Conservatives who oppose withdrawing from Afghanistan, what would you do?

[kaz]

Part we agree on: I agree that the Taliban enabled Al Qaeda who attacked the United States. And that means I totally support our attacking and destroying the Taliban and paying them back many times over for what they did to us. And I had no problem with our military staying involved and keeping them down by bombing and whatever else we wanted to do to them for as long as we need to keep them from being a threat and as a warning others what we will do to them.

What I don't agree with: Nation building in Afghanistan. It's a tribal country. Russia failed to control it. Britain failed four times. We had no chance. We should not have invaded and tried to build a government there. To maintain the government, we will have to stay for centuries. That is insane. W was a moron and really screwed us by putting us in an impossible situation where we could never leave.

It's really unfortunate that we sent so many Americans who fought and died for our country. My niece was in the military there and her husband did at least five tours that I remember. Now we pull out and it falls negating their sacrifice and the price we and they paid. I feel genuinely bad about that.

But what choice do we have? We have been there for almost 20 years and they aren't remotely able to support themselves. They won't be in our lifetimes. They won't be in our children's lifetimes.

What should we have done? What is the solution other than leaving? I can't believe Bush went in without realizing this is how at one point or another it would end.

U.S. troops leaving Afghanistan teetering on the brink of all-out civil war

As CBS News visits the viciously contested front line, it's clear U.S. troops are leaving behind an Afghan security force struggling to fend off a resurgent Taliban.

www.cbsnews.com

Part we agree on: I agree that the Taliban enabled Al Qaeda who attacked the United States.

I don't agree with that....In fact, the Taliban asked that Chimpy McShrub prove to them that OSB was behind the attack, and they'd turn him over themselves.....He refused and attacked.

You're not a conservative. I am not saying you can't comment, of course you can. I'm just pointing out I said I agree with CONSERVATIVES on that.

But Al Qaeda was freely operating in Afghanistan. They were certainly enabling them. If they had turned over OSB that would be a lot better argument than that they said if we convinced them then they would. Liars always say things like that. Have you read all the crap Hitler said? Offering and not doing is irrelevant

And yet OSB was in Pakistan, so what was the war really about?

It is true Afghanistan is a tribal nation, but the countries truly behind the attack on the U.S. were Pakistan and Saudi Arabia and not once did anyone threaten to invade them, so what was the point of invading Afghanistan?

I don't believe it's factually true that OSB wasn't in Afghanistan and the Taliban were uninvolved. As I understand it it's fair to say he was moving between the blurry borders, but I challenge your assertion that Afghanistan wasn't involved. The Taliban deserved what they got.

Whether OSB was in Afghanistan or Pakistan, the Taliban far more directly supported him. My argument is not let's rewrite history. I think we can be factually honest and still make the case it was bad policy and leaving is the right choice.

I agree that Saudi Arabia was far more directly involved than they were ever held accountable for. I have also been very critical of our supporting them. They still teach we are the great Satan in their schools and we are propping up a despotic government.

I realize why we have to support them if we are there. But a far better agenda would be to not be there and not support them. And let's finally stop restricting domestic oil production so we don't need them

The fact is the attack on Afghanistan was just a shiny object to appease the American public while knowing we could never go after Saudi Arabia or Pakistan for their involvement.

Afghanistan had or has their bases for training but so do many other countries from Mexico to the Philippines, and yet we never invaded those countries.

The fact is none of the terrorists ever came from Afghanistan and they were actually trained here to fly those planes if I remember correctly, so again why did we invade Afghanistan?

Simple, it was a shiny object to distract the American public from reality that we would never hold those that were truly behind the attacks accountable…

I like my strategy of accepting what Afghanistan and the Taliban did and not defending them but saying nation building was a bad idea when we did it 20 years ago and it's a bad idea now rather than your strategy of pretending the Taliban didn't do anything and we just made it up like you're doing. But whatever, go ahead and do that

 

[WTH_Progs?]

Conservatives who oppose withdrawing from Afghanistan, what would you do?

The problem is that conservatives with a wrongheaded, unwarranted opposition to withdrawing from Afghanistan might try to redeploy forces to that country when the next Republican is in the WH.

Republicans are infamous for their propensity for war.

FUCK you're stupid. That's a Demonicrat pitch and a fucking lie. How about you read history instead, dumbfuck?

You know, history, the shit progressives are trying to destroy in the name of "snowflakes".

 

[Theowl32]

Part we agree on: I agree that the Taliban enabled Al Qaeda who attacked the United States. And that means I totally support our attacking and destroying the Taliban and paying them back many times over for what they did to us. And I had no problem with our military staying involved and keeping them down by bombing and whatever else we wanted to do to them for as long as we need to keep them from being a threat and as a warning others what we will do to them.

What I don't agree with: Nation building in Afghanistan. It's a tribal country. Russia failed to control it. Britain failed four times. We had no chance. We should not have invaded and tried to build a government there. To maintain the government, we will have to stay for centuries. That is insane. W was a moron and really screwed us by putting us in an impossible situation where we could never leave.

It's really unfortunate that we sent so many Americans who fought and died for our country. My niece was in the military there and her husband did at least five tours that I remember. Now we pull out and it falls negating their sacrifice and the price we and they paid. I feel genuinely bad about that.

But what choice do we have? We have been there for almost 20 years and they aren't remotely able to support themselves. They won't be in our lifetimes. They won't be in our children's lifetimes.

What should we have done? What is the solution other than leaving? I can't believe Bush went in without realizing this is how at one point or another it would end.

U.S. troops leaving Afghanistan teetering on the brink of all-out civil war

As CBS News visits the viciously contested front line, it's clear U.S. troops are leaving behind an Afghan security force struggling to fend off a resurgent Taliban.

www.cbsnews.com

Friends with a retired decorated Colonel. He served in Vietnam and was a Colonel for 30 years.

He had conversation with me one time and most of us are what we would call "amateurs."

Meaning, whatever field you are in or a professional, there are amateurs always talking about what they would do.

Perhaps nothing is more true than war or battle. While amateurs are always discussing what they would do, the professionals are studying LOGISTICS.

That is a word that encompasses a lot of issues. For instance the left wing idiots always talk about how our country "occupies" certain countries cause we have military bases there. Of course they do. They are dumb, not to mention traitors and all American haters parroting the hateful world lead.

This country SUBJUGATES NO ONE. All of those countries governments WELCOME OUR PROTECTION AND OUR MONEY.

From a LOGISTICAL STANDPOINT it is imperative that we are in vast different regions on this planet.

Why?

The LOGISTICAL reality of troop deployment among other things. Without those bases, rapid response would be impossible.

Of course when a Democrat is in office, they do a wonderful job of emboldening our enemies.

Look no further than the Benghazi disaster. Under her husband, the Somalia debacle which greatly emboldened Al Qaeda and bin laden used it as the example to recruit his members and said America doesn't have the stomach for war.

Here is the REALITY in regards to Afghanistan. We need our presence there. We need to have hardware there. We need to be able to rapidly respond to terrorism or attacks on our allies. Abandoning them only allows the terror groups to grow into monsters.

Isis is an example of Obamas version of Frankensteins monster. To say nothing of his domestic monsters created under obama. Antifa and blm.

Unfortunately there are too many of us that don't understand the RRALITY of the world and how imperative it is from a LOGISTICAL PERSPECTIVE to be there.

We will have to learn the hard way.....AGAIN.

Bump


Oh and this happened today.

Viral video of Taliban executing 22 Afghan commandos as they surrendered ignites more criticism of Biden's withdrawal

"This is horrible-yet it's the reality of announcing the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan," tweeted Rep. Adam Kinzinger, who served in Afghanistan.

www.yahoo.com

We will learn the hard way of course. As I mentioned in the post, logistics are a major concern and something that we amateurs don't study.

The basics are we need a presence in troubled regions that have potential threat to us here.

We know the left don't care about that. We know they despise this country and will preach about our "imperialism" and then yell about us "occupying" countries because we have military bases there.

Don't follow the lead of them. I also believe Trump was on the wrong side of the issue too when he was calling for all out withdrawal.

It is something that is political and NOT in line with the reality of our world. So, when should we close the base? Well, when there is genuine peace in that region. Does that answer it? In other words, never. That is the REALITY of our world.

 

[healthmyths]

Good money after bad

ROEs...
“In Afghanistan, the [rules of engagement] that were put in place in 2009 and 2010 have created a hesitation and confusion for our war fighters,” Wayne Simmons, a retired US intelligence officer who worked at NATO headquarters in Kabul under McChrystal and Petraeus, told the Times.

“It is no accident nor a coincidence that from January 2009 to August of 2010, coinciding with the Obama/McChrystal radical change of the ROE, casualties more than doubled,” Simmons went on. “The carnage will certainly continue as the already fragile and ineffective [rules] have been further weakened by the Obama administration as if they were playground rules.”
Perhaps the most striking example of a bureaucracy putting lives at risk came in September 2009 at the battle of Ganjgal. Two soldiers were award the Medal of Honor for their actions in the in 10-hour fight in Afghanistan’s Kunar province, yet one of them – former Army Captain William Swenson – has said that the military’s reluctance to provide an air strike nearly killed him.

“It’s not JAG (military attorney) responsibility to interject to say, ‘Hey, we are concerned that you’re going to hit a building,’” he told the Washington Times last month. “I can tell you that I am concerned with saving as many lives as I can, not necessarily one. Unfortunately, this is combat. I can’t be perfect, but I can do what I feel what’s right at the time.”

Policies about limiting civilian casualties have soldiers complaining they can't effectively fight; one showed author Michael Hastings a card with regulations including
"Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force."
Said the soldier: "You sit and ask yourself: What are we doing here

In Afghanistan, a New General -- But An Old Strategy

Obama Stands by His Plan for Winning in Afghanistan, if Not the Man Who Orchestrated it; Will he Regret Not Changing Course?

www.cbsnews.com

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

ROEs...
“In Afghanistan, the [rules of engagement] that were put in place in 2009 and 2010 have created a hesitation and confusion for our war fighters,” Wayne Simmons, a retired US intelligence officer who worked at NATO headquarters in Kabul under McChrystal and Petraeus, told the Times.

“It is no accident nor a coincidence that from January 2009 to August of 2010, coinciding with the Obama/McChrystal radical change of the ROE, casualties more than doubled,” Simmons went on. “The carnage will certainly continue as the already fragile and ineffective [rules] have been further weakened by the Obama administration as if they were playground rules.”
Perhaps the most striking example of a bureaucracy putting lives at risk came in September 2009 at the battle of Ganjgal. Two soldiers were award the Medal of Honor for their actions in the in 10-hour fight in Afghanistan’s Kunar province, yet one of them – former Army Captain William Swenson – has said that the military’s reluctance to provide an air strike nearly killed him.

“It’s not JAG (military attorney) responsibility to interject to say, ‘Hey, we are concerned that you’re going to hit a building,’” he told the Washington Times last month. “I can tell you that I am concerned with saving as many lives as I can, not necessarily one. Unfortunately, this is combat. I can’t be perfect, but I can do what I feel what’s right at the time.”

Policies about limiting civilian casualties have soldiers complaining they can't effectively fight; one showed author Michael Hastings a card with regulations including
"Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force."
Said the soldier: "You sit and ask yourself: What are we doing here

In Afghanistan, a New General -- But An Old Strategy

Obama Stands by His Plan for Winning in Afghanistan, if Not the Man Who Orchestrated it; Will he Regret Not Changing Course?

www.cbsnews.com

I don’t disagree with the sentiment but your first source was popped in 2016 for posing as CIA.
He’s a neighborhood friend I’ve known for decades. He once got so angry over being jilted by the girl across the street from me that he cut down the saplings in front of five houses in a row on our street. (Too bad it wasn’t my side of the street because it would have alleviated some yard work). That was 1970.
As of 2015 he was still sending flowers to that girl on her birthday.

 

[Crepitus]

Conservatives who oppose withdrawing from Afghanistan, what would you do?​

Wait until a conservative is president and call it a good idea then.

 

[eagle7-31]

Part we agree on: I agree that the Taliban enabled Al Qaeda who attacked the United States. And that means I totally support our attacking and destroying the Taliban and paying them back many times over for what they did to us. And I had no problem with our military staying involved and keeping them down by bombing and whatever else we wanted to do to them for as long as we need to keep them from being a threat and as a warning others what we will do to them.

What I don't agree with: Nation building in Afghanistan. It's a tribal country. Russia failed to control it. Britain failed four times. We had no chance. We should not have invaded and tried to build a government there. To maintain the government, we will have to stay for centuries. That is insane. W was a moron and really screwed us by putting us in an impossible situation where we could never leave.

It's really unfortunate that we sent so many Americans who fought and died for our country. My niece was in the military there and her husband did at least five tours that I remember. Now we pull out and it falls negating their sacrifice and the price we and they paid. I feel genuinely bad about that.

But what choice do we have? We have been there for almost 20 years and they aren't remotely able to support themselves. They won't be in our lifetimes. They won't be in our children's lifetimes.

What should we have done? What is the solution other than leaving? I can't believe Bush went in without realizing this is how at one point or another it would end.

U.S. troops leaving Afghanistan teetering on the brink of all-out civil war

As CBS News visits the viciously contested front line, it's clear U.S. troops are leaving behind an Afghan security force struggling to fend off a resurgent Taliban.

www.cbsnews.com

This goes back 40 plus years when the Soviet Red army invaded the country in 1979, The late congressman Charlie Wilson said it best when he said we F'd up the end game in the late 1980's. He sponsored a bill for a billion or so dollars after the communists left to build schools, roads etc. and it never got anywhere. I am not saying that aid package would have stopped the events that later happened but the odds would have been lessened to a great degree.

 

[Ben Thomson]

ROEs...
“In Afghanistan, the [rules of engagement] that were put in place in 2009 and 2010 have created a hesitation and confusion for our war fighters,” Wayne Simmons, a retired US intelligence officer who worked at NATO headquarters in Kabul under McChrystal and Petraeus, told the Times.

“It is no accident nor a coincidence that from January 2009 to August of 2010, coinciding with the Obama/McChrystal radical change of the ROE, casualties more than doubled,” Simmons went on. “The carnage will certainly continue as the already fragile and ineffective [rules] have been further weakened by the Obama administration as if they were playground rules.”
Perhaps the most striking example of a bureaucracy putting lives at risk came in September 2009 at the battle of Ganjgal. Two soldiers were award the Medal of Honor for their actions in the in 10-hour fight in Afghanistan’s Kunar province, yet one of them – former Army Captain William Swenson – has said that the military’s reluctance to provide an air strike nearly killed him.

“It’s not JAG (military attorney) responsibility to interject to say, ‘Hey, we are concerned that you’re going to hit a building,’” he told the Washington Times last month. “I can tell you that I am concerned with saving as many lives as I can, not necessarily one. Unfortunately, this is combat. I can’t be perfect, but I can do what I feel what’s right at the time.”

Policies about limiting civilian casualties have soldiers complaining they can't effectively fight; one showed author Michael Hastings a card with regulations including
"Patrol only in areas that you are reasonably certain that you will not have to defend yourselves with lethal force."
Said the soldier: "You sit and ask yourself: What are we doing here

In Afghanistan, a New General -- But An Old Strategy

Obama Stands by His Plan for Winning in Afghanistan, if Not the Man Who Orchestrated it; Will he Regret Not Changing Course?

www.cbsnews.com

Good thing Trump changed all that huh...

 

[Ben Thomson]

Evidently the right wing chicken hawks want another 20 years of this..Afghanistan: What has the conflict cost the US and its allies?

 

[Desperado]

No consevatives are against the US withdraw from Afghanistan only NeoCons want to continue with US involvement

 

[harmonica]

Part we agree on: I agree that the Taliban enabled Al Qaeda who attacked the United States. And that means I totally support our attacking and destroying the Taliban and paying them back many times over for what they did to us. And I had no problem with our military staying involved and keeping them down by bombing and whatever else we wanted to do to them for as long as we need to keep them from being a threat and as a warning others what we will do to them.

What I don't agree with: Nation building in Afghanistan. It's a tribal country. Russia failed to control it. Britain failed four times. We had no chance. We should not have invaded and tried to build a government there. To maintain the government, we will have to stay for centuries. That is insane. W was a moron and really screwed us by putting us in an impossible situation where we could never leave.

It's really unfortunate that we sent so many Americans who fought and died for our country. My niece was in the military there and her husband did at least five tours that I remember. Now we pull out and it falls negating their sacrifice and the price we and they paid. I feel genuinely bad about that.

But what choice do we have? We have been there for almost 20 years and they aren't remotely able to support themselves. They won't be in our lifetimes. They won't be in our children's lifetimes.

What should we have done? What is the solution other than leaving? I can't believe Bush went in without realizing this is how at one point or another it would end.

U.S. troops leaving Afghanistan teetering on the brink of all-out civil war

As CBS News visits the viciously contested front line, it's clear U.S. troops are leaving behind an Afghan security force struggling to fend off a resurgent Taliban.

www.cbsnews.com

1. as usual, it has nothing to do with being conservative/'''''other'''' etc---like a lot of issues today
2. anyone that knows history, knows you can't do nation building/etc
3. it was the ''liberals'' that fkd up in Vietnam/Bay of Pigs/etc

 

[Flash]

I am a Conservative non interventionist.

I think it was proper for the US to go after Bin Laden after 911. We should have sent in the resources to capture him at Tora Bora but we didn't. We let him get away.

The fight was always with him and not with doing nation building in Afghanistan. That was never going to work.

We never should have invaded Iraq.

 

[Independentthinker]

My opinion is that if we’re going to use the military, we should use it for its intended purpose. And that is to destroy and kill everything in its path.

Yes, we are indeed pussies and cowards. Whether the world likes it or not, we are entering an age where Imperialism will once again rule. We have a choice of letting terrorists take over the world or us taking over the world and spreading democracy. People think it's Afghanistan's problem but nuclear technology is all around them. Aren't we smart enough to figure out what happens when the Taliban isn't happy with just owning Afghanistan?

 

[Smokin' OP]

1. as usual, it has nothing to do with being conservative/'''''other'''' etc---like a lot of issues today
2. anyone that knows history, knows you can't do nation building/etc
3. it was the ''liberals'' that fkd up in Vietnam/Bay of Pigs/etc

During last year's presidential campaign, George W. Bush expressed contempt for "nation-building." In the October 3, 2000, debate, he warned: "If we don't stop extending our troops all around the world in nation-building missions, then we're going to have a serious problem coming down the road. I'm going to prevent that."

Then that's exactly what he did.

 

[RetiredGySgt]

A 5 to 10000 man force could be left in Afghanistan with a lot of airpower. We suffered almost no losses the lest few years and with air power the afghan forces held their own.

But I don't think it should be a US force alone. Let the liberal Governments of the world help.

 

[RoshawnMarkwees]

A 5 to 10000 man force could be left in Afghanistan with a lot of airpower. We suffered almost no losses the lest few years and with air power the afghan forces held their own.

But I don't think it should be a US force alone. Let the liberal Governments of the world help.

I agree.
But I think we should enlist the help of China. Just as they manufactured a virus that kills old and sick people they can surely create one that kills Muslim terrorists.

 

[Flash]

 

[Smokin' OP]

View attachment 525951

So, the "great negotiator's" agreement failed, just like everything he touches?

February 29 2020
"Soon, at my direction, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo will witness the signing of an agreement with representatives of the Taliban, while Secretary of Defense Mark Esper will issue a joint declaration with the government of Afghanistan. If the Taliban and the government of Afghanistan live up to these commitments, we will have a powerful path forward to end the war in Afghanistan and bring our troops home," Trump said.

 

[zaangalewa]

View attachment 525951

Donald Trump is not president of the USA. If he had been once - in the good old times where wishes still came true - not only formally but also really president of the USA that's another question.

 

[zaangalewa]

Removing troops from Afghanistan is like defunding the police.
We need a presence there more than we do in Europe.

Why?