"Is the fall of Kabul WORSE than the fall of Saigon?" Topic

link

Worse for who?

Worse for the people who trusted us and were left behind? Probably equivalent. But remember that there was quite a bloodbath after Saigon fell. Boat people = "translators". The Afghans who trusted us will now be treated as collaborators, just as in Vietnam.

Worse for the honor of the United States? Which means that "small nations" will trust us even less. That's possibly a Good Thing. If nobody trusts us, that's less mischief we can get into in far off foreign lands. But small nations learn as much from history as do large ones.

Worse for the stability of the region? Well, Vietnam invaded Cambodia for highly decent humanitarian reasons. Killing Fields anyone? But they still kept up persecuting their own "collaborators". Then China invaded Vietnam.
Stability in that region is an oxymoron. Afghanistan should really be 4 separate mutually antagonistic ethnic states. Maybe more.
So, probably equivalent.

Both are bad, but ranking them is like trying to rate Mao vs Stalin vs Hitler by body count.

Our current Secretary of State is indignantly denying any comparison. Even CNN doesn't believe him. They aren't carrying water for anybody.

The expression "fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me" comes to mind. After the debacle of Vietnam, people said "no more Vietnam's". We have no excuse this time. The globalist politicians from both parties along with the military industrial complex profited at the expense of American citizens.

It's not going to be "The Fall of Kabul" that is worse. It's going to be "The Aftermath of The Fall of Kabul", that is going to be worse as people who are happy to live a quasi-medieval lifestyle, with an 8th century mindset drags Afghanistan and the people living in the modern ages kicking and screaming at the point of a gun, back to a hardline theocracy "New Dark Age"….

2 years from now, Kabul will be a different place….for the worse.

Depends how/if our troops in Kabul can get out.

The airport is closed.

How much ammo/supplies do they have?

If the Afghan people don't value their freedom and are not willing to fight for it, then why should we?

At least the South Vietnamese held out until they no longer had the logistics to carry on the fight. With that in mind, it is worse then the fall of Saigon.

My prayers are for safe return of our troops.

Yes. My fear is that Kabul will be the fall of Saigon AND a new hostage crisis.

Well, I admit I was wrong. I didn't think the fall of Kabul would look like the fall of Vietnam. I was wrong. Somehow they managed to execute something that sure looks like it.

Helicopters removing people from the roof of the US embassy? Check

Total Chaos as civilians flood the airport to get out? Check

Images of people falling from aircraft taking off? Check

US troops sent in to remove key people? Check

I still believe we should have never been there, but somehow they managed to orchestrate the worst way to pull out of the country possible.

Yep, "they" sure did. And "they" will spin spin spin and their speech will be full of contradictions. And the double speak begins: We didn't have enough troops there, we don't want any troops there. Huh?

If the Afghan people don't value their freedom and are not willing to fight for it, then why should we?

Or we may just have radically different meanings for the word "freedom".
Freedom to not be a vassal of Yankee Imperialists from 10,000 miles away.
Freedom to practice their religion. (Oh? We "permit" them to practice Islam, within reason?)
Freedom to oppress women. (Boy, those Yankees sure have strange ideas about women.)

It all boils down to the arrogance of Western Superiority. We were not able to make them toe the line for 20 years. Would another 5 have helped? 10? 20?

The most ironic thing is watching CNN be appalled at what they report on.

The only way to approach this is bitter cynicism.

+1 Col Durnford

Speaking as an Australian I would observe that we too fought our longest war in Afghanistan over the last 20 years. It has cost us blood and treasure in abundance too.

I think the majority of Australian citizens felt that we should participate in the "War on Terror" because we too lost 11 or more citizens in the World Trade Center attack. And we lost another 88 citizens in the Bali Bombings a year later.

I think we also felt that we should be a good ally and stand beside America and NATO. Just as we did in Vietnam (without NATO!)and Korea, etc.

To be frank I think the average Australian has come to question the strength of the alliance with America over the last 4 years but thats another tangent.

I do wonder where to from here. We still cannot allow the Taliban to harbour Al Qaeda and ISIS training camps. I wonder if, given the rapid development of drone technology, we can accomplish the mission of interdicting these terrorist camps with low intensity precision bombing from the air and thus commit no boots on the ground to become targets. It just doesn't seem worth the blood to continue with the way we have done it for the last 20 years.

Unmitigated disaster.

The next will be what they export and now China has claimed they will recognize the Taliban as legimate…not a surprise, but I am continually amazed at how the supposed astute and high-ranking cannot handle these actions no matter how long they have to prepare.

Really wonder how people get these jobs.

The worst is coming…. remember that….

Armand

Yes. China will recognize the Taliban. "Reluctantly", of course.
Then they'll come in, make an offer they can't refuse to mine the Upsadaisyum, and the Taliban will suddenly remember the Uighurs.
No. Don't expect smooth sailing for anyone in that area, friends or foe.
Everyone's enemy of their enemy (us) is gone and now they don't have to be friends anymore.

To be frank I think the average Australian has come to question the strength of the alliance with America over the last 4 years but thats another tangent.

To be frank in my experience the average Australian has never had a single thought about foreign affairs or wars we are involved in.

Even when it comes to domestic politics, the average Australian displays very little understanding of political ideology or policy. It's why our elections are based on idiotic pork barrelling and vote buying that has nothing to do with policy – literally lowest common denominator.

And this is why Australian governments get away with every single pointless war we tag along with. Most of the Australian population is literally too self absorbed and ignorant for these to be an issue.

+1 USAFpilot … agree with all your posts …

OFM -

Our current Secretary of State is indignantly denying any comparison. Even CNN doesn't believe him. They aren't carrying water for anybody.

Yes, even they can see thru another "Baghdad Bob" moment. Which there have been many and very, very, often …

Depends how/if our troops in Kabul can get out.

That will happen sooner than later …

The airport is closed.

That is only temporary … will probably open soon.

How much ammo/supplies do they have?

3 days I'd think … however, this is not DBP, etc., we effectively can resupply by air if need be. I don't think that will be necessary.

Yes. My fear is that Kabul will be the fall of Saigon AND a new hostage crisis.

It will fall but there will be no hostage crisis …

But note we still have airpower, that is, as always … our trump card.

We still cannot allow the Taliban to harbour Al Qaeda and ISIS training camps

That should be a priority. Drones, cruise missiles, etc. Sadly … Ignore CD … they may be better off dead. Than a Taliban "sex slave", etc. etc.

Yes, that is how horrible this is and the Taliban, AQ, ISIS, etc. are savage religious fanatics from the 15th Century … they don't deserve to live.

COL Kurtz said it, "The horror … the horror … " …

We should continue airstrikes with drones & cruise missiles on a daily basis. Striking any Taliban, AQ, ISIS, etc. target. And not let this turn into a jihadi training camp, etc., again.

Many islamists fanatics/jihadis, etc., outside of A'stan see this a victory for the Taliban[as it is] and will rally to the jihadi cause. Making more targets in the short & long run …

. We still cannot allow the Taliban to harbour Al Qaeda and ISIS training camps.

Yeah the Australian (and American) preference is for Al Qaeda to be in Yemen to fight Houthis:

- UAE is involved in Yemen

- UAE has turned a blind eye to large al Qaeda presence in Yemen and has at times let them do as they please as long as its fighting Houthis.

- UAE special forces is headed by ex-Australian special forces commander Major General Mike Hindmarsh. This was approved by Australian government in 2009.

- Australian mercenaries (all ex Commando or SAS) form up to 50% of "white" mercenaries used by UAE. They have been commanding troops in Yemen as well as apparently being used in hit squads against Houthis. These are all endorsed by Australian government (as it's illegal for Australian nationals to fight for another country's military).

Examples listed here including names of ex-Australian officers serving in UAEs military:

link

link

Thus Australian government does not have any issues supporting an authoritarian regime (UAE is a totalitarian state) fostering Al Qaeda.

---

And there's the rub – the west no longer stands for democracy or freedom or anything save the almighty dollar. We are a cheap lady of the night, for sale to the highest bidder.

Regardless of all of that, and I have heard it all before. Yes, yes, yes, the US and Oz gov'ts are horrible people, they should be struck down by the Gods.

However, right now we need to get all our people out of that 3d world hole. And kill as many as of the Taliban, AQ, ISIS, etc., as we can on the way out. Which may be needed in this situations.

the west no longer stands for democracy or freedom or anything save the almighty dollar.

And this is something new ? Are you surprised ? Take off the rose colored glasses … We are not Saints, but better than those like the Taliban, AQ, ISIS, etc. IMO of course …

Neither. But what galls me is that the admin is so surprised at the speed of collapse. Really? Could anyone who plays modern games (and studies contemporary or recent past events in Afghanistan) not see this coming. What do they pay CIA and DIA analysts for?

As for fall of Kabul being worse than fall of Saigon – it's worse.

This is merely the jewel in the crown of stunning failures for US policy.

Since 2001 US has failed or bungled pretty much every single foreign policy crisis/development:

1. Afghanistan
2. Iraq
3. Syria
4. Libya
5. Ukraine
6. Georgia
7. Chinese occupation of South China Sea
8. Yemen (remember a US ally up to 2014)
9. Somalia
10. Iran – no real coherent policy
11. Growing authoritarianism in Eastern Europe NATO partners.
12. Deteriorating relationships with Turkey and intra NATO tension.
13. Myriad of pointless directionless conflicts in sub Saharan Africa where US special forces are operating (and sometimes dying).

The last US foreign policy success was against Serbia in 1999 though even that's not fully resolved as the US violated international law by carving out a Kosovo pseudo state (something Russians now do with glee – thanks for the idea Uncle Sam).

The US no longer espouses any values either – it is apparently OK for US to support Saudi Arabia in committing atrocities in Yemen without any repercussions. It is apparently OK to empower and even provide air support to Islamist terrorists.

Nah, the Orange Man presidency crushed ISIS while drawing down the US presence in the region, and then scored historic Arab-Israeli peace deals. Most of those fiascos you list have a single presidency and it's staffers and former VP to blame, and it's the guy before Orange Man…

And this is something new ? Are you surprised ? Take off the rose colored glasses … We are not Saints, but better than those like the Taliban, AQ, ISIS, etc. IMO of course …

Values are the only thing the west has to sway other powers into supporting it. The Chinese (and in the past others like Chile or South Korea) proved you can have economic success without democracy.

That matters a lot – the Erdogans and Orbans (and probably Polish government) see Putin and Jinping as role models.

Democracy is shrinking in core of west too – including here in Australia.

If the west talk of values is only a facade, then we're doomed to head down the same path way as all authoritarian states.

Neither. But what galls me is that the admin is so surprised at the speed of collapse. Really? Could anyone who plays modern games (and studies contemporary or recent past events in Afghanistan) not see this coming. What do they pay CIA and DIA analysts for?

Group think has become endemic in the west as the elites distance themselves from reality. And it's like that in everything from provision of healthcare to economic development to war.

Not just about politicians, it's about the whole structure from public servants to private think tanks etc etc.

It's what happened in Byzantium – the elites were so divorced from reality they didn't realise the empire was crumbling and instead bungled along doing the same thing they'd always done.

55 Days at Peking or Gandamak part two?

Perceptive analysis ardo. When the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is asked by Congress about combating white supremacy in our military (a nonexistent problem), you know things are askew. The priorities are all backwards. We are living in bizarro world where up is down, left is right, and black is white. Society better get back to the basics, such as the military's job is to defend the nation, and schools need to teach reading, writing, and math. Too much nonsense going o.

SBminisguy + 1, I would just change "guy before" to "guys before".

This one has made me angry for about 20 years…smh

At random….

1) Bosnia required over 100,000 troops – yeah, authorized for 60,000 but they were clever. Only 60K within the borders but at least as many just outside – and, of course, right next to a bunch of NATO infrastructure. So…Bosnia = 3 million and 50K sq-km. Afghanistan > 30 million and 650,000 sq-km – in the middle of nowhere close to existing infrastructure. Simple calculation = more than 1 million troops needed.

2) But wait, we'll go in "co-terminus" with local friendlies. "Co-terminus"? What's that mean? Trying to do it on the cheap. Initially, what was it? 20,000 to hunt Bin Laden and 5,000 for 'occupation' plus a bunch of locals we paid to switch sides. (Note: co-terminus was term an officer used for a planning situation. When he explained it I understood it was the new 'doctrine' for Afghanistan. Another FYI – the 30:1 ratio of troops for population is what the Germans used for their calculations invading Austria.

3) But we're putting all this money into the country…er, yeah, but how much of that comes back home??? A colleague did a study on another 'intervention' and found 95% of the money ended up back home one way or another. I expect that's true of the $1 USD trillion the US spent…robbing the average person to pay the…well you know who they are.

4) But what about what we spent for economic development? A trifle compared to what we poured into the country via the drug trade. Yes, 'we' – as in the people of the 'intervention' countries. We're the consumption side of the drug trade. It's not just poor people who are users – a lot of high-flying folks too – well, they can afford it. Poor addicts I can forgive. The others – not so much. There's plenty of blood on their hands.

5) A long time ago, the management skills the military learned in WWII worked their way into the business community. Now it goes the other way but with a difference. The WWII management skills were learned the hard way. The management 'skills' coming back haven't been tested – they're rather marketing buzz phrases that sound good but they sound good because they're simplistic. Management science is a dismal science….sorry if you're in the discipline but it's a science if theories are thoroughly tested not because they seem convincing. Snake oil is snake oil – which should never, ever be the basis of military doctrine. I've seen too many business ideas-du-jour as a substitute for genuine military planning. Balanced scorecard for strategic planning???? I kid you not.

6) I suppose over-reach was inevitable after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Over-reach happened to the Romans after they defeated all their peer competitors. It wasn't a happy story for them…for us???? We'll see.

7) Afghanistan never, ever was primarily a military problem. When you put military people in charge the problem will end up being defined as a war fighting on because that's the preferred solution.

8) Oh, when you have a major theatre of operations, opening up a 2nd theatre (Iraq) is such a clever idea.

9) FYI – by all of NATO's metrics of progress / success (military, police, political involvement, etc.), the Soviets exceeded them by a wide margin and we know how long their puppet state lasted after the Soviet military left. Why would we ever have thought it would be different this time?

10) ….better stop. I was angry about it 20 years ago and I still haven't got over it. *sigh*

Forgot to answer to OP question….

Worse than Vietnam at least in one regard. After Vietnam the US military did some real soul searching, identified lessons and learned from them to produce, by 1990, a truly excellent professional military force. There's an argument that a professional army isn't necessarily better than a civilian one – but I'm not sure conscription could be reintroduced. Leaving that argument aside, I have grave doubts that the military institution – not the soldiers, the institution – of today is capable of the same soul searching that was done after Vietnam.

To compound matters, I wonder what the last 20 years – or perhaps even 30 – have done to the 1990s force. Time will tell.

"If the west talk of values is only a facade, then we're doomed to head down the same path way as all authoritarian states."

Ya, pretty much. A slow death for democracy, but I won't see it. I'll live out my days in the Pax Americana.

This is the world people wanted, enjoy it. I know I am.

"the institution – of today is capable of the same soul searching that was done after Vietnam."

Don't think so, seems to be looking for unreconstructed neo-confederate sympathizers in the ranks. There is the real problem in the armed forces.

Get rid of those people and everything will be perfect.

That's the "soul" searching you will see take place in the armed forces of the "United" States.

My 2 cents on shadoe1.

After Vietnam the military did soul searching. But the politicians didnt. And I dont see politicians soul searching now – especially as the West falls into tribalism.

So as not to plagiarize the term "Unreconstructed Neo-Confederate Sympathizers", my source for that term is from the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Yes, SPLC had an article years ago that described well organized, para-military groups of unreconstructed neo-confederate sympathizers that conduct regular combat training.

The article was about the dangers of a "secret" army of……

Civil War re-enactors that wear gray uniforms.

Really, I can't make that up. SPLC viewed Civil War re-enactors as a potential "hate group". Those hate groups are everywhere, check under your bed.

Anyway, that's who coined the Stalin era like phrase. Don't have a link and don't care to give anymore time bothering to look for the link, to people who think like that.

Nick, pre-Vietnam the politicians saw all communist countries as a monolith. After Vietnam they were able to see that China and the Soviet Union weren't on the same page – and use that to advantage. The trouble was They weren't prepared for what to do after the collapse of the Soviet Union – it was a world they had not experienced. Unfortunately into that void crept HUBRIS and the belief we could create the world in our own image. The Fates have never looked kindly on such attitudes among we mortals.

Legion, totally agree with your post!

Comments on trillions of aid going back to US was interesting.

I read a recent thing about how Germany wanted to give Afghanistan $95 USD million for military aid. The US government took $15 USD million of that as some sort of "administration fee."

Well, that original link is clearly out of an 'extreme bias' source so I guess that is part of the arithmetic of any response. And, right now and for weeks to come, it is way too soon to be able to answer that question so won't even bother trying.

I'll posit this, however:

If little 'ole me with my hobby knowledge of the history of Afghanistan knew at the time that it was a dumb** s*** stupid idea to put 'boots on the ground' in that country, then the so-called experts who recommended it were either criminally ignorant or had eyeballs going ka-ching, ka-ching over the money making opportunities. Or both. (see posts above)

Now, back to history: for the last several centuries, 'top dog' countries have gotten about a century in that position: Spain, France, England, United States, and here comes China (just how bad will they screw it all up for the world? pre current leader, maybe not so bad, current leader, duck and cover world). Sorry, Russia, you don't even get an 'also ran', maybe in a century if we don't end it all sooner, see below. We've had our century and time is up. Foresaw this more than a decade ago – and nominated China as likely next up (no great stretch of imagination), used to be a gaming group discussion but that group broke apart (and included combat veterans out of Iraq).

While I like to think of myself as patriotic (I did volunteer to serve in the military), I also often ponder just what is the basis of patriotism and I think the best answer is that it was a political invention that has evolved to be how the rich, now that they can't 'force' their poor feudal tenants to die for them, get the less well off to go and die to help keep them rich. That comes out of the times of the so-called Age of Enlightenment if memory serves (perhaps someone more scholarly on the matter can pinpoint it better).

I'm sure some of the 'extreme bias' folks here on TMP won't like some of the above but I like to think that it is all an unbiased view of my perception of reality. Unfortunately, reality seems to be disappearing from too many viewpoints and only 'opinions' matter (and, of course, I am only expressing my opinion). And that means some really nasty, very real reality will be making its appearance in all sorts of unexpected and unwelcoming places. But it will be very real.

And now for something a little easier to digest, and just imagine:

Imagine there's no Heaven
It's easy if you try
No Hell below us
Above us only sky
Imagine all the people
Livin' for today
Ah, ah, ah-ah

Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothin' to kill or die for
And no religion, too
Imagine all the people
Livin' life in peace

Cue the religious fanatics, every corner of religion has them. Seems a pretty good planetary anthem to me, though.

Don't really need to worry about it though, we – the human beast – have been consuming this planet much faster than is sustainable for over 70 years and we continue to accelerate the rate of consumption. This ain't greenpeace save the planet stuff, this is simple arithmetic: If an inescapable island that cannot be reached from the outside in any way can only sustain twenty people but breeds up to 120 people, a lot of the residents are going to die ugly deaths. We, as a planet are heading there. The biomass of this planet may be variable on the margins but it is, in the main, a constant – and we are consuming it beyond any form of sustainability.

Maybe that crazy guy on the corner with the sign that says "We Are All Doomed" has been right all along.

But, hey, the scorpions will still be around to eat the cockroaches. They both can survive nuclear blast zones.

Happy Daze

Much worse, since the Vietnamese didn't conduct terror attacks on the USA from their homeland, nor did they plot future ones there.

Both are true of Afghanistan, and with our now non-existent Southern Border, their entry into the USA to conduct further ops WILL be much easier indeed.

I imagine a lot of "sleeper cells" are already in place, AND more will be coming in short order.

Absolutely is and it isn't even past the first quarter and the Taliban ran the opening kickoff back. This is a complete show and will get worse. Biden should resign over this. The airfield is not defendable they can just ring the city with stingers a shoot everything out of the sky. Why do you stage a pull out in "The fighting season"? I mean they call it that for a reason. Wait for winter, plan an orderly withdrawal and get everyone out we need to get out.

Much worse, since the Vietnamese didn't conduct terror attacks on the USA from their homeland, nor did they plot future ones there.

No, but they were under direction of USSR who certainly did plot nasty stuff against west!

I imagine a lot of "sleeper cells" are already in place, AND more will be coming in short order.

By "sleeper cell" do you mean some disgruntled guy watching some Youtube videos and hiring a truck to mow down people or buying a large knife from Walmart to stab someone?

Thanks to massive expansion of surveillance state, large scale terror attacks are very hard to implement in western countries.

Lone wolves on the other hand sneak under the radar and don't need training or funding or planning.

Eg TERROR ATTACKS IN FRANCE 2019-21

link

5-Mar-19 – stabbing
24-May-19 – pipe bomb
3-Oct-19 – stabbing
3-Jan-20 – stabbing
5-Jan-20 – stabbing
3-Feb-20 – stabbing
4-Apr-20 – stabbing
7-Apr-20 – vehicle ramming
25-Sep-20 – stabbing
16-Oct-20 – beheading
29-Oct-20 – stabbing/beheading
31-Oct-20 – shooting
17-Mar-21 – stabbing
23-Apr-21 – stabbing
28-May-21 – stabbing + shooting

"Wait for winter, plan an orderly withdrawal… "

Legion, totally agree with your post!

I don't think that is my post. And you won't agree with this one …

Regardless … What I got today from the Media:

Military flights have started again.

Pentagon says it can fly out 5000-9000/day.

Taliban appear to show some restraint(?) but still are going door-to-door.

Locals are forced to cook meals for the Taliban. No surprise!

Some from US "behind enemy lines" in Kabul. Those still have to be retrieved.

18000 US contractors kept the AAF flying, etc., etc., they are now gone, obviously.

Gen. Petraus just said this is a "Dunkirk" moment.

Something I see is this is not totally an Intel failure. If at all ? But as has happened before. US elected & appointed leadership does not always listen to it's Military, Intel and special area civilian advisors.

IMO this is what happened here. Some civilian leadership have long demonstrated their inability to make any good geopolitical, military advised, etc., decisions … Some for decades as reported by a number of Intel, military, etc. former insiders.

IMO this operation will get all the US personnel and Afghan that worked for the USA out of "Talibanland". It will take time. The US may have to talk with the Taliban to get our civilians out that are not at the airport.

I think the Taliban since they are not in hiding but clustered in the open. Celebrating victory, etc., etc. May not want to try to take on US Firepower.

E.g. We know where the former Presidential Palace where the Taliban are doing interviews for the media. It would be too easy to turn that into rubble and killing many of their leadership. They don't want to risk that … I'd think …

There have been "foreign fighters"/those not speaking any local language seen in Taliban ranks. Nothing new really …

One of the terrorists released by the Obama admin from Gitmo. Is now in the top of the Taliban leadership. Others who have been release from Gitmo have and are found on the battlefield as well. No surprise …

The Afghan VP fled to the Pansher Valley with ANA SF, etc., etc. to set up a resistance movement.

@Legion 4,

Yes, those are good points. I've seen where, in Iraq, good analysis was ignored only to have the things the analysis warned about happen a few months later. A friend of mine was an analyst in Baghdad. His boss was someone he knew who was used to acting on good analysis. My friend asked why not this time…the answer was it was driven from the 'top'. Objective analysis is bottom up – what's the problem, what are the options and what's the best decision. Policy analysis works in reverse – here's the decision, how do some analysis that supports the decision. A lot of that has been happened – Bosnia, Kosovo, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc. A former colleague – who I've thinks become a little…er, well, seems to be something like PTSD – call these things 'rubble diplomacy' which is probably more accurate than 'nation building'.

FWIW, I think things might somewhat stabilize in Afghanistan. While they harboured Al Qaeda they weren't involved in planning international terrorist before 2001. I don't recall many international terrorist incidents since 2001 – and, if anyone had a motivation to do so, surely it was the Taliban.

I used to, when I did military operational research, point out to people who said the problem was we needed unity of effort that the only unity was everyone agreed they wanted a peaceful, stable country, but after that the unity disappeared…and that they should remember that the Taliban also want a peaceful, stable country. It's just the terms that are different. All that was meant to do was to point out the shallowness of some of the thinking.

That article is trash. Blaming the situation on "wokeness" while ignoring 20 years of activity shows amazing willful ignorance. US policymakers have know the Taliban was resurgent from at least 2017. The US propping up a corrupt government in Kabul and covering for the sexual abuse of young boys are not "cultural strength". We have occupied a region for two decades and are surprised when the locals support a hardline group? "Afghanistan" is a bunch of lines drawn by the British and has very little to do with the realities of the tribal and ethnic groups that actually live in the region.

This has been a debacle in the making since the Bush administration refused to withdraw after OBL withdrew to Pakistan and Bush began diverting to Iraq, largely giving up on OBL. Obama and Trump continued the dumpster fire even as they pledged to end it (at least Obama had OBL's scalp as a justification/trophy). This administration finally pulls the plug on the whole mess and the house of cards finally collapses.

It's amazing that there are those who still want remote murdering in the region and think that will somehow decrease hostility. Let China deal with it- there is a reason that this region is known as the graveyard of empires and imperialistic powers can't seem to help themselves. And the USMIC learned lessons from Vietnam, but they had alot more to do with how you market a forever war and alot less to do with not repeating the same mistakes.

FWIW, I think things might somewhat stabilize in Afghanistan. While they harboured Al Qaeda they weren't involved in planning international terrorist before 2001. I don't recall many international terrorist incidents since 2001 – and, if anyone had a motivation to do so, surely it was the Taliban.

I do agree … But still think there may be some factions fighting each. Which has been the standard forever. But generally the Taliban will keep things under control under their version of the Koran and Sharia Law. But they are playing it down a bit. We'll have to see how women get treated. But it will probably go back to old habits. Bad for the women … again …

However, I feel, we will still have to keep an eye, orbital and drone assets, etc. On AQ & ISIS. With any luck, they being archenemies will slaughter each other. Too busy to plan attacks against the West. But we will have to wait an see …

Taliban also want a peaceful, stable country.

They just released a statement that said as much.

Plus have basically said, they won't stop us from evacing all US citizens, etc., etc., from the Kabul airport …

The Taliban even said they wanted all workers to go back to their jobs. Which only makes sense … someone has to run the daily functions of a city the size of Kabul.

Of course, we really at this point we can't trust them IMO. And what about all those 5000 of Taliban, AQ, ISIS prisoners the Taliban has released from prisons ?

The Taliban wants Uzbekistan to send back about 600 ANA/ANP, etc. to A'stan. I don't think this will bode well …

It's amazing that there are those who still want remote murdering in the region and think that will somehow decrease hostility.

If we see AQ or ISIS planning to attack the West. That may be a good option to use drones, cruise missiles, etc. That is not murder … it's killing terrorists. We may be able to deal with the Taliban but not AQ & ISIS. It would be foolish to think otherwise. Now killing/droning Iran's Gen Suilimani has hit the Iranian gov't and Quds Force link very hard. And know we can take out anyone at anytime.

Now if the PRC/CCP working with the Taliban keeps things under control … so much the better. But AQ & ISIS are still jihadis with blood on their hands. As we speak foreign fighter are in A'stn in the Taliban. As well as in AQ & ISIS …

Don't trust anyone too much … until they prove otherwise. AQ, ISIS and even Iran are still our enemies.

And the USMIC learned lessons from Vietnam,

USMIC = US Military Industrial Complex ?

>USMIC = US Military Industrial Complex

Yup. You know, the same ones who thought arming religious extremists to fight a floundering Soviet Union in Afghanistan was a great idea.

>If we see AQ or ISIS planning to attack the West. That may be a good option to use drones, cruise missiles, etc. That is not murder … it's killing terrorists.

You do realize that we just call whoever gets pasted a "terrorist" even if it was a wedding or something, right? Children or family standing too close to the target? Terrorists. Operator decides a group of people looks like a good/suspicious target? Terrorists. There is very little accountability and investigation after the fact is pretty much non-existent. Independent investigations indicate thousands of civilian casualties. Civilian populations in those areas are absolutely terrified by cars/buildings/people randomly blowing up.

>Don't trust anyone too much … until they prove otherwise. AQ, ISIS and even Iran are still our enemies.

AQ and ISIS are not the Taliban. In fact, the Taliban has worked with both this and the previous administration to try and avoid terrorist strikes on US troops. This does not make them good (see the mass executions, rapes, child brides, etc.), just willing to work with the US to some degree. The fact that they are releasing prisoners, many of which were enemies of the previous regime, is not as damning as you think it is. Kabul was notoriously corrupt. The Taliban seems to have figured out that you need support from the various factions to have any sort of national power and is largely leaving regions alone so long as they follow the big rules and proclaim loyalty. Since many of these regional leaders are pretty conservative, especially in rural areas, this is not a big ask. It absolutely sets the stage for some horrible persecution down the road.

It is also very likely that without a concentrated Western invading presence to unite against, many of the more militant groups will fall to infighting in the power vacuum. Especially given the influx of foreigners to ISIL.

How well China will deal with this, we shall see. Greedy imperial powers lusting after resources and control have a bad history here. China's arrogance does not bode well for them.

Iran is a totally different state actor (that, ironically, helped us fight ISIL and traditionally hasn't been on good terms with the Taliban) that the US has jerked around so much while enabling the Saudis that it would be a joke if it weren't so horribly true (our plastering of a Iranian general in a friendly country, for example). Unfortunately for Iran, we back both Israel and the KSA unquestioningly. It's no wonder they are racing for nuclear weaponry when we have shown no compunction about ignoring agreements with them or even assassination. Looking at how we deal with Pakistan, by comparison, it's a no brainer.

The more you look, the more you see the US's fingers in many of the problems of the Middle East. We then wonder why they keep getting bitten. Pulling our hands back is a good way to stop that, but may make us look at the messes we have made.

You do realize that we just call whoever gets pasted a "terrorist" even if it was a wedding or something, right? Children or family standing too close to the target? Terrorists. Operator decides a group of people looks like a good/suspicious target?

Yes I realize that all that … To safeguard US/Europe … we may have to put collateral damage as secondary priority. Sad but true …

Note : Operators will have to get authorization to fire as well. That is a fact. I hope you/everyone knows that … It's not a free fire zone, video game, etc. Don't want to kill just anyone & everyone.

But also note : Collateral Damage still happens. It is a fact of war. Non-combatants may and could die. All we can do is attempt to avoid it in most situations.

In many, many, cases US troops were denied fire support in both A'stan & Iraq because of fear of collateral damage. Costing us our lives … As a former Rifle Plt Ldr & Mech Co Cdr, '79-'90. I wouldn't want to risk my troops lives because of this type of ROE. Would anyone ?

AQ and ISIS are not the Taliban.

I know that …

In fact, the Taliban has worked with both this and the previous administration to try and avoid terrorist strikes on US troops. This does not make them good (see the mass executions, rapes, child brides, etc.), just willing to work with the US to some degree.

I have never heard that … and links ? And yes, they are still bad guys. But we do have a US Gen there talking to them now. link

many of the more militant groups will fall to infighting in the power vacuum. Especially given the influx of foreigners to ISIL.

And that is a very good thing … infighting … and the Taliban have a lot of new weapons & equipment the ANA/ANP left behind.

Iran is a totally different state actor (that, ironically, helped us fight ISIL and traditionally hasn't been on good terms with the Taliban)

Yes geopolitical/Realpolitik is a sometime … Again Iran, ISIS, AQ, Pakistan, are not our friends … Nor really are the Taliban. Just ask some of our troops who were there.

Considering the past and present conduct of the Taliban – should the comparison not be the fall of Cambodia/Phnom Penh rather than Saigon?

Legion if Afghan or other Muslim civilian casualties are acceptable then so are American and western civilians.

Anyone with an interest in this stuff knows US drone attacks were often against people who merely fit against a certain profile in a computer algorythm (so-called Disposition Matrix or kill list). Literally it compiles demographic data and known associates/family members and has them destroyed. Sometimes they are terrorists but anywhere up to 80% are not.

And weddings, funerals, hospitals etc bombed by Saudis using US made F-15s dropping US supplied bombs after bring refuelled by USAF tankers are not terrorists.

NATO even refused to investigate civilian casualties they caused in Libya in 2011.

This is what I keep saying – the west increasingly stands for nothing and for decades started creeping towards the kind of behaviour we are meant to stand against.

"Objective analysis is bottom up – what's the problem, what are the options and what's the best decision. Policy analysis works in reverse – here's the decision, how do some analysis that supports the decision."

@ shadoe01 Thank you. I have been trying to summarise that all morning.

@ jamemurp "Afghanistan" is a bunch of lines drawn by the British

To be fair, the only line the British drew in Afghanistand was on the southern border defining the Northwest Frontier districts. The situation there was essentially inherited from the Sikhs when their kingdom was finally annexed in 1849. The kingdom of Afghanistan had been in existance for a considerable time, although substantially diminished in size by the mid C19th, thanks in no small part to the Sikhs.

Legion if Afghan or other Muslim civilian casualties are acceptable then so are American and western civilians.

Remember 9/11 … and all the attacks on US, etc. non-combatants … That followed …

Anyone with an interest in this stuff knows US drone attacks were often against people who merely fit against a certain profile in a computer algorythm (so-called Disposition Matrix or kill list). Literally it compiles demographic data and known associates/family members and has them destroyed. Sometimes they are terrorists but anywhere up to 80% are not.

And that is the way it was done at times. Not pretty … 80% seems a bit high, IMO. But you are trying to paint a negative narrative again. No surprise … SOP with you and the USA … You are as biased as I am … maybe more ?

As I said so many times … if the USA was not concerned about CD there would be places on the planet that would look like the dark side of the Moon. Without WMDs, just standard ordinance.

This is what I keep saying – the west increasingly stands for nothing and for decades started creeping towards the kind of behaviour we are meant to stand against.

Sadly as we all know the world is not black & white but many shades of grey. I must be a bad person as I put the lives if my troops and US population and it's allies over the enemies'. Unfortunately the enemy hide among the non-combatants in an insurgency but you/we all know that.

Did you read this I posted ? … Note : Operators will have to get authorization to fire as well. That is a fact. I hope you/everyone knows that … It's not a free fire zone, video game, etc. Don't want to kill just anyone & everyone.

However, sometimes it does happen … the wrong people die.

But let me add mistakes like incorrect target ID, etc., etc., happens. Guess they should have thought about that when they attacked the US. The return fire may hit non-combatants …

Or this ?

In many, many, cases US troops were denied fire support in both A'stan & Iraq because of fear of collateral damage. Costing us our lives … As a former Rifle Plt Ldr & Mech Co Cdr, '79-'90. I wouldn't want to risk my troops lives because of this type of ROE. Would anyone ?

Would you ardo ? jamemurp ? Anyone ?

And I posted this … Yes geopolitical/Realpolitik is a sometime … Again Iran, ISIS, AQ, Pakistan, are not our friends … Nor really are the Taliban. Just ask some of our troops who were there.

Bad things happen in war … to & on both sides … You know that as do most others here.

Blowing up random sheep farmers is not protecting Americans.

Destroying Libya was certainly against western interests!

As for American troops, I wouldn't have them deployed on a pointless nation building exercise in the first place. Whole thing was flawed from start and many people understood that except the US elites who thought they could Americanise the world with LGBs and spec ops.

And if you have exhausted all options and have to wage war then wage war without mercy until you're knee deep in the blood of your enemies.

geopolitical/Realpolitik is a Bleeped text

There is no realpolitik in US foreign policy. This whole 20 year Afghan debacle is proof of it as is Libya, invasion of Iraq, American on and off bungling in Somalia, Ukraine, pointless sanctions against Cuba, allowing Chinese to take SC Sea etc etc etc.

Even the drone war and the disposition matrix simply live on because someone started it and no one has thought to review it or its efficacy let alone the morality of it.

Realpolitik is what the Europeans do (eg Nordstream 2), Russians and Turks (on and off allies depending on circumstances), the Chinese etc.

It is an unknown in America because the elites are convinced of America's exceptionalism and manifest destiny.