Deaths Advocate
Prince
Justification, lesser of two evils?
America has been Defeated in Afganistan
- Thread starter Deaths Advocate
- Start date
Ayatollah So
the spoof'll set you free
Iraq actually turned out decently for US leaders (not so much for many soldiers, or for taxpayers). Better than Afghanistan, despite the Iraq war's complete lack of even a fig leaf of justification. The turnaround in Iraq had a bit to do with the surge, but everything to do with the local population having had it up to here with Al Qaeda, and turning against them. Some factions of the Taliban in Afghanistan have been less set on making local civilians into "martyrs" whether they like it or not, than the Al Qaeda affiliates in Iraq. That probably has a lot to do with the semi-tolerance for the Taliban in many parts of Afghanistan.
I just agreed with a whole paragraph out of MisterCooper.
It's the end of the world as we know it
TomYo689
Emperor
What exactly is referred to as the strategic failure? It is easy to hear oh yeah the strategy failed but what exactly was the strategy
I agree with this. These wars were launched with ridiculous and unachievable goals, and it's about time we realized such and cut it out.
The problem here is that this strategy got us into the trouble in the first place.
King Kalmah
Magyar Madness
The problem is that Afghanistan has more in common with Mexico then it has to any other place America has been.It is a complete 180 compared to Vietnam.Iraq is similar,but not as large and not as mountainous.
We could only defeat them if they were more condensed and urbanized.It really is like the wild west.WE should fight fire with fire and get some spies in the Taliban.I think it would not be to hard....
We could only defeat them if they were more condensed and urbanized.It really is like the wild west.WE should fight fire with fire and get some spies in the Taliban.I think it would not be to hard....
Core Imposter
Felon
- Joined
- May 13, 2011
- Messages
- 5,427
Note that this is not lost on Islamists bent on the destruction of Israel. Israel is everything that Afganistan is not. Small, urban and powerful in military might but very susceptible to terror tactics and being overrun. Once Iran or other militant regimes have attained the deterent of nuclear force, proxy forces will be unleased, international institutions will be increasingly turned against Israel by the use of propaganda.
We are witnessing an inexorable march to calamity and genocide.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
Was the US/NATO defeated? That depends a lot on what its objective in Afghanistan was. Destroy Al-Qaeda training camps/terrorist bases in the country? Done. Topple Taleban from power? Done. Install a regime that isn't rabidly hostile to the west? Meh, done, more or less.
Now, if the goal was this:
... then yes, that has been a failure.
Creating a stable *democracy* in a place where most people can't read and write in their language (doesn't help Afghanistan has more than one) and believe women to be on the same level as cattle is mission impossible indeed.
The West's problem is that it often fails to grasp the limits of its power and influence. Nation-building in places like Afghanistan simply isn't and shouldn't be our job. I am glad that we got rid of the Taleban regime because it was an affront to humanity. I am not happy that in many places in Afghanistan, the same medieval BS is still the law of the land. However, I know that it's borderline impossible to force people to be sane. Societies have to get to that point on their own.
Now, if the goal was this:
... then yes, that has been a failure.
Creating a stable *democracy* in a place where most people can't read and write in their language (doesn't help Afghanistan has more than one) and believe women to be on the same level as cattle is mission impossible indeed.
The West's problem is that it often fails to grasp the limits of its power and influence. Nation-building in places like Afghanistan simply isn't and shouldn't be our job. I am glad that we got rid of the Taleban regime because it was an affront to humanity. I am not happy that in many places in Afghanistan, the same medieval BS is still the law of the land. However, I know that it's borderline impossible to force people to be sane. Societies have to get to that point on their own.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
I think this would be virtually impossible. The Taliban are puritans. To infiltrate them you would need a puritan-looking western-allied person. I don't think there is any such a thing.
bathsheba666
Fast 'n Bulbous
I wonder why america keeps misjudging these situations ?
GoodGame
Red, White, & Blue, baby!
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2004
- Messages
- 13,725
To Kill (or capture) OBL and his supporters.
Nation-building, etc... was really to facilitate that goal, so I'd say the US won, although not in some outlandish way such as turning Afghanistan into France. Even if the name Taliban were eliminated from the Afghani consciousness, there'd still be Afghanis with similar views trying to enforce them locally. My first sentence in this post was the most accurate reason why troops landed on Afghanistan in 2001. Again, their objective was not to conquer the world, nor to change it's viewpoints beyond which that helped the main objective. So we won on our terms.
Saying the US lost in Afghanistan is a lot like expecting the outcome of the ACW to have been the complete "Northification" of the CSA, and a fairy tale ending. That didn't happen, not in the time frame of the war or the immediate reconstruction. There was still antipathy in South, racism for generations after the ACW. The ACW achieved its primary objective of keeping the Union together, and the secondary objective of ending slavery. There was no fairy tale ending, nor mission creep after the surrenders were accepted. It was a hard fought victory for the North.
Bad leadership. Political leaders are not specifying an outcome they want, or one that makes sense. And doing so before the shooting starts. Generals are not looking at how to accomplish overall objectives, and often not even intermediate objectives. No real planning is going on at the strategic level by political or military leaders. Neither political or military leaders are are talking to each other honestly and candidly. Political leaders who don't understand the military are becoming more common. And many of them are unwilling to learn. Neocons not only do not know the military, but have no respect for the military at all. And in fact treat military with utter contempt. And they are increasingly dominant in politics. Military leaders are alienated from politics. There are fewer connections and less meetings of the minds. They are increasingly living in an issolated world and are less willing to connect with political leaders.
Essentially, everyone in power is fraking up by the numbers.
I think it's overblown to say that the Taliban will seize power again in a last-helicopter-out-of-Saigon situation. If the King of Kabul can manage it then there will probably be some kind of power-sharing agreement, most of the south is already in Taliban hands, but forcing the Karzai out will probably be too difficult since he's well entrenched in his little fiefdom and has powerful allies. Something more along the lines of a Northern Alliance type situation with affiliated warlords in the center and the north with nominal allegiance to the King of Kabul, and the Taliban in the south.
r16
not deity
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2008
- Messages
- 12,170
the thing about of Afghanistan is that it serves perfectly to destablize Pakistan to keep an agressive yet still under American influence Secret Service group in control , which is supposed to be a ready to use deterrent against an Iran that will be allowed to have nuclear weapons . Defeat of American brilliance in the Afghan theatre ? Not yet .
Thank you for this link! It's really amazing the level of incompetency shown by Franks and Sanchez (among others). I've read about generals in central Africa with more strategic and political vision than those two.
Deaths Advocate
Prince
You gotta to survive in Africa!
Quoted, so people wouldn't miss it. Really worth reading...
Deaths Advocate
Prince
You don't think the moment we leave, they won't just take back power? The Taleban are merely waiting in the wings. An Al-q? They just moved away. Sure we've killed a fair number, but this is a beast that simply spread elsewhere. In the end, a lot of deaths and money spent for tiny gain.
Winner
Diverse in Unity
I don't think Taleban will simply waltz in and restore its pre-war power. It's more likely it will eventually be integrated into semi-tribal decentralized Afghan government. Al-Qaeda's infrastructure in Afghanistan has been destroyed, and that's no small achievement. Sure it moved elsewhere, but nowhere has it such an extensive support from local government(s) and so much freedom to operate.
Make no mistake, I am not saying the Afghan War was a glaring success. I am just not sure we should call it a defeat in the two respects I mentioned. It would have been much better of course if the US hadn't launched the operation "Iraqi Screw-up" and diverted resources from Afghanistan to a pointless war in a country that posed zero threat to the West.
What's going to stop it from moving right back, once we're out?
"A Pyrrhic victory"?
Similar threads
