The Key Reason we did not prevail in Afghanistan

Amanullah Khan, the king of Afghanistan (center), shares a row boat with Mustafa Kemal Ataturk, the president of Turkey, in 1928. Amanullah obtained Afghanistan’s freedom from Britain and introduced modern reforms, for which he was eventually exiled.

A1E78E5C-FC66-426F-B306-09FE1ECABA2B.jpeg
 
Sikh soldiers guard Afghan prisoners near the Khyber Pass. The British invaded Afghanistan in 1878 after Emir Sher Ali Khan gave an audience to a Russian representative but refused to let a British diplomatic mission enter the country.


652024AF-7A7C-4F09-857C-77DD3378EE71.jpeg
 
JoeB131 yes---again, you prove you people HATE America--you LOVE criminals and terrorists ...you did not want us to get the terrorists that attacked on 9-11
 
JoeB131 o --Dems??? you mean like the Dems who totally fkd up with Vietnam and Bay of Pigs...those Dems???
HHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

Hey, buddy, Nixon and Ford were in charge when THIS happened.

1629194192434.png



As for the Bay of Pigs, that fiasco was organized under Eisenhower, and JFK went along with it until it was clear the CIA was lying to him about how popular the Exiles were in Cuba (not very).
 
@JoeB131 yes---again, you prove you people HATE America--you LOVE criminals and terrorists ...you did not want us to get the terrorists that attacked on 9-11

Okay, let's look at that one. Who ended up killing Bin Laden?

Oh, right, this guy.

1629194312859.png


Bush, on the other hand, pulled all the troops out of Afghanistan so he could do revenge on Saddam for humiliating his daddy.

If Afghanistan was winnable at all, it was in that very narrow window in 2003, where we didn't.
 
JoeB131 bullshit----the Dems got us into Nam and JFK gave the go for Bay of Pigs ---yes, you don't know anything

Actually, you are confused again. Eisenhower (who I generally have a lot of good things to say about, compared to modern Republicans) was the guy who ignored Truman's policy and decided we needed to take over French interests in Indochina.

The real problem in both Vietnam and Afghanistan is that we engaged in the Sunk Cost Fallacy- Look it up.
 
When the Allies won WW2 the war was not over. There were about 10 years of insurgencies from the Nazi regime after the war. But this was carried out without any neighboring countries supporting the insurgencies.

Now take over a country that has hostile neighbors to you and who support those you have just invaded. At that point, the insurgencies will never end. You must do one of two things, take out the countries that border you or never leave.
 
The two main reasons we lost in Afghanistan and why we lost so quickly was 1 Trump negotiated this agreement with the Taliban and left the Afghan government out of it, slighting the Afghan government, weakining it by essentially by saying the Taliban was the power in Afghanistan, legitimizing them. And most important of all 2. The Afghan people were not willing to defend their country from these terrorists.
Think recent events just showed that the AFGHAN government was completely worthless. Trump was right again-----
 
As many of us were saying back then, you can't push a 17th-Century civilization into modernity if it doesn't WANT to pushed into modernity.

This was a failed effort from Day One. The end was inevitable. 20 fucking wasted years is enough.
Yeah...

But, when a 17th-Century civilization clashes with a pre-historic civilization and wins, SJWs try to blame whitey 300+ years later.

:dunno:
 
Yeah...

But, when a 17th-Century civilization clashes with a pre-historic civilization and wins, SJWs try to blame whitey 300+ years later.

:dunno:
We have seen the real terrorists in the United States for some years now. They control the pulpit and the all the violence is excused.
 

Forum List

Back
Top