Posted on 12/15/2019 3:03:48 PM PST by robowombat
The Washington Times is reporting that President Trump is
allegedly going to pull 4000 troops out out the 12-13,000
stationed in Afghanistan.
But there is something that can create stability over there without is. It’s called “Russia”. Let them waste their time and money, and not us. The uncivilized apes in that region will never be pacified. They don’t want to be. They like it being a s***hole. Not our circus, and not our monkeys.
The Washington Times is reporting that President Trump is
allegedly going to pull 4000 troops out out the 12-13,000
stationed in Afghanistan.
_________________________________________________
That still leaves 8000-9000 too many.
Comparison between Afghanistan and the Soviet Union is absurd. Soviet Union leaders had some semblance of sanity. If we leave then maybe not tomorrow or even next year or five years from now but sooner or later the bad guys will gain power and Afghanistan will be another Iran problem worrying about them producing nuclea Warheads
At least we are there to put out any fires before they get too big.
They also likely stop Terror plots before they get too far along.
I think we underestimate how much we are doing over there.
As bad as the worst neighborhoods here are, it would be much worse without police functioning there. Not a great comparison but the best I can think of.
Comparison between Afghanistan and the Soviet Union is absurd. Soviet Union leaders had some semblance of sanity. If we leave then maybe not tomorrow or even next year or five years from now but sooner or later the bad guys will gain power and Afghanistan will be another Iran problem worrying about them producing nuclea Warheads
At least we are there to put out any fires before they get too big.
They also likely stop Terror plots before they get too far along.
I think we underestimate how much we are doing over there.
As bad as the worst neighborhoods here are, it would be much worse without police functioning there. Not a great comparison but the best I can think of.
The problem with the war in Afghanistan,Korea and Vietnam was the confusion over the mission. War is for decimating your enemy and leaving them incapable of waging war for the foreseeable future. Nation building, spreading democracy or passing out the rice and beans can never and will never lead to victory.
Good point. We should have listened to MacArthur. BTW...Iraq is considered Asia too
Nuts. We should have let USSR stay there forever.
“... England tried it way back in 1860’s and Russia now us.” [SkyDancer, post 2]
“There hasn’t been a single army since and including the army of Alexander the Great, that has been successful in Afghanistan...” [BuffaloJack, post 7]
The conceit that Afghanistan can neither be taken nor held is not as well-supported by the historical record as many think.
The British were not beaten. They went in to counter the Imperial Russians, who had given indications they might attack India by that route. When Russian attention turned elsewhere, the British walked away.
The USSR was on the verge of complete success when American Stinger anti-aircraft missiles were sent in. The Soviet effort collapsed because their air power was negated.
Americans have enjoyed successes there to a degree as great as any other power, at least as early.
We must remember that in Afghanistan, we are up against cultures possessing a very different concept of what constitutes short-term and when that transitions to long-term.
To us Americans, long term begins before the next election cycle, or even the next sports season.
To the Afghans, short term isn’t even reached after the passage of 50 to 100 years.
Until American citizens can reconcile this disparity, our actions in the wider world will face difficulties.
It didn’t have to be this way.
46 Fascinating Photos Of 1960s Afghanistan Before The Taliban
https://allthatsinteresting.com/1960s-afghanistan
[What would be contained today would be jihadis: we would focus our efforts on preventing them from ever leaving Afghanistan and sowing mayhem anywhere else, while giving up our quixotic aspirations of Wilsonian nation-building. Accompany that with a robust and unapologetic affirmation of American values (freedom of speech, equality of rights of women, etc.) instead of the support we have given to Sharia in Afghanistan (and previously in Iraq), and an honest acknowledgment of the motivating ideology behind jihad activity, and we might actually start getting somewhere. ]
A British incursion into Afghanistan ended in disaster in 1842 when an entire British army, while retreating back to India, was massacred. Only a single survivor made it back to British-held territory. It was assumed the Afghans let him live to tell the story of what had happened.
On January 6, 1842, the British began their withdrawal from Kabul. About 4,500 British troops and 12,000 civilians who had followed the British Army to Kabul left the city. The plan was to march to Jalalabad, about 90 miles away.
The Brits left Afghanistan right after that.
“Massacre of British Army in Afghanistan in 1842...Only a single survivor made it back...The Brits left Afghanistan right after that.” [SkyDancer, post 29]
Your information is incomplete. Also superficial.
Why?
Imperial British moves were not concluded after 1842. They went back in a number of years later. 1897, if memory serves: Winston Churchill tagged along, on extended leave from his cavalry regiment.
Your tone bears hints of intellectual dishonesty, implying that the British gave up because they suffered heavy losses. That’s more of American gambit, to judge by our cowardly withdrawal from Southeast Asia in the 1970s.
Superficial for a superficial post.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.