me say this: BZ to all who have served, whether back in the 'nam as they say, or in OEF etc. Kudos to all those who ask the hard questions of the policy makers (these are not mutually exclusive groups). I hope answers come. I hope the next generation considers the answers, and even considers if the right questions were/are asked, and does a better job not repeating mistakes.

[colker]

Good discussion. Pakistan was harboring the Taliban and allowing them to strike NATO forces and then run back to Pakistan.



Donning my tin foil hat, even though there was some genius level intelligence work, I think Pakistan let us have him in the end.

OBL was Dead Man Walking in the hands of the Pakhistani Military Intel. Assets like him are used and disposed in political trades.

[Corso]

When we 1st remained in Afghanistan, after the initial search and destroy actions against Al-Qaeda, I thought about my college class in low intensity conflict. I shared beers with some FMF corpsman (marine medics) who were there early, and it was just so much wild west stuff. Corruption, entire truckloads of supplies disappearing, so called "intelligence" turning out to be a version of an Afghan Hatfield leader providing "intel": ie using the US to exact revenge on an Afghan McCoy. There was too much similarity for my liking in things I'd read in "A Bright and Shining Lie", and Joe Galloway's (may he RIP) book, whose title sadly escapes me now, for that class.

I served my country another 14 years after we invaded, but by luck and effort (positioning myself whenever I could to be needed elsewhere), I did not deploy there. I'll be honest, I did not want to. They can brand it GWOT, OIF, OEF, etc, to me there was always a disconnect of policy level talking points/marketing and the reality I heard from those who had been there. That forced my wife to move more often, but I felt it was worth it (maybe just to me) to not deploy there. So many had no way to not deploy, and they did it with honor, courage, and commitment (not just a slogan).

The distance from where I sit in SoCal to that sandbox is a good metaphor for the gap between a plan(s) on some desk at the Pentagon or CentCom, and the reality on the ground; and the gap between the simplistic ideas of "they will welcome us with parades" and "spreading democracy" versus the centuries of a very different cultural reality in a land that really defines "foreign" with respect to what is normal for us (in so many aspects of comparison).

This has been an interesting thread to read. The SIV process was obviously a clusterF for several years, and it is easy to post-hoc see the errors. I can ask from now until 2050 why a SLOW, CALM, STEADY evacuation of US, allied, and SIV personnel didn't start the DAY AFTER the administration announced a May 2021 withdrawal date, or, barring that, commencing on 21 January; but it simply didn't. How big a crisis can they manage before things slip. It is pretty easy to say, IF I was president, I'd have managed COVID, the economy, AND figured out the Afghanistan problem (go back 4 presidents and the problem might be defined differently, but our last two had it as leaving).

From what I heard of the tribalism, given the number of casualties (collateral and direct) whose leaders/families want retribution, I'm honestly amazed we've evacuated as many as we have, as cleanly as we have thus far. I hope the rush hasn't been so chaotic as to allow any of the 5k released terrorist/prisoners or other hardliners to "mix in", nothing worse than a "long-con" scenario involving such types. I also hope money continues to talk there, so that anyone who isn't out by the 31st will be smuggled out for King Dollar--I'll donate to that cause sooner than to a political campaign. If I hadn't sold our other house last year, I'd have signed it up as an AirBnB refugee host home.

As I told my wife whenever the specter arose (this is now past-tense for me): I take the check; I volunteered; so I wear the uniform with pride; obey lawful orders; and, just as my parents raised me to do, I do my best, even when I don't like the task. Heck, even if I think it is the wrong way to do something (not to be confused with wrong), I do it and do it well.
In the service, we learn to do the mission. From simple stuff like PMS on equipment, finishing some ship's husbandry work before liberty can commence, or standing at attention in a parade for a change of command or some dignitary when it is 95 and 95% humidity, whatever. It all adds up to a remarkable machine that does hard, difficult, dangerous, and too-often thankless things. At least now a "thank you for your service" is common at Home Depot or wherever, and sincere.

This thread makes me say this: BZ to all who have served, whether back in the 'nam as they say, or in OEF etc. Kudos to all those who ask the hard questions of the policy makers (these are not mutually exclusive groups). I hope answers come. I hope the next generation considers the answers, and even considers if the right questions were/are asked, and does a better job not repeating mistakes.

Thank You for your service, and for sharing your story in this fantastic post. Well done sir!

[jclay]

The withdrawal is obviously a disaster and nobody in the general public knows nearly enough about the who, what, where, when, why and how it was planned, what info was rejected, what was adopted and so on, to render accurate judgment re this administration yet. I hope that will change, that the details will emerge but I doubt that Biden just walked into a meeting and said “I don’t care what any of you military planners say, leave now and damn the consequences”. That's not a defense of Biden (or anyone) either; to whatever degree he screwed up I want to know it along with the relevant details.

I disagree that it's pointless to discuss why we shouldn’t have decided to, on the heels of decades rat-effing many tens of other countries, garrison the country for 20 years. We’ve been doing this crap for decades and it isn’t about “protecting freedom loving Americans” or “delivering democracy”, it’s about global resource hegemony, making the world “safe” for US business interests and defense contractors making obscene money, and it needs to stop. Acknowledging and educating the voting public about all of the above is the only constructive way to, possibly, put a stop to it.

Here's retired Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges take on it; you need to read the whole thing. He has the guts to admit that he (personally), and our institutions, were and are part of the problem; I admire that far more than his CIB or stars: https://www.tallahassee.com/story/ne...is/8191936002/

[72gmc]

Thanks for contributing to this thread, bigbill and jimcav. I’m making a list of pieces to find and read.

[htwoopup]

While we are talking about articles/ things to read....

I really am saddened that many (even some here) are blaming the way we pulled out as a/the problem.

I would suggest it is time to stop pretending that the way we withdrew was the issue.

Read this ("The Incompetence Dodge") which was about liberals talking about another war and in fact is about all sides of all wars/ interventions/ nation building/ foreign policy etc....https://prospect.org/features/incompetence-dodge-d2/. It eloquently says some of the thoughts I had not as eloquently said earlier in this thread.

And then read this piece which is about this fiasco of a generation and also references the above article and which has the same headline and lede of what I just said...https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/26/o...ithdrawal.html

[jimcav]

While we are talking about articles/ things to read....

I really am saddened that many (even some here) are blaming the way we pulled out as a/the problem.

I would suggest it is time to stop pretending that the way we withdrew was the issue.

Read this ("The Incompetence Dodge") which was about liberals talking about another war and in fact is about all sides of all wars/ interventions/ nation building/ foreign policy etc....https://prospect.org/features/incompetence-dodge-d2/. It eloquently says some of the thoughts I had not as eloquently said earlier in this thread.

And then read this piece which is about this fiasco of a generation and also references the above article and which has the same headline and lede of what I just said...https://www.nytimes.com/2021/08/26/o...ithdrawal.html

As far as ultimate lessons to be learned, you and I agree. But I disagree that the current focus on the withdrawal is truly misplaced. There is actually a distinction that makes a difference. I have already stated here I disagreed after the mission changed from strikes to damage Al-Queda capability. There is a huge amount of ground covered between "A" problem and "THE" issue. There remain many problems.

However, the obvious issue here is temporal. While there are facts from the past, the past itself is just that, and cannot be addressed (I believe your point is it can provide lessons, and I agree). Some of us looked hard even as the "WMD" lie led to OIF. Others not so much. The withdrawal is real-time, and since some of the "facts" surrounding the timeline, plans, and execution are still unknown; it is entirely reasonable to question the withdrawal.

It isn't in the past, it is is ongoing. Individuals just died, including service members. The 'way we pull out' is mattering, and will at the most fundamental level, either for more service members and their families, or for Afghanis, and sadly, likely for both.

[72gmc]

It would seem practical to put a lot of energy into evaluating and re-imagining how the US withdraws from a military occupation, if military occupation is to remain a primary lever of US statecraft.

[mjbabcock]

Serious question here, if the flood of people turned on their oppressors, would they be capable of overtaking the taliban? I understand that the taliban is well armed and violent, but would hundreds of thousands swarming and passionate citizens overwhelm them?

[sk_tle]

Serious question here, if the flood of people turned on their oppressors, would they be capable of overtaking the taliban? I understand that the taliban is well armed and violent, but would hundreds of thousands swarming and passionate citizens overwhelm them?

Like in any kind of revolution, there needs to be some kind of vocal and eloquent leader that put people in that kind of trance that makes you dismiss the individual risk or make it appears that losing your life for a greater good is worth it.

Otherwise the flood of people just consist of people looking at each other with a yes but you first face.