"10,000 US troops to stay in Afghanistan to 2016" Topic

US has signed a bilateral agreement with Afghanistan to station 10,000 troops there after 31/12/14. A spearate agreement will be signed to for NATO to continue to maintain 4,000 – 5,000 troops in country.

This will apparently last to 2016. However, given all troops were already meant to pull out by 2014, it goes to show that the 2016 deadline is probably fictitous.

rferl.org/content/united-states-afghanistan-security-pact-/26612799.html

aljazeera.com/news/asia/2014/05/thousands-us-troops-stay-afghanistan-201452719107242829.html

Basically NATO/US is commiting to continue to fight in Afghanistan.

With Afghani forces failing already to contain Taliban, it will only be a matter of time before US/NATO commit to another "surge" in Afghanistan.

The premise of having troops in theatre makes any combat deployments "not a new deployment" (which may require congressional/parliamentary approval plus political willpower) into a "bolstering an existing commitment."

Basically West is committing to war without end in Afghanistan.

Coupled with war without end in Iraq/Syria, Yemen, Somalia etc etc.

This will apparently last to 2016. However, given all troops were already meant to pull out by 2014, it goes to show that the 2016 deadline is probably fictitous.

Probably. Negotiations have been ongoing for a year without resolution because former Afghan president Hamid Karzai wouldn't budge on the legal immunity issue (which would subject US service members to prosecution in Afghan courts). Now with a new president more receptive to American needs the way is clear for maintaining a residual presence 10,000 to continue the war against AQ/Taliban indefinitely.

Basically West is committing to war without end in Afghanistan.

Coupled with war without end in Iraq/Syria, Yemen, Somalia etc etc.

Pretty much. Asymmetrical warfighting in the 21st century requires patience, which most Americans don't have. Look at what happened in Iraq after we pulled out completely.

Asymmetrical warfighting in the 21st century requires patience, which most Americans don't have.

Erm Americans have been in Afghanistan for 13 years now. It's the longest running American War. How long does it take?

> How long does it take?

I would peg it at 20 to 30 years. This is a war against an idea and not a nation state, such things take a generation or two *IF* things go well.

Have they done anything about poppy farming (for Heroin)?

Buy up all the poppy at twice what the Bad Guys are paying and make proper capitalists out of them. It IS a useful product after all.

I agree with 28mm … Based on what happened in Iraq with their army and gov't acting alone … Some may think it might be a good idea keeping some US/NATO troops in A'stan. However, as in Iraq, many of the locals may still look at the "infidels as crusaders" invaders/occupiers. And that is what AQ/jihadists, et al want. However, I hope someone finally convinced politicians, et al, to stop telling the enemy, what we are doing, when, why, etc. Certainly an OPSEC violation, etc. and flies in the face of history. So maybe the 2016 withdrawel date is part of a deception plan. Regardless, I don't know if 10,000-15,000 US/NATO troops would make much of a difference, based on what we have seen in the past … Look at the battle of Marjah link

Have they done anything about poppy farming (for Heroin)?

When my friend was over there (Platoon leader for a bunch of Strykers), he would burn at least one poppy/cannabis field a month, usually closer to every couple weeks.

@28mm Fanatik: You make the US desiring legal immunity for US soldiers sound like an unusual demand. It's not an unusual demand. Every other nation the US has a Status of Forces Agreement with makes the 'owning nation' responsible for any legal issues, not the local nation. And this is reciprocal, so any Afghan soldiers in the US would have immunity from US laws.

Heck, even American troops in the US have general immunity. They're turned over to the base police and/or their home command, face the military music, and then occasionally get sent out to face civilian justice, too. No, not in lieu of their military punishment, in addition to the punishment they received from the military

I would peg it at 20 to 30 years. This is a war against an idea and not a nation state, such things take a generation or two *IF* things go well

I think 20-30 years is highly optimistic.

Firstly Islamic fundamentalism is as old as Islam.

Protest Catholic conflict lasted for centuries too (not just 30 Years War, but French Wars of Religion, and it's last embers were mainly in Northern Ireland and only resolved recently.

Even Communism took 140 odd years to be defeated as an idea (Communist Mainfesto published in 1848, USSR collapsed in 1991). And arguably the idea was a lot older (e.g. levellers in English Civil War).

I suspect the idea of Islamic fundamentalism will outlive the idea of the West especially as most people born in the future will be Muslims and Western countries will be increasingly more Islamic as local muslims breed faster than Westerners and more Muslims emigrate to West.