"Afghanistan findings" Topic

Subject: House GOP releases scathing report on Biden's withdrawal from Afghanistan

Interesting, but what many of us have said already.

link

The images of people falling out of wheel wells was all we needed to know it was a disaster. Plus the bombing. Joe Biden has been wrong on every major foreign policy decision …not my opinion…Bob Gates said that. Bottom line is if we have civilian control of the military we need strategically competent leadership and that is lacking here. Tying to wargaming…US forces in games should suffer because they are hampered by higher command.

Yes, I've been following this. And a number of investigations have said the same. In reality certain heads should roll/be impeached/fired. We know all the usual suspects who should deserve this treatment. As mentioned, many of us knew this was a televised .

And yet . Many Ret. GENs, etc. had said this was an abortion of an operation. And the civilian leaders wanted to play soldier. They didn't listen to the professionals. Optics/politics is more important than anything else. But they still call this debacle a success.

And like so many situations as this , the guilty/worthless/incompetent, etc. who did this will not be punished it anyway.

It won't affect any votes at all.
To paraphrase Kit Marlowe, "That was in another country. And besides the wench is dead."
Plus, it was 3 years ago, so who cares?
The Decider is off wandering off and incoherent. The poor dear can't be held responsible for things he can't remember. 🙄🤷

And the Democrats released their own version of the report.
I am not interested in reading it. The withdrawal was a Trump plan but the pathetic execution was under Democratic leadership.

It was a whole-of-system failure. The leadership failed. The directing "national security" apparatus failed. The military failed. The intelligence system, in all of its expensive, secretive glory, failed. The diplomats failed, and the people on the ground failed. The most expensive and technologically advanced defense system in the history of the world was turned out of Kabul by people without the education or skills to make the weapons or ammunition they were using. The only reason it wasn't worse was because the invaders retained some residual respect for the capacity of the system to suddenly blanket them with high explosive, and because that system's erratic history made them wary of the potential for a sudden and unexpected outcome. Call it "legacy deterrence," or "the power of the unpredictable," if you like.

But that won't last forever, and I wouldn't count on seeing it next time.

The TMP report came out a couple of years ago. I think it covered the main points well. Whatever political impact Congress is looking for now has already happened.

The US needed to be out of the Afghan hell hole. After 20 years of war our men and women are not getting killed over there. Our monetary assistance has been reduced from billions of dollars to millions of dollars. It was a good decision that one man was brave enough to make regardless of the political fallout.

However, tragic withdrawal the was more about politics and optics, plus an election promise. A formula destined to be wrong. As well as with e.g. Vietnam – most couldn't find that place on a map either …

Plus, it was 3 years ago, so who cares?

Hmmmm ? Well historians especially in the military have to care. They have to care. As is so often said to paraphrase, "those that don't understand/study history are doomed to repeat it." … Or something like that. As an Army officer we studied history, we were supposed to read it, etc. learn lessons, etc. What should be done or shouldn't.

E.g. Another POTUS said he'd pull the US out of Iraq. Against what the military and intel advisors had recommended. Then the vacuum was filled by a very large mob of murdering troglodytes. As the Iraqi gov't couldn't handle it on their own.

Result – The US and other allies had to go back and attrite ISIS to the point as it is today. And again, the US has troops in Iraq[2500] and Syria[900] with the mission to keep ISIS from coming back. And on occasion kill off some of the ISIS remnants. Just killed about 15 the other day. The US and Iraqi forces.

Flash forward to today.

Again, the military and intel advise was to keep about 2500 US troops[plus 3000 contractors] in country and hold Bagram. To observe the Taliban, AQ, etc. if they started to look like a threat again. Well that is why we had drones, A-10s, AH-64s, etc. that could fly out and take of the problem. As well as C-17s, etc. flying in daily to resupply etc. As we see we still do in Syria and Iraq primarily to kill off more ISIS …

Add NATO force there did not want this to happen and were not told of this US retreat. They knew there needed to be some troops there to observe and take direct actions if required. "Better to fight them there than in the streets of Western Europe." …

Another key strategic consideration. Is that Bagram is between Iran and China. That alone should be a reason to hold Bagram.

In both cases in Iraq & A'stan, it was/is reminiscent of 1938. "Peace in our time." …

Inside the original Afghanistan pullout deal. IIRC there were no Americans killed in the 18 months after this negotiation, until the cluster at Bagram.

link

🤔

To me the most interesting:

"Biden was not bound by deadlines in Trump's Doha agreement with Taliban

The report found that Biden and Vice President Harris were advised by top leaders that the Taliban were already in violation of the conditions of the Doha agreement and, therefore, the U.S. was not obligated to leave.

The committee also found NATO allies had expressed their vehement opposition to the U.S. decision to withdraw. The British Chief of the Defense staff warned that "withdrawal under these circumstances would be perceived as a strategic victory for the Taliban."

Biden kept on Zalmay Khalilzad, a Trump appointee who negotiated the agreement, as special representative to Afghanistan – a signal that the new administration endorsed the deal.

At the Taliban's demand, Khalilzad had shut out the Afghan government from the talks – a major blow to President Ashraf Ghani's government.

When Trump left office, some 2,500 U.S. troops remained in Afghanistan. Biden himself was determined to draw that number to zero no matter what, according to Col. Seth Krummrich, chief of staff for Special Operations Command, who told the committee, "The president decided we're going to leave, and he's not listening to anybody."

Then-State Dept. spokesperson Ned Price admitted in testimony the Doha agreement was "immaterial" to Biden's decision to withdraw."

So please stop saying Biden had to do it because of the Trump deal. The current administration "wanted" to do it. They saw it as a political coup… until it became a fiasco with multiple US soldiers killed and wounded and many US citizens and Afghan supporters left behind. Oops! and of course, the abandonment of Bagram Air Force Base.

Few other interesting things:

"When the last U.S. military flight departed Kabul, around 1,000 Americans were left on the ground, as were more than 90% of SIV-eligible Afghans.

The report found that local embassy employees had been de-prioritized for evacuation, with many turned away from the embassy and airport in tears. On the day of the Taliban takeover, the U.S.' only guidance for those who might be eligible for evacuation was to "not travel to the airport until you have been informed by email that departure options exist."

And since the NSC did not send over guidelines for who was eligible for evacuation and who to prioritize because they were "at risk," the State Department processed thousands of evacuees with no documentation.

The U.S. government had "no idea if people being evacuated were threats," one State Department employee told the committee."

Also
"In addition to the $7 USD billion in abandoned U.S. weapons, the Taliban likely gained access to up to $57 USD million in U.S. funds that were initially given to the Afghan government.

The Taliban's interior minister, Sirajuddin Haqqani, proclaimed in February 2024 that relations with the rest of the world, especially the U.S., are "irrelevant" to its policymaking."

All so we could be out close to "9/11". 😔

All and a certain VP claimed "she was the last person in the room" when the decision was made… and agreed with it.

Yes, and with the horrendous pullout in A'stan. The US Forces lost 13 KIA, 45 WIA plus 170 Afghans. And as many reports have said, and I say the hearing in Congress. Where intel put out who the ISIS-K suicide bomber was to the US Forces there on the ground. A USMC Sniper Tm had the bomber ID'd and in their sights. The ROE coming down from the CinC[well probably from the WH civilian staff, e.g. Sec of State, etc.] That the US Forces could not engage without getting it OK'd by higher.

The Sniper Tm had gone all the way up to their Bn Cdr. Who said he could not give them the go ahead to kill the bomber. And didn't know who could. I was an Army Mech Bn Cdr, '87-'89, had many of my troops trained at the Sniper School at Benning[now Moore]. I can't imagine how this scenario actually happening. But it did …

That is from the USMC Sniper Tm NCO who talking to Congress at the hearings not to long after the abortive withdrawal … IIRC … he was WIA'd too.

I see no way to call anything about this disaster of the retreat from A'stan as a success … But still, some in very high places do …

Inch high +1

OVI +10

@smithsco

Tying to wargaming…US forces in games should suffer because they are hampered by higher command.

Good point -- US forces should have an activation penalty or turn delay while commanders seek approval from a politically paralyzed chain of command. Or maybe a "ROE Response table" where you roll to see what you can do -- so you want to conduct an airstrike campaign on Houthi missile launchers, but can only conduct patrol instead based on the dice roll.

@Legion4

And as many reports have said, and I say the hearing in Congress. Where intel put out who the ISIS-K suicide bomber was to the US Forces there on the ground. A USMC Sniper Tm had the bomber ID'd and in their sights. The ROE coming down from the CinC[well probably from the WH civilian staff, e.g. Sec of State, etc.] That the US Forces could not engage without getting it OK'd by higher.

And when the current POTUS team did decide to finally respond after the suicide bombing they misidentified the target and blew up a car full of kids, and then scurried away from responsibility for that deadly mistake as fast as they could, aided US media who suddenly dropped coverage of the fiasco.

"so you want to conduct an airstrike campaign on Houthi missile launchers, but can only conduct patrol instead based on the dice roll."

Or your missile content is changed to "DEI pamphlets", to be dropped on them. Because A new administration has decided we must destroy wrong minded attitudes instead. Also you must do it in an unarmed Plane to show them our peaceful intent. 😂🤣

"And when the current POTUS team did decide to finally respond after the suicide bombing they misidentified the target and blew up a car full of kids, and then scurried away from responsibility for that deadly mistake as fast as they could, aided US media who suddenly dropped coverage of the fiasco."

And still broadcast they had killed the terrorists. 😔

And when the current POTUS team did decide to finally respond after the suicide bombing they misidentified the target and blew up a car full of kids, and then scurried away from responsibility for that deadly mistake as fast as they could, aided US media who suddenly dropped coverage of the fiasco.

Yes, I remember that clearly … another indication that there was no planning and it was amateur hour. Some decided to play soldier, and they didn't read the instructs.

At times when disaster occurs, it only gets compounded. Especially when there is no real leadership or those who are leaders are not allowed to do their jobs.

Just heard part of the report read on FOX. Where another US GEN says, to paraphrase, the decision was made to leave A'stan by the CinC and his staff. And the military's advice was ignored. As I have said many times, watching this debacle on TV. Being a former Infantry Officer and Bn Air Ops Officer(S3-Air) in the 101, I watched in disbelief. No one in the military, even retired/former officer or senior NCO would have planned this debacle.

I knew and many of my friends former or still on active duty said the same. I am on the local Military Officers Assoc. of America group's staff. And the MOAA's liaison to USAFR base. Talking to many junior & senior officers both retired and former. I could not find one that thought other than I did.

And some in gov't or media have the s to call this a successful operation ? Dunkirk was more successful … and it actually was in comparison …

You do realize that y'all are just preaching to the choir here.
The congressional report only came out the way it did because the majority was of the opposite party of the administration.
And it won't affect the votes in the coming election. Minds have already been made up and neither the majority report nor the minority report, if anyone has even heard of them, will influence anyone. Nobody's mind will be changed.

Whill4,

I don't think anyone is arguing that we should have stay in Afghanistan. The issue is how we withdrew. That was a debacle. Pure and simply.

The Afghan report by the same member of Congress in 2022 mentions Harris 2 times. In the new one he mentions her 251 times, just in time for the debate.

I think most people are already as aware as they are going to be. Those who followed this and vote have factored in Biden's mistakes, along with those of his team who share responsibility. Harris may have had some role, but it's hard to imagine it was significant. She would have been aware at least. This is mostly Biden's mess, IMO.

"Funny, I always thought TMP was a wargaming site, I am sure I am not the only one to think this discussion has no place here!"

TMP is a history as welll as a wargaming site.

War is" the continuation of politics by other means".

So war is the failure of politicians and politics. To discuss war, one must include the history and policies that led to it and those that failed.

Why have conversations about slavery, secession and the 1864 election on the ACW Discussion site? That's all politics. You can't game it.

Why discuss the constitution and the rights or wrongs of the US breaking off on the Revolution discussion site? You can't game it.

Why have a site talking about comic books? You can't game it.

There are discussions I disagree with. I skip them or get involved.

There are a few posts in this about how one could throw it into a game, as there were on another Afghan thread. Dice rolls for politicians getting involved in things they shouldn't.

I think she might have refilled everyone's glasses.

You're talking about a woman who once made her staff help her rehearse for a dinner party. I doubt she contributed much of substance.

"The congressional report only came out the way it did because the majority was of the opposite party of the administration."

All committees like all of these, are partisan. It is the nature of the beast and politics. The choice to believe or disbelieve are left to those who read them. 🙂

"Harris may have had some role, but it's hard to imagine it was significant"

As far as the ex VP and current candidate. I and others, go by her own words.
Now either she lied to try and garner gravitas, or she actually contributed and is equally responsible for the debacle.

Neither are positives.

Subject: Vice President Harris says she was the last person in the room with President Biden when he made the Afghanistan troop withdrawal decision: "I have seen… | By ‏‎CNN Politics‎‏Facebook

link

Subject: Kamala Harris' central role in U.S. Afghanistan withdrawal – Los Angeles Times

link

Funny, I always thought TMP was a wargaming site, I am sure I am not the only one to think this discussion has no place here!

That's why I tried to redirect this to wargaming. I've played a lot of moderns rules in which the US just runs roughshod over insurgents. Making a US handicap in these types of conflicts where US forces can't engage unless engaged first and/or make checks to do a lot of things like permission for airstrikes etc that take a turn would make it far more realistic and balanced. Insurgents walking right up to a firebase while the commander is on the phone asking for permission to attempt to call in an airstrike next round feels about right.

Well this was my response on a previous Afghan thread. Quoting myself. 🙂

"🤔 maybe this will help you use it in a game.

So let us say you playing British vs Boers.

Each turn the Boers roll 3 6 sided dice. If they roll 3 5's they get so many pounds carelessly or corruptly handled by the British Government. They determine how many weapons that buys them. If they roll 3 6's and the roll again on a 20 sided die and get either a 19 or 20. The British Army retreats from an occupied area and leave all weapons of those units behind for the Boers.

This can be adapted for any conflict.

I'm sure there are other ideas on how to use this information. Have fun. 🙂"

You do realize that y'all are just preaching to the choir here.

Yeah John, but have not been around too much so we got to talk to you while you're here !

The congressional report only came out the way it did because the majority was of the opposite party of the administration.

However based on everything I have heard, read, etc. seems most if not all of those findings in the report are correct.

The issue is how we withdrew. That was a debacle. Pure and simply.

Agree but the plan actually to have about 2500 troops + 3000 Contractors. As I have mentioned before … But based on the comments from that new report. The CinC would not listen to the military nor intel agencies. Including the JCS, DNI, NATO Mission Cdr, etc. The CinC and some of his admin wanted to withdraw from A'stan no matter what.

The US Military takes an oath, as many of us know, part of it says … follow the orders of the POTUS[CinC]. … Which sadly this time couldn't have been more wrong. Based on the POTUS's passed record with geopolitics, etc. it is said he has not been right about that for decades.

OVI +1

"Funny, I always thought TMP was a wargaming site, I am sure I am not the only one to think this discussion has no place here!"

TMP is a history as welll as a wargaming site.

War is" the continuation of politics by other means".

So war is the failure of politicians and politics. To discuss war, one must include the history and policies that led to it and those that failed.

Correct … I agree totally … War and politics are not mutually exclusive.

I strongly suspect Harris embellished her involvement as part of her campaign. But given the numbers of outrageous lies flying around DC these last few years, she is a lightweight in this department.

She said she was the last one out of the room. Regardless of its veracity, she said in the national media … She may have thought it was a good idea to say such. She appears to be wrong ?

But if she gets elected as POTUS … won't make any difference …

These are not necessarily incompatible accounts. It is very possible that she was the last one in the room- and that she served up a helping of the word salad for which she is justly famous, affecting absolutely nothing at all. It's even possible to reconcile this with her apparent belief that she somehow affected the outcome- but if you try to do that, you don't wind up with flattering conclusions about her ability to read a room and understand what happened.

9lbs rd +1 I agree we have no idea what went on in that room [or many others in the WH ?]. However, it seems to me and others, based on interviews, etc. in the media, etc. She like some others wanted to take some credit for this "successful"9!!?!) operation …

I think the old saying was something like "hitching your horse up to the wrong wagon" … 🤠🐎 For all the obvious reasons … especially in an election year.

However, this is what I know … IMO, based on my training, experience, etc. from being on Active Duty in US Army, '79-'90 + USAR '91-'92 … The new Report is correct on most if not all points …

From Military.com … GOP Report Findings

link

*As a sidebar … I don't mind getting SNIPPED ✂ … I just can't remember what I posted there ? … 🤔😣

Right now, the Congress is awarding the 13 US service members killed at Abbey Gate the civilian Gold Metal[I think it is called?].

Wonder if those in the US Gov't that are responsible for this botched operation are anywhere to be found at this ceremony. As they were not at the wreath laying ceremony at Arlington last week or so.

Guess they all had better things to do than honoring the dead they are responsible for …

Yes it seems some of the family members are speaking giving tributes (live on Fox). The mother of Cpl. Humberto Sanchez is speaking now.

Yes, I just saw that … Still no sign of the POTUS or VP …

Which is just plain wrong. It was a debacle on your watch. Still, these men and women died because of it. Have some class and show up to honor them. Not everything needs to be politics. Carter was not that great of a president, but when the operation failed to rescue the Tehran hostages and people died he stood up and said it was all his fault.

Grattan54: So true. Self responsibility seems to be dying a quick death. It always seems to be someone else's fault for one's own failures and weaknesses. It also makes it much easier when others tell you, you are right and IT IS someone else's fault too.

Carter was a good , honorable and decent man. Which is a lot more than I can say about recent inhabitants of that office.
He made mistakes, to be sure. I don't think he enriched himself in office either. I may not have agreed with him on many things, but he never frightened me, nor did he make me embarrassed that he was our President.

Should we have established a permanent base in Kabul? Just like other U.S. bases around the world. It would have denied a haven for terrorists. The agreement that Trump made with the Taliban (at Camp David of all places) made no provision for free elections and human rights. Women there are treated as slaves, little more than cattle. It is only a matter of time before Al-Qaeda reconstitute themselves in Afghanistan. They probably already have. The clock is ticking.

I think Trump was talked out of inviting the Taliban to Camp David. Bolton and Pompeo were not in agreement on this. Bolton was right in the end – you don't sign a deal with the Taliban. As it is, the admin left out the Afghan government in the agreement talks, Taliban prisoners were released.

Biden did not just blow the evacuation, he had no plan of his own to secure anything. The previous agreement was worthless, the timeline meaningless. Our forces were drawn down, consequences ignored. At the very least Bagram air base should have been secured and defended. A base in Kabul as well.

Again from the congressional findings:

"Biden was not bound by deadlines in Trump's Doha agreement with Taliban

The report found that Biden and Vice President Harris were advised by top leaders that the Taliban were already in violation of the conditions of the Doha agreement and, therefore, the U.S. was not obligated to leave.

The committee also found NATO allies had expressed their vehement opposition to the U.S. decision to withdraw. The British Chief of the Defense staff warned that "withdrawal under these circumstances would be perceived as a strategic victory for the Taliban."

Biden kept on Zalmay Khalilzad, a Trump appointee who negotiated the agreement, as special representative to Afghanistan – a signal that the new administration endorsed the deal.

At the Taliban's demand, Khalilzad had shut out the Afghan government from the talks – a major blow to President Ashraf Ghani's government.

When Trump left office, some 2,500 U.S. troops remained in Afghanistan. Biden himself was determined to draw that number to zero no matter what, according to Col. Seth Krummrich, chief of staff for Special Operations Command, who told the committee, "The president decided we're going to leave, and he's not listening to anybody."

Then-State Dept. spokesperson Ned Price admitted in testimony the Doha agreement was "immaterial" to Biden's decision to withdraw."

Grattan +1

Which is just plain wrong. It was a debacle on your watch. Still, these men and women died because of it.

Yes and I can't imagine anyone thinking what the POTUS and his Admin did by ignoring the Military and Intel agencies advise … Was a good thing. But yes, as we see there are many in DC that see this embarrassment as a success.

Carter was a good , honorable and decent man.

Many forgot he was SSBN[Nuke Sub] Cdr. And even before that when the USN was working with nukes. He risked his life to stop a small nuke explosion. He was a real US hero … And so many don't even know.

Should we have established a permanent base in Kabul?

NO, Bagram was a much better choice. If for nothing else is has more runways and apron space.

Plus, it is very heavily fortified and defended.

You don't use an airport next to an enemy held town. Unless it is cleared. For obvious reasons.

Note the US Embassy Complex is in Kabul IIRC.

It is fortified and had a number of US Military units there to protect the US staff, etc., IIRC. They should have been evac'd to Bagram before all US Forces withdrew and abandoned it to the Taliban. Evac'ing civilians in a priority … always. Before the military forces.[someone in the Biden Admin must have missed that day.]

The Embassy Compound should have been evac'd with all the US non-combatants being flown by to US UH-60s and CH-47 helicopters to Bagram. With each Lift being covered by AH-64s, A-10s, etc. from Bagram. All likely or known enemy locations would be pre-targeted along the flight routes. If FA was within range and/or CAS loitering.

it would have denied a haven for terrorists

It would have been unless we decided to hold it. Would take too many troops. Bagram would be Ft. Apache. For all the reasons I already posted. Once all US civilians and remaining security forces were evac'd to Bagram. Kabul will belong to the Taliban. It serves no purpose once all our people are gone.

Just like other U.S. bases around the world.

Not too many bases are currently in a failed state full of the enemy. The closest to that is the DMZ in the ROK. Been there … did that … twice. However, the ROK is thriving, unlike A'stan.

The agreement that Trump made with the Taliban (at Camp David of all places) made no provision for free elections and human rights.

The Taliban already violated the agreement, which was no surprise. So, unless the Taliban were following the rules of the agreement. Trump said, No deal …

As OVI quoted from the new report …

Biden was not bound by deadlines in Trump's Doha agreement with Taliban

That is the way it was left when Trump was voted out. The Biden Admin had an open door to make their own deal with the Taliban. That was way out of their league as we see. Albeit no one could really make a good deal with them. All they understand is force and the threat of force/firepower.

Women there are treated as slaves, little more than cattle. It is only a matter of time before Al-Qaeda reconstitute themselves in Afghanistan.

Unless the Taliban, AQ, and ISIS-K were all eliminated that was going to and still is happening. A few centuries of living in the 15th Century, changing religious belief of a culture that is so wedded to it. And willing to die for those beliefs… Makes it next to impossible. The men there like living in the 15th Century. And that is where they will stay. It appears for a very long time.

It is only a matter of time before Al-Qaeda reconstitute themselves in Afghanistan.

That is why the GENs wanted 2500 US Military Force + 3000 Contractors to stay in country. Operating out of Bagram. So if AQ, ISIS, etc. start to look like a threat to the West again. The US airpower, etc. flying out of Bagram will put an end to much of it. Repeat as needed. They will have a hard time reconstituting with ordinance of all kinds falling on their heads. And resupply is flown in daily with C-17 into Bagram.

Plus the NATO Forces were to stay too. So, they could assist in keeping eyes on AQ, ISIS, etc. They don't want them in Europe any more than the US wants islamic terrorists roaming the streets of America. But with the current open border policy sanctioned by the US Gov't some are already here …

Earlier in this thread, I said "who cares". I was specifically referring to voters.
I've also said that minds are made up on all sides.
Going in to the Biden Administration, it was obvious that the debacle in Afghanistan was entirely predictable.
Remember the photos of the Situation Room when Bin Laden was taken out? According to reports at the time, the opinion to take him out was unanimous, with one exception. Biden.
Obama was on board. Hillary was on board.

We haven't won a war since WWII. And, not by coincidence, we haven't declared war since then either. Ponder that.
We keep getting involved in wars because we believe we are the World's Policeman.
We overthrew legitimate elected governments in Iran and stuck with the Shah.
We intervened in Korea after deliberately excluding it from our zone of interests.
We took up after the French lost in Indochina.

And the sad fact is that we never really tried to win. I'm not blaming our armed forces. They did their best. I am blaming our Government. From Dulles to MacNamara to Kissinger to Cheney. All were only interested in blocking "movements" and "showing resolve", American lives be damned. And foreign lives be damned too.
And that gave us 9/11. Which gave us Afghanistan.

You know, isolationism isn't all that bad.

I might also point out that we, thanks to Dulles, were "supporting" partisans in Ukraine (back when it was "the Ukraine") until at least 1956. As usual, we gave them just enough to be a pain in the ass to the Soviets, but not enough to win. It was enough to get thousands of civilians killed.
Just as the Soviets were doing elsewhere. Some right wingers are whining that we have no business being involved in Ukraine, but what about the early 1950s? Fighting Commies!
Can one trace Soviet involvement in Cuba to this? It's at least something to think about.
Ukraine should have kept their nukes, but thanks to wise "statesmen"….

So, our messing around where we didn't belong led directly to 9/11. Or so said Bin Laden. We can't expect fanatics to be logical, but that was his story and he stuck to it.
So we went in after him, and thought it would be a good idea to stay in a country where nobody since Alexander the Great succeeded in staying. We acted so surprised when our chosen puppets didn't really want us there.
Please explain to me what was America's strategic interest in Afghanistan. Use small words, since I'm obviously not very knowledgeable or sophisticated.
Cheney decided that conquering Iraq and Afghanistan was sufficient and we needed no coherent plans for the occupation.
Again this is no slur on our fighting personnel. They did the best they could.
What I hate is the idiot "statesmen" who run things. Who want to appease other idiot statesmen in other countries. And then we change our foreign policy every 4 or 8 years.
Bush stuck Obama with his policy. Obama passed the mess on to Trump who wisely wanted no part of it. (Please note the faint praise for Trump. You won't often see that from me. 🙄)
Trump passed on half baked and half assed plans to Biden, who as usual chose the worst way out, disastrously.
But we are out.

The extremely ironic recent development is that Cheney opposes Trump.
What a farce and laughing stock America is.
.

Just as the Soviets were doing elsewhere. Some right wingers are whining that we have no business being involved in Ukraine, but what about the early 1950s? Fighting Commies!

The objection is THERE'S NO FRIUCKING PLAN! There's no realistic plan to prosecute and end this war. What is the goal, the end game?? What does "winning" look like? Do you think Ukraine will be able militarily defeat Russia?

I don't think that's gonna happen. And neither will NATO be able to march to Moscow and topple Putin, so WHAT IS THE POINT?? The war will only end via a negotiated settlement, or with Ukrain's collapse. OR NATO and the current POTUS continue to miscalculate and start WW3 – especially since the brainiacs running this mess brought us the Arab Spring, the Libya War, ISIS, Civil War in Libya and Syria, the collapse of Lebanon, the rise of Iran and it's proxies and their Oct 7 attack, the rising power of China and its sabre rattling, the fall of Afghanistan and the Ukraine War.

Btw, I agree with much of the rest of what you said.

SB true. Also not accounting for what we send and where it goes to. The longer this goes on, the more chances for the ultimate mistake. I mean seriously, who is running the government right now. The President has spent 40% of his term on vacation. The VP is out Campaigning.

I personally don't trust the current President to be capable of making correct decisions, if things become serious. Be honest, do you?

I mean the latest is the long range missiles and Putin's response if they are deployed and cross deep into Russia.

I hope they negotiate a peace soon, but not holding my breath.

Trump passed on half baked and half assed plans to Biden, who as usual chose the worst way out, disastrously.
But we are out.

"Half-baked" might be not that accurate. Because as we know the plan was a WIP. When dealing with islamic radicals, terrorists, etc. It's like trying to herd rabid feral cats. Had he been re-elected; things would have worked out differently. If for nothing else, it would not have been the disastrous "retreat" as it was under the current POTUS & VP.

Plus, as has been said many times. The A'stan Gov't, ANA and ANP were not up to the task … well … to do anything for the most part. Only made worse by most of their population was totally wedded to their versions of a religion, old tribal/ethnic hatreds and conflicting warlord, mullah, etc. affiliations. Most not living in the 20th century let alone the 21st.

Agreed that the current POTUS, as his entire history has shown. To quote John- "who as usual chose the worst way out, disastrously." The comment of the day if not the week. 👍👍

As well as to quote John again, "According to reports at the time, the opinion to take him out was unanimous, with one exception. Biden. "… Two for Two ! Bravo Sir ! Bravo !!

But we are out.

That could have happened without the way things were done. But again, the current POTUS seems to know no other way …

"I'm not blaming our armed forces. They did their best. I am blaming our Government.

3 for 3 !!! 👍👍👍👍👍👍👍👍

Some right wingers are whining that we have no business being involved in Ukraine

Frankly I think both the US and NATO need to give all the support they can to Ukraine. Again, IMO, the US support was not soon enough and, in the numbers, required to push Russia out of their lands. Even at this point the Ukraine has attrited the Russians severely. If they got more sooner … I'd think the situation would be different. Again, as I have said often, the US leadership was/is risk adverse and feared/fears escalation. And our enemies knew/know it …

Again … FWIW – from OVI's post from the most recent A'stan debacle report:

"Biden was not bound by deadlines in Trump's Doha agreement with Taliban

The report found that Biden and Vice President Harris were advised by top leaders that the Taliban were already in violation of the conditions of the Doha agreement and, therefore, the U.S. was not obligated to leave.

The committee also found NATO allies had expressed their vehement opposition to the U.S. decision to withdraw. The British Chief of the Defense staff warned that "withdrawal under these circumstances would be perceived as a strategic victory for the Taliban."

Biden kept on Zalmay Khalilzad, a Trump appointee who negotiated the agreement, as special representative to Afghanistan – a signal that the new administration endorsed the deal.

I would make George MacDonald Fraser's "Flashman" required reading for "statesmen" wishing to poke their nose into Afghanistan.
Oh, heck, everywhere. He's an excellent chronicler of disasters, and they would be wise to study disasters, instead of boyish enthusiasm.

Given the way they behave, I thought it already was – as a "how to" manual.