Foreign Affairs: Why Afghanistan is the wrong war

[Winehole23]

How Dangerous are the Taliban? (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64932/john-mueller/how-dangerous-are-the-taliban)

by John Mueller

Summary --


The Taliban and al Qaeda may not pose enough of a threat to the United States to make a long war in Afghanistan worth the costs.





JOHN MUELLER is Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University. Among his books are Overblown: How Politicians and the Terrorism Industry Inflate National Security Threats, and Why We Believe Them and the forthcoming Atomic Obsession: Nuclear Alarmism from Hiroshima to Al Qaeda.





Is There Still a Terrorist Threat?: The Myth of the Omnipresent Enemy (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/61911/john-mueller/is-there-still-a-terrorist-threat-the-myth-of-the-omnipresent-en)
John Mueller (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/author/john-mueller)


Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable -- but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.

(http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/61911/john-mueller/is-there-still-a-terrorist-threat-the-myth-of-the-omnipresent-en)



[/URL]George W. Bush led the United States into war in Iraq on the grounds that Saddam Hussein might give his country’s nonexistent weapons of mass destruction to terrorists. Now, Bush’s successor is perpetuating the war in Afghanistan with comparably dubious arguments about the danger posed by the Taliban and al Qaeda.







President Barack Obama [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/03/24/60minutes/main4890687.shtml#ccmm"]insists (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/node/64932/talk) that the U.S. mission in Afghanistan is about "making sure that al Qaeda cannot attack the U.S. homeland and U.S. interests and our allies" or "project violence against" American citizens. The reasoning is that if the Taliban win in Afghanistan, al Qaeda will once again be able to set up shop there to carry out its dirty work. As the president puts it (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/27/us/politics/27obama-text.html?_r=1), Afghanistan would "again be a base for terrorists who want to kill as many of our people as they possibly can." This argument is constantly repeated but rarely examined; given the costs and risks associated with the Obama administration’s plans for the region, it is time such statements be given the scrutiny they deserve.


Multiple sources, including Lawrence Wright's book The Looming Tower, make clear that the Taliban was a reluctant host to al Qaeda in the 1990s and felt betrayed when the terrorist group repeatedly violated agreements to refrain from issuing inflammatory statements and fomenting violence abroad. Then the al Qaeda-sponsored 9/11 attacks -- which the Taliban had nothing to do with -- led to the toppling of the Taliban’s regime. Given the Taliban’s limited interest in issues outside the "AfPak" region, if they came to power again now, they would be highly unlikely to host provocative terrorist groups whose actions could lead to another outside intervention. And even if al Qaeda were able to relocate to Afghanistan after a Taliban victory there, it would still have to operate under the same siege situation it presently enjoys in what Obama calls its "safe haven" in Pakistan.


The very notion that al Qaeda needs a secure geographic base to carry out its terrorist operations, moreover, is questionable. After all, the operational base for 9/11 was in Hamburg, Germany. Conspiracies involving small numbers of people require communication, money, and planning -- but not a major protected base camp.


Given the Taliban’s limited interest in issues outside the “AfPak” region, if it came to power again now, it would be highly unlikely to host provocative terrorist groups whose actions could lead to another outside intervention.
At present, al Qaeda consists (http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/06/02/080602fa_fact_wright?currentPage=all) of a few hundred people running around in Pakistan, seeking to avoid detection and helping the Taliban when possible. It also has a disjointed network of fellow travelers around the globe who communicate over the Internet. Over the last decade, the group has almost completely discredited (http://www.democracyjournal.org/article.php?ID=6622) itself in the Muslim world due to the fallout from the 9/11 attacks and subsequent counterproductive terrorism, much of it directed against Muslims. No convincing evidence has been offered publicly to show that al Qaeda Central has put together a single full operation anywhere in the world since 9/11. And, outside of war zones, the violence perpetrated by al Qaeda affiliates, wannabes, and lookalikes combined has resulted (http://psweb.sbs.ohio-state.edu/faculty/jmueller/ISA2007T.PDF) in the deaths of some 200 to 300 people per year, and may be declining (http://www.humansecuritybrief.info/HSRP_Brief_2007.pdf). That is 200 to 300 too many, of course, but it scarcely suggests that "the safety of people around the world is at stake," as Obama dramatically puts it.



In addition, al Qaeda has yet to establish a significant presence in the United States. In 2002, U.S. intelligence reports asserted that the number of trained al Qaeda operatives in the United States was between 2,000 and 5,000, and FBI Director Robert Mueller assured (http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress03/mueller021103.htm) a Senate committee that al Qaeda had "developed a support infrastructure" in the country and achieved both "the ability and the intent to inflict significant casualties in the U.S. with little warning." However, after years of well funded sleuthing, the FBI and other investigative agencies have been unable (http://www.newsweek.com/id/32962) to uncover a single true al Qaeda sleeper cell or operative within the country. Mueller's rallying cry has now been reduced (http://www.fbi.gov/congress/congress07/mueller011107.htm) to a comparatively bland formulation: "We believe al Qaeda is still seeking to infiltrate operatives into the U.S. from overseas."


Even that may not be true. Since 9/11, some two million foreigners have been admitted to the United States legally and many others, of course, have entered illegally. Even if border security has been so effective that 90 percent of al Qaeda’s operatives have been turned away or deterred from entering the United States, some should have made it in -- and some of those, it seems reasonable to suggest, would have been picked up by law enforcement by now. The lack of attacks inside the United States combined with the inability of the FBI to find any potential attackers suggests that the terrorists are either not trying very hard or are far less clever and capable than usually depicted.


Policymakers and the public at large should keep in mind the words (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/07/11/AR2008071102710.html) of Glenn Carle, a 23 year veteran of the CIA who served as deputy national intelligence officer for transnational threats: "We must see jihadists for the small, lethal, disjointed and miserable opponents that they are." Al Qaeda "has only a handful of individuals capable of planning, organizing and leading a terrorist operation," Carle notes, and "its capabilities are far inferior to its desires."


President Obama has said that there is also a humanitarian element to the Afghanistan mission. A return of the Taliban, he points out, would condemn the Afghan people "to brutal governance, international isolation, a paralyzed economy, and the denial of basic human rights." This concern is legitimate -- the Afghan people appear to be quite strongly opposed to a return of the Taliban, and they are surely entitled to some peace after 30 years of almost continual warfare, much of it imposed on them from outside.


The problem, as Obama is doubtlessly well aware, is that Americans are far less willing to sacrifice lives for missions that are essentially humanitarian than for those that seek to deal with a threat directed at the United States itself. People who embrace the idea of a humanitarian mission will continue to support Obama's policy in Afghanistan -- at least if they think it has a chance of success -- but many Americans (and Europeans) will increasingly start to question how many lives such a mission is worth.



This questioning, in fact, is well under way. Because of its ties to 9/11, the war in Afghanistan has enjoyed considerably greater public support (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/61196/john-mueller/the-iraq-syndrome) than the war in Iraq did (or, for that matter, the wars in Korea or Vietnam).



However, there has been a considerable dropoff in that support of late. If Obama's national security justification for his war in Afghanistan comes to seem as spurious as Bush's national security justification for his war in Iraq, he, like Bush, will increasingly have only the humanitarian argument to fall back on. And that is likely to be a weak reed.

[Winehole23]

Related FA roundtable discussion (http://www.foreignaffairs.com/discussions/roundtables/are-we-safe-yet) of Mueller's thesis.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

(http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/64932/john-mueller/how-dangerous-are-the-taliban)

Despite all the ominous warnings of wily terrorists and imminent attacks, there has been neither a successful strike nor a close call in the United States since 9/11. The reasonable -- but rarely heard -- explanation is that there are no terrorists within the United States, and few have the means or the inclination to strike from abroad.

(http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/61911/john-mueller/is-there-still-a-terrorist-threat-the-myth-of-the-omnipresent-en)
that's a little hard to believe. what about those dudes, i think it was 5 of them, that they arrested 'cause they were planning an attack on the sears building? i think it was the sears building. i'm going to have to look it up. to what degree are they saying that no close calls have happened here? it's also hard, for me, to believe that there's no terrorists here already.

[Winehole23]

that's a little hard to believe. what about those dudes, i think it was 5 of them, that they arrested 'cause they were planning an attack on the sears building? i think it was the sears building. i'm going to have to look it up.Sting operation. "Seas of David", I think. Bad guys had little snap. Your chosen example backs me up, I think.


Except the story was wildly exaggerated -- and juries refuse to give prosecutors a conviction (http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/story?id=4665658&page=1). A deadlocked jury led to a second mistrial today.
Critics have said the administration's efforts to prosecute the men on terror charges undermines its credibility. Miami law professor and civil rights lawyer Bruce Winick said the defeat was a harsh blow to the Bush administration. "It makes them look bad," said Winick, who has criticized the Liberty City Seven case in the past. "They don't have any credibility... you can't see terrorism under every rock," he said.
The government's case was "more hype than evidence," Neal Sonnett, past president of the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, told ABC News recently. It was viable to argue, as the men's lawyers did, that the government informant "created the crime."
Critics' accusations appear to have merit. These alleged terrorists had no weapons (http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/news/nation/14889667.htm), no bombs (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115106746324888733.html?mod=world_news_whats_new s), no expertise (http://www.slate.com/id/2144439/), and no money (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/06/see_video_of_an.html). They didn't behave or operate (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1207412,00.html) as terrorists. They apparently swore an oath of allegiance to Osama bin Laden, but because an undercover FBI infiltrator suggested the idea (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB115106746324888733.html?mod=world_news_whats_new s). For that matter, despite some reports to the contrary, these guys weren't Muslims, but instead practiced their own hybrid religion (http://www.nydailynews.com/news/wn_report/story/429525p-362167c.html) that combined Islam and Christianity.

to what degree are they saying that no close calls have happened here? it's also hard, for me, to believe that there's no terrorists here already.Fair enough. This part of the analysis is speculative, but then again, so is the *strategic* threat.

[boutons_deux]

Fear-mongering and hyping War-on-<whatever> is great for business.

Why didn't the Repugs run a War-on-Immigrants during their 8-year Reign of Error?

Because that war is bad for businesses (that exploit illegal immigrants).

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Sting operation. "Seas of David", I think. Bad guys had little snap. Your chosen example backs me up, I think.

Fair enough. This part of the analysis is speculative, but then again, so is the *strategic* threat.
fair enough. what about those dudes they caught with all those cell phones about a year and a half ago and quite a bit of cash. i wanna say it was in michigan. deerborn, perhaps.

[Winehole23]

fair enough. what about those dudes they caught with all those cell phones about a year and a half ago and quite a bit of cash. i wanna say it was in michigan. deerborn, perhaps.That was a financing scheme, I think. Not a direct terrorist threat.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

That was a financing scheme, I think. Not a direct terrorist threat.
i'll have to check it out again and see whatever happened. i remember they were basic cell phones that didn't have sim cards or they had removed all sim cards from them. it was about the same time it was reported that cell phones were being used to detonate bombs.

[boutons_deux]

dubya and dickhead let America be attacked on 9/11 and escaped ALL responsibility and punishment for their treason and negligence on security duty.

I'm sure they are praying for another terrorist attack on US soil now so they, and all the hate-media, can lay all blame on Magik Negro.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

dubya and dickhead let America be attacked on 9/11 and escaped ALL responsibility and punishment for their treason and negligence on security duty.
and firing a missle from 1100 miles away really shut them up........... :jack

[Winehole23]

i'll have to check it out again and see whatever happened. i remember they were basic cell phones that didn't have sim cards or they had removed all sim cards from them. it was about the same time it was reported that cell phones were being used to detonate bombs.No terrorism charges (http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060814/NEWS28/308140016) were ever filed in this case.

[Winehole23]

Strike two, VLE.

[boutons_deux]

Korean peninsula to LA is about 6000 mi. That's Redmond is easier/better target.

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Strike two, VLE.
yeah, i checked it out. thanks for keeping score.

[Winehole23]

Here's one (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/06/22/opinion/22KRUG.html) you may not have heard of before.

[Winehole23]

yeah, i checked it out. thanks for keeping score.Not so easy to put your finger on, is it?

[ChumpDumper]

The very notion that al Qaeda needs a secure geographic base to carry out its terrorist operations, moreover, is questionable. After all, the operational base for 9/11 was in Hamburg, Germany.Most of the hijackers went to Afghanistan for some time though. That is well-documented.


Policymakers and the public at large should keep in mind the words of Glenn Carle, a 23 year veteran of the CIA who served as deputy national intelligence officer for transnational threats: "We must see jihadists for the small, lethal, disjointed and miserable opponents that they are." Al Qaeda "has only a handful of individuals capable of planning, organizing and leading a terrorist operation," Carle notes, and "its capabilities are far inferior to its desires."I very much agree with this, but their capabilities would have been much greater had Afghanistan not been invaded. We are in a way lucky that their desires are so grandiose -- if they just concentrated on soft targets or something like roadside IEDs in the the west, who knows what could happen?

[Viva Las Espuelas]

Not so easy to put your finger on, is it?
wow, and still haven't heard about it. the latest article i found was posted back in 2004. i'm surprised being that he is a rightwing extremist which was pointed out thoroughly.

[Winehole23]

.I very much agree with this, but their capabilities would have been much greater had Afghanistan not been invaded. Black ops and cruise missiles couldn't have done the trick? I wonder.

[sam1617]

Black ops and cruise missiles couldn't have done the trick? I wonder.

Are black ops ethical? They seem to be the opposite of what open and honest societies would strive for. I mean, I personally am in favor of them, but assassination, sabotage and disappearing seems awfully close to murder, terrorism and kidnapping...

[ChumpDumper]

Black ops and cruise missiles couldn't have done the trick? I wonder.Well the actual toppling of the Taliban only took a few special forces and a lot of bombs from the US -- the Afghans did most of the fighting. Keeping power has proven to be more difficult than getting it.

[Winehole23]

Are black ops ethical? They seem to be the opposite of what open and honest societies would strive for. I mean, I personally am in favor of them, but assassination, sabotage and disappearing seems awfully close to murder, terrorism and kidnapping...IMO, no. There's a reason it's done in the dark. The blowback is a bitch, but it might be *less unethical* in its aggregate effects than invasion and occupation. Certainly it's much less sticky. There's no *Pottery Barn* rule with black ops.

I wasn't so much recommending black ops as taking issue with Chump's begged question about invasion being unavoidable.

[sam1617]

IMO, no. There's a reason it's done in the dark. The blowback is a bitch, but it might be *less unethical* in its aggregate effects than invasion and occupation. Certainly it's much less sticky. There's no *Pottery Barn* rule with black ops.

I wasn't so much recommending black ops as taking issue with Chump's begged question about invasion being unavoidable.

Yeah, I don't really know whether the ends justify the means there.

To me, black ops are like Tylenol, they just treat the symptoms. Someone will always step in to fill the role of a disappeared person, and often times they are as bad. Someone always rebuilds that drug farm that was blown up in the dead of night. And thats the thing with Afghanistan, until the root of the problem is fixed, there will always be trouble. Whether that trouble can effect the US is not necessarily proven, but I would tend to believe that it does, and it certainly destabilizes countries that are nominally allies, and nuclear armed allies at that.

[clambake]

I wasn't so much recommending black ops as taking issue with Chump's begged question about invasion being unavoidable.

we told the taliban to turn the guys over. they wouldn't. i think this pissed someone off.

[Winehole23]

Whether that trouble can effect the US is not necessarily proven, but I would tend to believe that it does, and it certainly destabilizes countries that are nominally allies, and nuclear armed allies at that.Drone attacks in Pakistan. Yeah. That's a good point.

We oughtn't meddle in the internal affairs of other countries unless some vital US interest is at stake. In 2002. it's at least arguable there was. What vital interest is at hazard now in Afghanistan isn't really clear to me. We contained the USSR for 50 years, but couldn't keep Afghanistan in check without invading and occupying? Count me skeptical.

[ElNono]

Drone attacks in Pakistan. Yeah. That's a good point.

We oughtn't meddle in the internal affairs of other countries unless some vital US interest is at stake. In 2002. it's at least arguable there was. What vital interest is at hazard now in Afghanistan isn't really clear to me. We contained the USSR for 50 years, but couldn't keep Afghanistan in check without invading and occupying? Count me skeptical.

Because we're far better than the Russians. We can walk into Afghanistan, give away a few soccer balls, call it a democracy and declare victory!
Oh wait, it didn't quite work that way... never mind.

[sam1617]

Because we're far better than the Russians. We can walk into Afghanistan, give away a few soccer balls, call it a democracy and declare victory!
Oh wait, it didn't quite work that way... never mind.

I know a way to do it... But is suspect it isn't politically viable, mostly because it requires most of them to die...

[Winehole23]

If you won't even say it, it probably isn't.

[LnGrrrR]

The question of the ethical quality of black ops is a good one. I'm willing to accept black ops as a "sometimes it has to be done" affair, but I don't think it's right. Just like I'm willing to accept a "some person might torture someone for information" outcome on an individual basis, while not wanting the law to enshrine that right.

However, I only support black ops in the sense that the people being attacked/kidnapped are already plotting against the US or people within the US, effectively making black ops a "retaliation" but one in secret. I'm not ok with, say assassinating a popular political leader in another country that is espousing views we don't like, or using sabotage against a commercial industry that isn't advancing a warfare agenda in any way.

[DarrinS]

I wonder how dangerous he thought Al Qaeda was on 9/10/2001?

[DarrinS]

Dude also wrote a paper called

Pearl Harbor: Military Inconvenience, Political Disaster (http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/is1991-2.pdf)

[Winehole23]

I wonder how dangerous he thought Al Qaeda was on 9/10/2001?Irrelevant. We're talking about the Taliban and Al Qaeda now.

[Winehole23]

Dude also wrote a paper called

Pearl Harbor: Military Inconvenience, Political Disaster (http://polisci.osu.edu/faculty/jmueller/is1991-2.pdf)Your point, please? I know this is supposed to be some kind of ad hominem but your argument is elliptical, as usual.

Dollars to donuts you didn't even read it, D. I read a little bit, and it's totally reasonable. Attacks cause people to freak out and exaggerate the effects. It was true of Pearl Harbor, and it's true of 9/11.

You defend the hysterical exaggerations. Some people prefer reason and analysis. Each to his own taste.

[sam1617]

Irrelevant. We're talking about the Taliban and Al Qaeda now.

I think the potential for the Taliban and Al Qaeda to be dangerous to the US is there. I do not know how much greater that threat is than it was in 2001. I suspect in some ways it has lessened and in some ways it has increased. I do think that Iraq and Afghanistan are working as something of a buffer zone, with terrorist organizations being more concentrated on whats going on in their front yard than with the continental US. However I also suspect that there are few home run plays in the works for the terrorists organizations, because thats what I would do.

Essentially, who can know without more information...

[Winehole23]

Much depends on how you unpack *dangerous to the US*. Is either an existential threat to the country? No way. Are they capable of deadly crimes and destruction? Sure.

Are they as dangerous to US citizens as the drive to and from work?

Your prescription bottle?

Your swimming pool?

What's on your your dinner plate?

Falling down?

Electrocution?

Poisoning?

Fire?

The answer to all of these questions is no. And it's not even close.

How many of the above are you freaking out about right now?

[DarrinS]

Irrelevant. We're talking about the Taliban and Al Qaeda now.


Guy just seems to be an antiwar type.

[DarrinS]

Bottom line is, I don't spend my days worrying about Al Qaeda, but I want someone in this govt to pay attention to them.

[Winehole23]

Bottom line is, I don't spend my days worrying about Al Qaeda, but I want someone in this govt to pay attention to them.Please quit changing the subject. Nobody's arguing that the government shouldn't pay attention to Al Qaeda. The present question is whether the war in Afghanistan is worth it.

Can you tell me what we stand to gain from it, Darrin?

[DarrinS]

Please quit changing the subject. Nobody's arguing that the government shouldn't pay attention to Al Qaeda. The present question is whether the war in Afghanistan is worth it.

Can you tell me what we stand to gain from it, Darrin?


WAR!


What is it GOOD for? Absolutely nothin'.

[Winehole23]

(redacted)

I'll just assume that means you have no good answer to the question.

[Marcus Bryant]

Afghanistan may be the wrong war but American blood lust and the MIC won't let it be. I doubt Obama will be able to overcome that. Come to think of it, he campaigned on ramping that effort up. More of the same. Surprise, surprise.

[Winehole23]

Afghanistan may be the wrong war but American blood lust and the MIC won't let it be..At least you can reason with people a little bit now. A few years ago I'd have been shouted down by a chorus of hysterical superpatriots.

[Winehole23]

the longest war in US history has officially ended


The war in Afghanistan, fought for 13 bloody years and still raging, came to a formal end Sunday with a quiet flag-lowering ceremony in Kabul that marked the transition of the fighting from U.S.-led combat troops to the country's own security forces.

In front of a small, hand-picked audience at the headquarters of the NATO mission, the green-and-white flag of the International Security Assistance Force was ceremonially rolled up and sheathed, and the flag of the new international mission called Resolute Support was hoisted.


U.S. Gen. John Campbell, commander of ISAF, commemorated the 3,500 international soldiers killed on Afghan battlefields and praised the country's army for giving him confidence that they are able to take on the fight alone.

"Resolute Support will serve as the bedrock of an enduring partnership" between NATO and Afghanistan, Campbell told an audience of Afghan and international military officers and officials, as well as diplomats and journalists.
"The road before us remains challenging, but we will triumph," he added.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/12/28/afghanistan-war-ends_n_6386602.html

[Winehole23]

what did we get? how did the USA benefit from 13 years of war in Afghanistan?

[boutons_deux]

2200+ US military dead, a $T+ wasted, 100Ks Afghans dead.

Taliban now taking over regions won and thought secure from the Taliban.

As always, British, Russians, Americans LOST in Afghanistan, outwaited, outwitted by the locals.

[boutons_deux]

The War In Afghanistan By The Numbers (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/12/28/3607134/afghanistan-war-by-the-numbers/)

Here are some numbers to provide a sense of scope to the war’s impact, longevity, toll, and effect:

13: number of years the war lasted, making this the longest war in American history

140,000: highest number (http://bigstory.ap.org/article/0c62a5ff780240c2ab90da754eb565d9/obama-longest-war-us-history-ending) of U.S. troops present in the country, in 2010, during the surge begun at President Obama’s behest

13,500: number of international troops that will stay (http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/12/28/373597845/ceremony-in-afghanistan-officially-ends-americas-longest-war) in country for Resolute Support, including roughly 10,800 U.S. troops (a number that will continue to fall (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2014/05/29/these-are-americas-9-longest-foreign-wars/) through 2015 and 2016), and 1,000 more (http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/hagel-pays-final-visit-to-afghanistan-as-pentagon-chief/2014/12/06/e6cf5c2c-7d17-11e4-9a27-6fdbc612bff8_story.html) than planned earlier this year

38,000: number of U.S. forces that were in Afghanistan at the beginning of 2014 (http://www.startribune.com/politics/national/260601331.html)

2,224: the number of U.S. troops, according to an AP tally, who were killed (http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2014/12/28/373597845/ceremony-in-afghanistan-officially-ends-americas-longest-war) in Afghanistan during the war, with more than 1,000 international coalition troops killed

17,674: estimated number of U.S. troops wounded (http://icasualties.org/OEF/USCasualtiesByState.aspx) during Operation Enduring Freedom, according to the website iCasualties.org

21,000: estimate number of Afghan civilians killed (http://costsofwar.org/article/afghan-civilians) since 2001 as a result of “crossfire, improvised explosive devices, assassination, bombing, and night raids into houses of suspected insurgents,” according to the website Costs of War

90: percentage of troops that are now home from Iraq and Afghanistan from the 180,000 that were in both countries when President Obama took office, according to a White House statement noting that 15,000 troops remain

747,000: estimated number of weapons (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/07/28/3464685/afghanistan-missing-weapons/) the U.S. provided to the Afghan National Security Forces, many of which experts say have gone missing, prompting worries they will be used in escalating insurgency attacks by Taliban fighters

3,380: estimated number of people who died (http://www.cnn.com/2013/07/27/us/september-11-anniversary-fast-facts/) in the immediate aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, including those on the hijacked planes, first responders, and victims in the World Trade Center towers and the Pentagon

35: number of years since the Marxist revolution, which essentially kicked off a near-constant period of brutal civil conflict

69: the number of women in Afghanistan’s parliament (http://priceonomics.com/afghanistan-has-more-women-in-national-parliament/), which is proportionately more than the number in the U.S. Congress. To be fair, when written, their constitution set a quota of at least 27 percent female representation in parliament, a quota that was recently revised to 20 percent.

3 million: approximate number of girls who are now enrolled in school (http://www.usaid.gov/afghanistan/gender-participant-training), while under the Taliban, virtually no girls attended school — and USAID helped to train 25,000 female teachers

1: the ranking Afghanistan received when Thomson Reuters (http://www.trust.org/item/?map=factsheet-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-women) released its list of most dangerous countries for women in 2011

9: the percentage of women who die in childbirth (http://www.trust.org/item/?map=factsheet-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-women) in Afghanistan

4,000: approximate number of midwives (http://www.usaid.gov/afghanistan/health), up from less than 500 under Taliban rule — and half of the new ones were trained by USAID-supported programs

87: percentage of women who are illiterate (http://www.trust.org/item/?map=factsheet-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-women)

70-80: percentage of girls forced into marriage (http://www.trust.org/item/?map=factsheet-the-worlds-most-dangerous-countries-for-women)

14: cases of polio (http://www.usaid.gov/afghanistan/health) in 2013, which is a drop from 80 cases in 2011

7 million: approximate number of Afghan voters (http://www.wsj.com/articles/afghans-vote-to-elect-new-president-1402714188) took part in last June’s presidential elections

46: number of people (20 civilians, 26 Afghan troops) who were killed due to attacks on Election Day

68: number of private television channels (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-12013942), not including 23 state and provincial networks — though journalists face many threats from security forces and religious entities

9.4: percentage of Afghanis who have internet access (http://www.bbc.com/news/world-south-asia-12013942), according to a 2013 Ministry of Information report

3.3 million: new Afghani customers linked to 172 megawatts of new electricity (http://www.usaid.gov/afghanistan/infrastructure) on the nation’s grid — a six to twenty-eight percent jump in the number of Afghans with access to reliable power

34 million: amount, in dollars the U.S. spent trying, unsuccessfully, to provide Afghan farmers with soybeans (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/07/24/3463603/the-us-wasted-34-million-trying-to-make-soybeans-a-thing-in-afghanistan/) as a new cash crop option

63.7 billion: dollars appropriated (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/12/04/3599827/defense-bill/) to “overseas contingency operations” in Iraq and Afghanistan for the coming year in the latest appropriations bill passed by Congress, including $2.9 billion for Afghanistan’s Ministry of Defense

62: percent drop in child mortality (http://www.usaid.gov/afghanistan/health) since 2002; infant mortality decreased 53 percent

http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/12/28/3607134/afghanistan-war-by-the-numbers/ (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/12/28/3607134/afghanistan-war-by-the-numbers/)

[FuzzyLumpkins]

what did we get? how did the USA benefit from 13 years of war in Afghanistan?

It think the central issue is Salafist types like ISIS and Taliban having their own geographically autonomous area and national security. The length of time nearly a generation was all about propping up a regime which was necessary. They now have somewhat of a plurality and a comparatively well educated incoming generation. It's neocolonialism sure but I would argue the previous order had to be removed and held at bay anyway.

The obvious concern is the Taliban coming out of the hills and retaking the country. This next year will be key.

[boutons_deux]

The obvious concern is the Taliban coming out of the hills and retaking the country.

:lol next year? how about this year?

As US, NATO exit, thousands of Afghans flee returning Taliban

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Latest-News-Wires/2014/1229/As-US-NATO-exit-thousands-of-Afghans-flee-returning-Taliban


Afghanistan conflict: Taliban declares 'defeat' of Nato

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-30626728

[Winehole23]

It think the central issue is Salafist types like ISIS and Taliban having their own geographically autonomous area and national security. The length of time nearly a generation was all about propping up a regime which was necessary. They now have somewhat of a plurality and a comparatively well educated incoming generation. It's neocolonialism sure but I would argue the previous order had to be removed and held at bay anyway.

The obvious concern is the Taliban coming out of the hills and retaking the country. This next year will be key.And if they do, then what? Another decade of war to assure the stability of a small, relatively unimportant part of South Asia? This is in our national interest how, again?

[Winehole23]

If we just spent 13 years propping up a regime that can't stand on its own for a year, maybe we backed the wrong horse.

[CosmicCowboy]

If we just spent 13 years propping up a regime that can't stand on its own for a year, maybe we backed the wrong horse.

Agreed. This is going to be Iraq II. Army will throw down their weapons and run at the first sign of trouble and the big guys will retire in Europe with their stolen millions/billions.

[boutons_deux]

Agreed. This is going to be Iraq II. Army will throw down their weapons and run at the first sign of trouble and the big guys will retire in Europe with their stolen millions/billions.

Thanks, Repugs! Breaking Iraq AND Afghanistan, destabilizing the Middle East.

iow, Never Forget! Repug War Crimes!

[CosmicCowboy]

Thanks, Repugs! Breaking Iraq AND Afghanistan, destabilizing the Middle East.

iow, Never Forget! Repug War Crimes!

Uhhhh FuzzySenior, I'm pretty sure the "Repubs" didn't do it all by themselves, spittle spittle

[FuzzyLumpkins]

And if they do, then what? Another decade of war to assure the stability of a small, relatively unimportant part of South Asia? This is in our national interest how, again?

2001 happened and this was the response. You can wave your hands at emotional generalizations like 'unimportant' but to do nothing certainly would have engendered more attacks. The foreign jihadis have since moved on to Mesopotamia but in 2001 it was certainly in our national security interests to topple that regime.

Do you disagree that there is a significant political movement in the middle east to establish a Sunni nation or that the political party in question attacked us here?

Once you get past that then you have to take responsibility for your actions. There is a history of nation building in the colonial era and following major conflicts. There are success stories and there are failures. You don't seem as much interested in discussing the actual security circumstance there as much as you are in cheering on any potential failure. They don't all fail you know.

[boutons_deux]

Uhhhh FuzzySenior, I'm pretty sure the "Repubs" didn't do it all by themselves, spittle spittle

yeah, yeah, the old false equivalence of "the Dems are just as bad as the Repugs", but the Dems weren't in power 2001-2008, and didn't execute the destruction of two countries for NO GAIN and PLENTY of LOSS

Never Forget!

[CosmicCowboy]

Hmmm....if memory serves me correctly Obama was a major proponent of moving the "real war" to Afghanistan.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Agreed. This is going to be Iraq II. Army will throw down their weapons and run at the first sign of trouble and the big guys will retire in Europe with their stolen millions/billions.

If the Caliphists escape Mesopotamia and go there maybe. Take a look at your map and look to see what is between Afghanistan and Iraq. What is that country's opinion of Sunni jihadis?

[CosmicCowboy]

If the Caliphists escape Mesopotamia and go there maybe. Take a look at your map and look to see what is between Afghanistan and Iraq. What is that country's opinion of Sunni jihadis?

I realize it won't be the Caliphists, but rather the various Taliban tribes...same difference as far as wasted lives/money/resources to prop up a puppet government that won't survive a US withdrawal.

[boutons_deux]

Hmmm....if memory serves me correctly Obama was a major proponent of moving the "real war" to Afghanistan.

Obama took office with TONS OF REPUG SHIT in progress, a cratering economy, two botched, unwinnable wars. He hasn't done so badly, and above all, he doesn't OWN any of the Repug shit. Thanks, Repugs.

[CosmicCowboy]

Obama took office with TONS OF REPUG SHIT in progress, a cratering economy, two botched, unwinnable wars. He hasn't done so badly, and above all, he doesn't OWN any of the Repug shit. Thanks, Repugs.

Please....Fuzzyoutons...There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama definitely owns his share on Afghanistan.

[boutons_deux]

Please....Fuzzyoutons...There is plenty of blame to go around. Obama definitely owns his share on Afghanistan.

Really, what could he have done differently with Afghanistan to produce that laughable American myth of "Greetings! The American military brings you democracy and freedom!"

What big mistakes did he make with that Repug-created shit hole? how could he have "won" Iraq and Afghanistan?

[Winehole23]

2001 happened and this was the response. You can wave your hands at emotional generalizations like 'unimportant' but to do nothing certainly would have engendered more attacks. The foreign jihadis have since moved on to Mesopotamia but in 2001 it was certainly in our national security interests to topple that regime. They were not a threat to us then and they aren't now. Invading Afghanistan to flush OBL from his hiding place was a grotesque waste of life and treasure.


Do you disagree that there is a significant political movement in the middle east to establish a Sunni nation or that the political party in question attacked us here? There wasn't then. There is now because two US invasions in South Asia and continuing war ever since have destabilized the whole region. Nature abhors a vacuum...


Once you get past that then you have to take responsibility for your actions. There is a history of nation building in the colonial era and following major conflicts. There are success stories and there are failures. You don't seem as much interested in discussing the actual security circumstance there as much as you are in cheering on any potential failure. They don't all fail you know.It's unsurprising you'd like to change the subject. Afghanistan doesn't really fit in that conversation, does it?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

I realize it won't be the Caliphists, but rather the various Taliban tribes...same difference as far as wasted lives/money/resources to prop up a puppet government that won't survive a US withdrawal.

All of our NATO allies participated as opposed to Iraq. Karzai isn't anything like Maliki. How do you see the fall of Afghanistan? I don't see it when Pakistan, Iran and former soviet states don't want it.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

They were not a threat to us then and they aren't now. Invading Afghanistan to flush OBL from his hiding place was a grotesque waste of life and treasure.

There wasn't then. There is now because two US invasions in South Asia and continuing war ever since have destabilized the whole region. Nature abhors a vacuum...

It's unsurprising you'd like to change the subject. Afghanistan doesn't really fit in that conversation, does it?

A bad literary narrative in place of reality. How delightful!

FLUSHING LIFE AND TREASURE!

Your story sucks because it leaves out the part where we were attacked and deposed those that attacked us. You speak as if loot should be the driving cause for war to boot, warmonger.

Wake me up when Kandahar is threatened.

[CosmicCowboy]

All of our NATO allies participated as opposed to Iraq. Karzai isn't anything like Maliki. How do you see the fall of Afghanistan? I don't see it when Pakistan, Iran and former soviet states don't want it.

Lmao @ anyone "wanting" that shithole. A return to tribal anarchy is virtually inevitable.

[ElNono]

Should've never gone there and it pains me to say it: we'll be back.

I did take much less issue with this war than Iraq, nevertheless, it was another incursion without clear goals or objectives.

[Winehole23]

Your story sucks because it leaves out the part where we were attacked and deposed those that attacked us.The Taliban didn't attack us. Their guests Al Qaeda did.

[boutons_deux]

The Taliban didn't attack us. Their guests Al Qaeda did.

and US blasted the shit out of whatever AQ they could find.

the mistake (the hubris-polluted, self-regarding USA NEVER learns) was "the US govt is now here to bring you Democracy and Freedom!"

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The Taliban didn't attack us. Their guests Al Qaeda did.

Sure and we gave them a month to expel him before we gave them the missile.

Doing nothing was not an option in the fall of 2001 and for all the bad intelligence the CIA produced for jr in the following years, they were right on regarding AQ and OBL.

Fewer US citizens died in that occupation -the Taliban fled early- than did in the WTC attacks so I guess you just want more of a financial windfall as a basis for war. Either that or your distaste for me and lack of self control regarding principles is apparent again.

[CosmicCowboy]

Whoulda thought babyboutons would be a war monger?

[FuzzyLumpkins]

Whoulda thought babyboutons would be a war monger?

Anyone who has been paying attention. I keep telling people that I am not the classic lib but far too many need their politics dumbed down.

Boutox is anti-capitalist as well as socialist as well as a democratic excusemaker.

I think both economics have a place. I cannot stand Obama, Pelosi, Reid, Schumer, or the Clintons.

[Winehole23]

Fewer US citizens died in that occupation -the Taliban fled early- than did in the WTC attacks so I guess you just want more of a financial windfall as a basis for war. A minimally plausible national interest rationale for occupying Afghanistan 13 years, would have been nice. None has been mentioned yet.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

A minimally plausible national interest rationale for occupying Afghanistan 13 years, would have been nice. None has been mentioned yet.

Sure, a sense of history and various occupations over the last 200 years. Also an ethic of finishing what you started and not leaving the power vacuum you were decrying a couple days ago.

You do not deny that we were just in responding to the WTC attack. Once you move past that, you realize that the occupation of the country is a responsibility we take on at that point. You can see the uncertainty about the security situation from various constituents of this thread and that is at the crux of the length of time.

If you want to argue specific policies like force-feeding democracy to a people not equipped for it then I will not dispute but our reasons for going and staying were necessary in my view just like the occupations of Germany and Japan following the last major conflict we didn't fuck up.

[TDMVPDPOY]

got the job done now all need to do is gtfo

htf clowns went from hunting for OBL to fighting taliban is beyond me, it was stupid to even think of liberating them

[Winehole23]

Sure, a sense of history and various occupations over the last 200 years. Also an ethic of finishing what you started and not leaving the power vacuum you were decrying a couple days ago.13 years isn't enough? How long would be? And how would that serve the US national interest. Like, now?


You do not deny that we were just in responding to the WTC attack. Once you move past that, you realize that the occupation of the country is a responsibility we take on at that point. You can see the uncertainty about the security situation from various constituents of this thread and that is at the crux of the length of time. It's their shithole. Let them manage it. We obviously can't do it for them.


If you want to argue specific policies like force-feeding democracy to a people not equipped for it then I will not dispute but our reasons for going and staying were necessary in my view just like the occupations of Germany and Japan following the last major conflict we didn't fuck up.Well, we fucked up this one. If you can't see that, you're the one who succumbed to the facile propaganda about it.

[Winehole23]

Afghanistan isn't, wasn't, and never will be a threat to global order on the scale of Germany and Japan in the mid-twentieth century. Never.

Nor Iraq, for that matter.

[Winehole23]

We propelled Al Qaeda to world historical significance they never deserved. Same thing is happening to ISIS.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

13 years isn't enough? How long would be? And how would that serve the US national interest. Like, now?

It's their shithole. Let them manage it. We obviously can't do it for them.

Well, we fucked up this one. If you can't see that, you're the one who succumbed to the facile propaganda about it.

If by propaganda you mean history then sure.

How long did we occupy Japan and Germany following WW2? How long did we garrison South Korea?

Quite a few US occupations have been successful. You keep on spewing out vitriol in the form of generalities. Infant mortality has gone down. Literacy rates particularly amongst women are up.

If we would have just abandoned the country and left another vacuum then the only education in the country would have been from the madrasa and the taliban or another of it's ilk would have quickly returned. Then there is the ethic of taking responsibility for one's actions and finishing what one started.

And you miss the point. My point was that those occupations were successful not the geopolitical significance you make of the country.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

We propelled Al Qaeda to world historical significance they never deserved. Same thing is happening to ISIS.

ISIS seized control of much of the Euphrates Valley. That propelled them into historical significance especially to someone with a sense of history. Go look up the Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Elamites. The political movement to establish a Sunni Caliphate isn't going to disappear because you stick your head in the sand. It's also a lesson that those who come after would be wise to note regarding political Islam.

Quite frankly who gives a shit who or what you think deserves someone else's attention?

[Winehole23]

And you miss the point. My point was that those occupations were successful not the geopolitical significance you make of the country.Heard you the first time. It's still not persuasive re: Afghanistan.

[boutons_deux]

2014 Deadliest Year for Afghan Civilians On Record


On the cusp of 2015, the people of Afghanistan pass another grim milestone: this calendar year saw the greatest number of civilians killed and wounded on record.

According to (http://unama.unmissions.org/Default.aspx?tabid=12254&ctl=Details&mid=15756&ItemID=38492&language=en-US) the United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan (UNAMA), the devastation faced by Afghan civilians is the worst it has been since the global body began making reports in 2009. Civilian casualties overall are up 19 percent from 2013, rising to 33 percent among children.

By November, 3,188 civilians had been killed and 6,429 wounded, according to UNAMA records, bringing the total number to 9,617—a number that has since climbed even higher.

A majority of these killings and woundings are a result of "ground engagements between parties to the conflict, improvised explosive devices, and suicide and complex attacks,"

http://www.commondreams.org/news/2014/12/31/2014-deadliest-year-afghan-civilians-record

[Winehole23]

ISIS seized control of much of the Euphrates Valley. That propelled them into historical significance especially to someone with a sense of history. Go look up the Assyrians, Babylonians, and the Elamites. The political movement to establish a Sunni Caliphate isn't going to disappear because you stick your head in the sand. It's also a lesson that those who come after would be wise to note regarding political Islam.It appeared because the USA invaded Iraq and deposed Saddam. Saddam was a much more effective bulwark against political Islam than we've been in the last decade.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

It appeared because the USA invaded Iraq and deposed Saddam. Saddam was a much more effective bulwark against political Islam than we've been in the last decade.

It appeared because the Koran, about a millennium of Muslim history, and the fact that the Shia have their homebase. You are remarkably ignorant.

As for me not being persuasive, we both know that given your current petulance, there is no way that I could persuade you of anything. Oh and again:


Quite frankly who gives a shit who or what you think deserves someone else's attention?

Applies here too.

Moreso, ISIS rose because we left and then refused to give assistance until Maliki made political reforms. We were an excellent deterrant to it. Our puppet regime otoh was not. Try and keep up, boy.

[boutons_deux]

dubya wouldn't sign SOFA because it excluded criminal immunity for US military and US mercenaries. All Barry did was withdraw according to the REPUG agreement to withdraw.

[Winehole23]

It appeared because the Koran, about a millennium of Muslim history, and the fact that the Shia have their homebase. You are remarkably ignorant.You're certainly not short of sweeping generalizations. Don't sprain your wrist patting yourself on the back for it.


Moreso, ISIS rose because we left and then refused to give assistance until Maliki made political reforms. We were an excellent deterrant to it. Our puppet regime otoh was not. Try and keep up, boy.You give yourself way too much credit. Hand-waving,fiat reasoning and lazy generalization aren't hard to follow.

[Winehole23]

meanwhile, the Peshmerga are doing the heavy lifting:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2014/12/27/has-the-kurdish-victory-at-sinjar-turned-the-tide-of-isis-war.html

[FuzzyLumpkins]

You're certainly not short of sweeping generalizations. Don't sprain your wrist patting yourself on the back for it.

You give yourself way too much credit. Hand-waving,fiat reasoning and lazy generalization aren't hard to follow.

How am I giving myself credit? Obama is CiC, he does have fiat over the military. He was the one that refused to give him aid until he stepped down. He refused for weeks while jihadi poured down out of the Syrian plateau and took over much of the valley. The the Shia clergy turned on Maliki and forced him out. All of that are specific events that are independent of you and me. Only thing going on here is your fixation.

Sweeping generalizations? There are specific verses in the Sunna that outline how politics works ie how leadership and judgements are determined. Since Muhammed there have been three Caliphates the last of which was toppled 100 years ago. Before that though one or another had existed for over 1000 years. Islam is theocratic. That is not a generalization. It's outlined in their dogma. Again that has nothing to do with me.

And spare me your sanctimony. You have displayed no reason beyond your bad fiction from yesterday and do little more than whining negations. You don't even argue that the invasion wasn't justified. You have basically come down to complaining about the bill and been tepid at it at that.

[boutons_deux]

Syria's version of the "Arab Spring" arising from US-provoked M/E instability:

Syria Deaths Hit New High in 2014, Observer Group Says

More than 76,000 people died in Syria (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/syria/index.html?inline=nyt-geo)’s civil war in 2014, including more than 3,500 children, a monitoring group reported on Thursday. The figures would make last year the deadliest in Syria (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/syria/index.html?inline=nyt-geo) since the conflict began in March 2011.

The figures from the monitoring group, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, put the total number of dead in the conflict as of Wednesday at 206,603.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/01/02/world/middleeast/syrian-civil-war-2014-deadliest-so-far.html?_r=0

[RandomGuy]

It think the central issue is Salafist types like ISIS and Taliban having their own geographically autonomous area and national security. The length of time nearly a generation was all about propping up a regime which was necessary. They now have somewhat of a plurality and a comparatively well educated incoming generation. It's neocolonialism sure but I would argue the previous order had to be removed and held at bay anyway.

The obvious concern is the Taliban coming out of the hills and retaking the country. This next year will be key.

The amorphous group called "Taliban" will find it a lot harder to stage much when Pakistani's stop supporting them, which seems more and more likely given the internal backlash in that country to Taliban attacks like this one:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/pakistan-school-massacre/taliban-chief-behind-pakistan-school-massacre-promises-more-attacks-n280786

Extremists tend to be their own worst enemy.

[FuzzyLumpkins]

The amorphous group called "Taliban" will find it a lot harder to stage much when Pakistani's stop supporting them, which seems more and more likely given the internal backlash in that country to Taliban attacks like this one:

http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/pakistan-school-massacre/taliban-chief-behind-pakistan-school-massacre-promises-more-attacks-n280786

Extremists tend to be their own worst enemy.

He gets mad because someone snatches his wife so he goes and attacks a school. Hope they teach her to read.

[Winehole23]

Months after President Obama (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/people/o/barack_obama/index.html?inline=nyt-per) formally declared that the United States’ long war against the Taliban was over (http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/26/us/obama-addresses-afghan-wars-end-on-christmas-visit.html) in Afghanistan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/afghanistan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo), the American military is regularly conducting airstrikes against low-level insurgent forces and sending Special Operations troops directly into harm’s way under the guise of “training and advising.”

In justifying the continued presence of the American forces in Afghanistan (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/afghanistan/index.html?inline=nyt-geo), administration officials have insisted that the troops’ role is relegated to counterterrorism, defined as tracking down the remnants of Al Qaeda (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/a/al_qaeda/index.html?inline=nyt-org) and other global terrorist groups, and training and advising the Afghan security forces who have assumed the bulk of the fight.


In public, officials have emphasized that the Taliban (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/t/taliban/index.html?inline=nyt-org) are not being targeted unless it is for “force protection” — where the insurgents were immediately threatening American forces.


But interviews with American and Western officials in Kabul and Washington offer a picture of a more aggressive range of military operations against the Taliban (http://topics.nytimes.com/top/reference/timestopics/organizations/t/taliban/index.html?inline=nyt-org) in recent months, as the insurgents have continued to make gains against struggling government forces.http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/world/asia/more-aggressive-role-by-us-military-is-seen-in-afghanistan.html?_r=0

[boutons_deux]

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/world/asia/more-aggressive-role-by-us-military-is-seen-in-afghanistan.html?_r=0

Thanks, dubya!

Why can't the adored, omnipresent US $700B/year military win at least one fucking war?

[Winehole23]

despite vast inferiority of numbers and continual bombardment by US forces, Taliban take Kunduz:


Questions about how thousands of army, police and militia defenders could continue to fare so poorly against a Taliban force that most local and military officials put in the hundreds hung over President Ashraf Ghani’s government and its American allies.

In the hours after Kunduz’s fall, Afghan officials said an overwhelming Afghan Army force was on its way to retake the city. But by the end of the day on Tuesday, only a few hundred had materialized at the airport — a small fraction of the number who had fled the city the day before. Many more traveling by road were said to have been slowed by ambushes and roadside bombs, in another sign of growing Taliban control in Kunduz Province and nearby areas.


As the situation worsened on Tuesday, the Pentagon press secretary, Peter Cook, said in a news conference of the Kunduz fighting, “Obviously, this is a setback.” In addition to the airstrikes, he said, a number of coalition forces were with Afghan forces as advisers.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/30/world/asia/afghan-forces-seek-to-regain-kunduz-city-from-taliban.html?_r=0

[Winehole23]

“We’ve ended two wars.” — Barack Obama, July 21, 2015, at a DSCC fundraiser (https://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2015/07/22/remarks-president-dscc-dinner) held at a “private residence”


“Now that we have ended two wars responsibly, and brought home hundreds of American troops, we salute this new generation of veterans.” — National Security Adviser Susan Rice (https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/05/20/ramadi-poland-washington-susan-rice-missile-defense/), May 20, 2015


“His presidency makes a potentially great story: the first African-American in the White House, who helped the country recover from recession and ended two wars.” — Dominic Tierney, The Atlantic, January 15, 2015 (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/01/were-going-to-miss-obama-when-hes-gone/384551/), “America Will Miss Obama When He’s Gone”


Report from Airwars, August 2, 2015, detailing civilian deaths (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/2190250-airwars-cause-for-concern-civilians-killed-by.html) from continuous U.S.-led airstrikes in Iraq and Syria:


https://firstlook.org/wp-uploads/sites/1/2015/09/iraq.png

(https://firstlook.org/wp-uploads/sites/1/2015/09/iraq.png)

New York Times, today, (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/01/world/asia/kunduz-afghanistan-taliban-fight.html) headlined: “U.S. Planes Strike Near Kunduz Airport as Fight Rages On”



American warplanes bombarded Taliban-held territory around the Kunduz airport overnight, and Afghan officials said American Special Forces were rushed toward the fighting. … The situation for the Afghan forces improved somewhat toward midnight: American warplanes conducted airstrikes at 11:30 p.m. and again at 1 a.m. on Taliban positions near the airport, an American military spokesman said. … Around the same time, soldiers with the American Special Forces headed out toward the city with Afghan commandos, according to Afghan government officials.


How do you know when you’re an out-of-control empire? When you keep bombing and deploying soldiers in places where you boast that you’ve ended wars. How do you know you have a hackish propagandist for a president? When you celebrate him for “ending two wars” in the very same places that he keeps bombing.

https://theintercept.com/2015/09/30/u-s-bombs-somehow-keep-falling-in-the-places-where-obama-boasts-he-ended-wars/

[boutons_deux]

U.S. Analysts Knew Afghan Site Hit By Air Attack Was A Hospital

Days before the Oct. 3 U.S. air attack on a hospital in Afghanistan, American special operations analysts were gathering intelligence on the facility — which they knew was a protected medical site — because they believed it was being used by a Pakistani operative to coordinate Taliban activity, The Associated Press has learned.

It's unclear whether commanders who unleashed the AC-130 gunship on the hospital — killing at least 22 patients and hospital staff — were aware that the site was a hospital or knew about the allegations of possible enemy activity. The Pentagon initially said the attack was to protect U.S. troops engaged in a firefight and has since said it was a mistake.

The special operations analysts had assembled a dossier that included maps with the hospital circled, along with indications that intelligence agencies were tracking the location of the Pakistani operative and activity reports based on overhead surveillance, according to a former intelligence official familiar with the material. The intelligence suggested the hospital was being used as a Taliban command and control center and may have housed heavy weapons.

After the attack — which came amidst a battle to retake the northern Afghan city of Kunduz from the Taliban — some U.S. analysts assessed that the strike had been justified, the former officer says. They concluded that the Pakistani, believed to have been working for his country's Inter-Service Intelligence directorate, had been killed.

No evidence has surfaced publicly to support those conclusions about the Pakistani's connections or his demise. The former intelligence official was not authorized to comment publicly and spoke only on condition of anonymity.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/doctors-without-borders-attack_561fe635e4b0c5a1ce6272da?ir=World&section=world&utm_campaign=101515&utm_medium=email&utm_source=Alert-world&utm_content=FullStory&ncid=newsltushpmg00000003

so the murdered Nobel prize laureates were just collateral damage.

and US intelligence is a bunch of Keystone Kops.

[Winehole23]

Obama extends the US withdrawal to 2017. So much for ending costly, unwinnable wars.

[boutons_deux]

14 Years After U.S. Invasion, the Taliban Are Back in Control of Large Parts of Afghanistan

taliban areas in red



http://graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2015/09/29/taliban-afghanistan-updates/bf344fceedd6154a0043a455c21e69637b2ec4ab/taliban-map-1015-720.png


http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/09/29/world/asia/100000003946402.mobile.html?_r=1

The English failed, the Russians failed, and the Americans failed!

[Winehole23]

war is wasteful: http://harpers.org/blog/2015/11/money-trail/

[boutons_deux]

...

[Winehole23]

The United States has resumed operations of its B-52H Stratofortress strategic bomber in Afghanistan for the first time in ten years. The strategic bomber recently flew several operations, dropping 27 munitions in various counterterrorism operations in Afghanistan. The reintroduction of the bomber may highlight the United States’ expanding role in Afghanistan and the increasing instability in the country.http://thediplomat.com/2016/08/after-10-years-us-b-52h-resumes-operations-in-afghanistan/

[boutons_deux]

War is a business, and unwinnable wars are unending business

[boutons_deux]

The Germans and French warned US/UK not to go to war in Afghanistan. This is the 2nd time UK got its butt kicked there.

[Winehole23]

billions wasted on ghost soldiers:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-afghanistan-army-idUSKCN1270F7

[Winehole23]

America's longest war is nowhere near over:



In all, the U.S. has spent over $850 billion on the Afghanistan war, suffered nearly 2,400 dead and the Taliban are not only back in the field, they’ve made steady progress in wresting control of the country from the U.S.-backed Afghanistan government. The Pentagon would like to convince us that the glass is half full: Two weeks ago the Defense Department announced that “U.S. backed forces control 70 percent” (https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/checkpoint/wp/2016/09/22/u-s-backed-forces-control-70-percent-of-afghanistan-us-military-chief-) of the country. Another way of saying this is that the Taliban control 30 percent—a not insignificant gain from zero, which was the case only eight weeks after Bush’s air campaign began back in 2001. The Pentagon’s estimate is conservative: The Long War Journal’s Bill Roggio, who tracks the conflict, recently noted that the Taliban have a heavy influence in fully half the country (http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2015/09/29/world/asia/afghanistan-taliban-maps.html?_r=0) and their power is expanding.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2016/10/afghanistan-longest-war-next-president-214324#ixzz4Mbh87aKb

[Winehole23]

Says the CIA’s Milt Bearden: “My touchstone is historian Louis Depree, one of the really great thinkers on Afghanistan. … Dupree said there were four mistakes the British made in Afghanistan: They occupied it, put their own hated emir on the throne, knocked down doors and killed people, then stopped paying their friends. We’ve followed the same pattern. It didn’t work for the British, it’s not working for us.”

[CosmicCowboy]

Russia couldn't do it and they shared a land border with them.

[Winehole23]

Four Americans died yesterday:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/suicide-attack-kills-least-4-americans-bagram-airfield-afghanistan-n682866

[Winehole23]

US Marines going back:


It's official: Marines are headed back to the Taliban hotbed of Helmand province, Afghanistan, the Marine Corps (http://www.military.com/marine-corps) announced Friday.
The deployment of 300 Marines from II Marine Expeditionary Force will return to the southwestern province that was the site of the Corps' major battles within the country as advisers and trainers for the Afghan National Army and police, officials said in a release.http://www.military.com/daily-news/2017/01/06/300-marines-will-deploy-to-helmand-this-spring-corps-confirms.html

[Winehole23]

bombings in Afghanistan exceed 2011 tempo:

https://www.militarytimes.com/flashpoints/2018/04/26/how-the-us-dropped-more-munitions-in-afghanistan-this-year-than-it-has-since-the-height-of-the-war/

[RandomGuy]

This shit will never end. Nothing has changed it seems in the years of this thread. Wow.

[boutons_deux]

England, failed there, told USA not to go into Afghanistan

Russia got their asses kicked and the bogus empire began to crumble there. (and it wasn't St Ronnie who brought down Russia)

American hubris and war-profiteering MIC.

At least the MIC is still, and will always profiteer from America's eternally losing wars.

[Winehole23]

What we've been doing for 17 years didn't work.

Bring 'em home.


The Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR) says the U.S. set unrealistic expectations for stabilizing Afghanistan (https://www.nbcnews.com/news/investigations/true-state-afghan-military-kept-secret-report-says-n234866) on a short timeline, that the Obama administration lacked the political will to invest the necessary time and effort to stabilize the country, and that some efforts to bolster the Afghan government actually backfired.

[Our] overall assessment is that despite some heroic efforts to stabilize insecure and contested areas in Afghanistan between 2002 and 2017, the program mostly failed,” said John Sopko, head of SIGAR, at a Thursday morning event announcing the report.https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/u-s-effort-stabilize-afghanistan-5-billion-failure-says-watchdog-n876846

[Winehole23]

Pentagon admits new Black Hawk choppers are worse than old Russian ones, and may compromise Afghanistan's miltary capability:


report from a top U.S. military watchdog has finally acknowledged that the UH-60A+ Black Hawks that the United States is supplying to the Afghan Air Force are less capable (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/10413/the-us-plan-to-give-afghanistan-a-fleet-of-black-hawks-is-deeply-flawed) and harder to maintain (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/14502/as-first-uh-60s-arrive-us-plan-to-dump-afghan-mi-17s-is-still-problematic) than the Russian-made Mi-17 Hip helicopters they have now. The review raises concerns that this could limit Afghanistan’s ability to conduct operations across the country unless steps are taking to mitigate the loss of capability, something we at The War Zone (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/17409/pentagon-watchdog-slams-u-s-backed-efforts-to-expand-the-afghan-air-force) have long warned could easily be the case (http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/17057/afghanistans-rebuilt-uh-60s-could-actually-hurt-its-warfighting-ability-in-the-near-term).http://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/21558/pentagon-admits-afghanistans-new-black-hawks-cant-match-its-older-russian-choppers

[Spurminator]

Probably because we're being penny pinchers on military spending.

[Winehole23]

:lol

[Winehole23]

White House orders direct talks with the Taliban:


The Trump administration has told its top diplomats to seek direct talks with the Taliban, a significant shift in American policy in Afghanistan, done in the hope of jump-starting negotiations to end the 17-year war.https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/15/world/asia/afghanistan-taliban-direct-negotiations.html

[Winehole23]

a trillion dollars flushed down the toilet on an unwinnable war. makes you think when our elected leaders say this or that is unaffordable.


Lawmakers, skeptical about the prospects of victory, grilled the Trump administration Tuesday on the direction of the nation’s longest-running war, now in its 17th year. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing comes after a wave of shocking militant attacks in Kabul that killed more than 200 people.

Randall Schriver, the Defense Department’s top Asia official, said the $45 billion total for the year includes $5 billion for Afghan forces and $13 billion for U.S. forces inside Afghanistan. Much of the rest is for logistical support. Some $780 million goes toward economic aid.

The costs now are still significantly lower than during the high point of the war in Afghanistan. From 2010 to 2012, when the U.S. had as many as 100,000 soldiers in the country, the price for American taxpayers surpassed $100 billion each year. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/pentagon-says-afghan-war-costs-taxpayers-45-billion-per-year

[FrostKing]

England, failed there, told USA not to go into Afghanistan

Russia got their asses kicked and the bogus empire began to crumble there. (and it wasn't St Ronnie who brought down Russia)

American hubris and war-profiteering MIC.

At least the MIC is still, and will always profiteer from America's eternally losing wars.
Tell the whole story. Americans weaponized the rebels and then those same rebels brought down your towers.

Scumbag USA always propping up violent ethnics - Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Chicago...

[Winehole23]

TERRORIST APOLOGISTS AND TRAITORS

1052968599898480640

[FrostKing]

Trump most definitely won't be ending/quitting/retreating from any wars. We just hope he doesn't start anymore. So far overall not being WarMonger

[hater]

What the hell does “the original 9/11 has been lost”?

Afghanistan was ruled by Taliban and they had zero involvement in 9/11.

All they did is allow Al Qaeda to live there and that was because Al Qaeda had helped them rid of the Russians with US help and training.

USA helped Taliban get the power and created Al Qaeda. Then when Al Qaeda attacks US, US blames Taliban and tries to obliterate them. Taliban survive and come back and wip that American ass back to Alabama.

There was no need to go after Taliban and try to force a shitty government down Afghanistans throat. USA installed one of the most savage corrupt governments in modern history and expected it yo succeed :lmao

:lol morons

[TDMVPDPOY]

11 of the idiots on 911 plane with from saudi arabia, yet US doesnt goto the source because they are an ally, but fck that... go start some undevelop countries, yet cant even finish the mission

hence i dont believe in this humanitarian bullshit, if US wants SA, whats stopping them?? EU and NATO aint going to do shit...whens the next crusades?

[hater]

Osamas grand plan was to bait US into an unwinnable war and USA fell hook line and sinker :lol

Gotta accept it was a masterful plan tbqh. Osama knew that would happen as he trained with CIA and US government

One of the most machiavellic moves in human history by Osama tbqh. Gotta give props when props are due

[Pavlov]

Osamas grand plan was to bait US into an unwinnable war and USA fell hook line and sinker :lol

Gotta accept it was a masterful plan tbqh. Osama knew that would happen as he trained with CIA and US government

One of the most machiavellic moves in human history by Osama tbqh. Gotta give props when props are due Everything single word you posted is wrong.

Called it.

[boutons_deux]

Everything single word you posted is wrong.

Called it.


no, OBL knew he would have only one shot at USA and it was brilliant, suckered USA into an expensive distantly foreign war that damaged, damages USA 100 times worse than WTC

[Winehole23]

Trump most definitely won't be ending/quitting/retreating from any wars. We just hope he doesn't start anymore. So far overall not being WarMongerDisagree. the tempo of bombing has increased in all theaters.

[Winehole23]

:lol moronsit's newsworthy that a magazine that shilled as hard for for the war (and against its critics) as the Weekly Standard says it's time to take the L and go home.

[boutons_deux]

War is highly profitable, the oligarchy LOVES eternal wars

[Winehole23]

Erik Prince's Wollman Rink moment:


According to a PowerPoint presentation (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4999853-A-strategic-economy-of-force.html) he used in meetings with administration officials and shared (https://www.politico.com/story/2017/11/02/afghanistan-envoy-position-white-house-244426) with Politico, Prince argued (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4999853-A-strategic-economy-of-force.html#document/p6/a460753) that “Afghanistan is effectively in bankruptcy” and “The best way forward is analogous to a Chapter 11 reorganization, (https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/4999853-A-strategic-economy-of-force.html#document/p6/a460753)” a reference to U.S. bankruptcy law.







https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4999853/pages/A-strategic-economy-of-force-p1-normal.gif




https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4999853/pages/A-strategic-economy-of-force-p2-normal.gif




https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4999853/pages/A-strategic-economy-of-force-p3-normal.gif


https://www.documentcloud.org/pixel.gif?key=document%3A4999853%3Ahttps%3A%2F%2Fw ww.pogo.org%2Fanalysis%2F2018%2F10%2Fpaper-cuts-the-american-president-and-the-prince-of-war



His presentation, passed among his friends in Congress (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/dana-rohrabacher-we-need-a-new-afghanistan-strategy), and presented (https://www.forbes.com/return-of-erik-prince/#6c9ffde750aa) to the President at Camp David, proposes a “strategic economy of force” in Afghanistan. Prince models his approach on the British East India Company (https://www.salon.com/2017/08/08/blackwater-founder-erik-prince-cites-east-india-company-as-a-model-to-privatize-afghanistan-war/)’s 250-year Colonial rule in the Indian subcontinent—a private foreign company with military supremacy (https://www.qdl.qa/en/brief-history-english-east-india-company-1600%E2%80%931858) blessed by a distant government.

Prince calls Afghanistan “The Wollman Ice Rink Moment of the Trump Administration (https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2015-09-29/a-1980s-new-york-city-battle-explains-donald-trump-s-candidacy#document/p11/a460750)”—a reference to Mr. Trump’s high-profile fight in the 1980s with New York City’s then-mayor Ed Koch over a dilapidated ice rink in Central Park. The reference provides a clue to who the intended audience is for the presentation: the President himself. The city had struggled with cost overruns and a lack of progress while renovating the ice rink—a fact Mr. Trump repeatedly raised with Mayor Koch. Mr. Trump asserted he could fix the Central Park attraction faster and better with less money, and offered to turn it around (https://www.nytimes.com/1986/05/31/nyregion/trump-offers-to-rebuild-skating-rink.html) on behalf of the city in exchange for the right to operate it. The Trump Organization successfully did so and operates the rink to this day.


https://www.pogo.org/analysis/2018/10/paper-cuts-the-american-president-and-the-prince-of-war/

[Winehole23]

Taliban show no sign of capitulation, casualties in the capitol mount:


Afghan security forces' control of the capital Kabul has slipped in recent months as it also suffers record-level casualties fighting against the Taliban, a watchdog reported.


Resolute Support, the US-led NATO mission in Afghanistan, released figures on Wednesday that showed Afghan forces controlled or influenced 55.5 percent of the capital.



The figure is down 0.7 percent from the previous quarter, according to the US Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction (SIGAR), and marks the lowest level since records were first kept in November 2015.SIGAR added that a full 12 percent of Kabul's districts were under Taliban control or influence, with 32 percent considered "contested".


Last year, US President Donald Trump unveilled a new Afghan war strategy that recommitted thousands of troops there and scrapped any timeline for a withdrawal.
The US has fought in Afghanistan since 2001, now America's longest war, and has roughly 15,000 troops deployed

https://www.alaraby.co.uk/english/news/2018/11/1/afghan-forces-losing-kabul-control-to-taliban-us-watchdog

fun fact: Donald Trump may send as many troops to the border as we have in Afghanistan.

[Winehole23]

Green on blue, another US soldier dies in Afghanistan:


A U.S. service member was killed in an "apparent insider attack" in Kabul, Afghanistan's capital, the U.S. military in Kabul said Saturday. Sgt. 1st Class Debra Richardson, a Resolute Support spokeswoman, said in a statement (https://rs.nato.int/news-center/press-releases/2018-press-releases/apparent-insider-attack-kills-us-service-member.aspx) that another U.S. service member was wounded in the attack.https://www.cbsnews.com/news/u-s-service-member-killed-in-apparent-insider-attack-in-kabul-afghanistan-2018-11-03/

[Winehole23]

this will probably be cited as a reason why the longest war in US history must continue, despite no prospects for victory or any tangible benefit to the USA:


The Pentagon’s pick for the next commander of U.S. Central Command said on Tuesday the high casualty rate of Afghan security forces would not be sustainable even with the stalemate in the fight against Taliban militants.https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-afghanistan-military/afghan-security-forces-deaths-unsustainable-us-military-official-idUSKBN1O32CS

[Chris]

US general to Congress: War in Afghanistan is at stalemate



believe they would be able to successfully defend their country,” McKenzie said.

McKenzie said the U.S. and its allies need to keep helping the Afghans recruit and train forces to fight the Taliban’s estimated 60,000 troops.

“They’re fighting hard, but their losses are not going to be sustainable unless we correct this problem,” McKenzie said, in one of the U.S. military’s more dire assessments of the Afghan losses.

In its most recent report to Congress, in October, the special inspector general for Afghanistan said Afghan casualty numbers had been reported only in classified form since September 2017 at the request of the Afghan government. The report, however, said that the average number of casualties between May and October this year was the greatest it has ever been during similar periods.

*
On Oct. 30, Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said Afghan forces had more than 1,000 dead and wounded during August and September alone. Afghan President Ashraf Ghani said in a November speech that more than 28,000 of his country’s forces had been killed in the last four years.

McKenzie’s grim assessment comes amid growing frustration among Congress over lack of progress in the 17-year Afghan conflict. Lawmakers peppered the general with questions about lack of advancement in the war, and why the Taliban has been gaining control of additional territory.

Sen. Ben Peters, D-Mich., told McKenzie that Congress members have been hearing about a political settlement for years.

“We’ve been at it for 17 years; 17 years is a long time,” said Peters. “What are we doing differently when it comes to the Afghan security forces that we haven’t done for 17 years?”

McKenzie, who is director of the Joint Staff and who served two tours in Afghanistan, acknowledged the frustration. But he said the government has opted to secure the more populated areas of the country, while ceding control of more remote, sparsely occupied regions to the insurgents.

He also voice optimism over the invigorated effort to negotiate peace with the Taliban.

President Donald Trump late last month expressed a willingness to continue support for the war, asserting that the U.S. is in “very strong negotiations,” an apparent reference to U.S. special envoy Zalmay Khalilzad’s efforts to get the Taliban to agree to peace talks.

At the same time, however, Trump indicated he had little confidence the talks are going to succeed. “Maybe they’re not. Probably they’re not,” he said.

Khalilzad, who was appointed in September, met Tuesday with Pakistani officials, and a Taliban official said four members from the group’s political office in the Middle Eastern state of Qatar were also in the Pakistani capital. Khalilzad will also travel to Afghanistan, Russia, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Belgium, the United Arab Emirates and Qatar.

He held three days of talks with the Taliban in Qatar in November, according to the Taliban. The U.S. has not confirmed or denied direct talks.

McKenzie pushed back against suggestions from lawmakers that peace negotiations are nothing new, and have been discussed in the past. He said the latest push by Khalizad is a new opportunity for the U.S.

He said the Taliban are also “in a stalemate” and it’s critical to maintain unrelenting pressure on the group to force them to the peace table.

https://amp.washingtontimes.com/news/2018/dec/4/us-general-tells-congress-war-in-afghanistan-is-at/








Mattis Urges End to War in Afghanistan



Secretary of Defense James Mattis is urging the international community to help bring an end to the war in Afghanistan.

“In Afghanistan, it’s approaching 40 years;” he told reporters on Monday. “Forty years is enough and it’s time for everyone to get on board, support the United Nations, support (India’s) Prime Minister (Narendra) Modi, support President (Ashraf) Ghani (of Afghanistan) and all those who are trying to maintain peace and make for a better world here. So, we are on that track.”

His comments were reported by the Afghan media outlet Tolo News.

The Hill noted the U.S. has maintained a military presence in the country since 2001 when the Taliban government was removed from power. The nation has been in conflict since the late 70s.


https://www.newsmax.com/newsfront/jim-mattis-afghanistan-war/2018/12/04/id/893089/

[Winehole23]

what's your take on this war, Chris?

[Chris]

what's your take on this war, Chris?

It's been in the works for quite some time. A key player was Zbigniew Brzezinski (his daughter is an anchor for mockingbird media outlet MSNBC). He worked with the CIA to train the Mujahideen which would evolve in to "al Qaeda". Now that we have a manufactured enemy and a blueprint for a never ending war (Operation Northwoods) we can move in and start exporting their opium. Fast forward to over 160,000 soldiers deployed to fight 100 "al-Qaeda" soldiers (Thanks Obama!) This was about establishing bases in the Middle East and was bought and paid for by David Rockefeller. Rewind back...we have an exclusive CNN interview with CIA asset Osama Bin Laden. The same Bin Laden that none of our intelligence assets can locate, but CNN found the cave! :tu Create an event (9/11) that gets us in to a never ending war hunting for non-existent weapons of mass destruction.

[Winehole23]

odd not to mention the guy who started the war, but to thank Obama for sending troops.

do you have the never speaking ill of Republicans disease?

[Chris]

Obviously not.

What's your take on this war, Winehole23?

[Pavlov]

It's been in the works for quite some time. A key player was Zbigniew Brzezinski (his daughter is an anchor for mockingbird media outlet MSNBC). He worked with the CIA to train the Mujahideen which would evolve in to "al Qaeda". Now that we have a manufactured enemy and a blueprint for a never ending war (Operation Northwoods) we can move in and start exporting their opium. Fast forward to over 160,000 soldiers deployed to fight 100 "al-Qaeda" soldiers (Thanks Obama!) This was about establishing bases in the Middle East and was bought and paid for by David Rockefeller. Rewind back...we have an exclusive CNN interview with CIA asset Osama Bin Laden. The same Bin Laden that none of our intelligence assets can locate, but CNN found the cave! :tu Create an event (9/11) that gets us in to a never ending war hunting for non-existent weapons of mass destruction.lol multiple Chrispiracies

[Chris]

http://i66.tinypic.com/243hwzb.jpg

[Pavlov]

lol ripping off gifs

[boutons_deux]

Afghanistan, Iraq, Africom, $700B/year for Empire, while 100Ks of Americans, kids are homeless, suffering, dying for want of health care

America in permanent, irreversible, unstoppable decline

For America, it's GAMEOVER

[Chris]

lol ripping off gifs

lol forum cop

[Pavlov]

lol forum copYou're the one claiming to be original.

[Winehole23]

Obviously not.

What's your take on this war, Winehole23 (https://www.spurstalk.com/forums/member.php?u=14613)?No reason to be there after we chased OBL out of the country.

[Winehole23]

lol ripping off gifsI went to sleep.

Sorry you had to wait for your answer, Chris!

[Winehole23]

US and Taliban meet in UAE:

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2018/12/taliban-meet-officials-uae-monday-181217063219519.html

[FrostKing]

Afghanistan, Iraq, Africom, $700B/year for Empire, while 100Ks of Americans, kids are homeless, suffering, dying for want of health care

America in permanent, irreversible, unstoppable decline

For America, it's GAMEOVER
When the dollar is no longer the global standard, that is when you'll see undeniable decline. At the moment Americans can still buy cheap shit and the war machine is a major reason for that.


Sidenote: Switzerland referenced lowering of wages for its own people while recently negotiating EU terms. Both political parties in America support cheap labor. The American Dream is as much about creating/importing refugees as it is nurturing its own.

[boutons_deux]

When the dollar is no longer the global standard, that is when you'll see undeniable decline.

goddamn, you're fucking stupid

The 21st century belongs to China, with degraded, declining, oligarchical USA a distant second.

=============

Europe’s central banks are starting to replace dollar reserves with the yuan

https://qz.com/1180434/europes-central-banks-are-starting-to-replace-us-dollar-reserves-with-the-chinese-yuan/

[FrostKing]

goddamn, you're fucking stupid

The 21st century belongs to China, with degraded, declining, oligarchical USA a distant second.

=============

Europe’s central banks are starting to replace dollar reserves with the yuan

https://qz.com/1180434/europes-central-banks-are-starting-to-replace-us-dollar-reserves-with-the-chinese-yuan/



I'm stupid for agreeing with you?

[Winehole23]

I'm stupid for agreeing with you?vehement agreement is a Boutons hallmark.

[Chris]

https://twitter.com/OfficeOfMike/status/1075869647625433089

[benefactor]

I think both parties can agree walking away from Afghanistan should have happened long ago.

[Chris]

Walking away from the Middle East entirely :tu

[spurraider21]

good move

[Pavlov]

Walking away from the Middle East entirely :tuIncluding foreign aid to Israel, Chris?

[Winehole23]

the treatment of in theater allies has been and continues to be shameful:

1084025221298966528

[Winehole23]

civilian casualties likely much higher than estimates:

1089272932604485633

[Winehole23]

Matt Taibbi: McConnell getting so many Dems to vote for the resolution rebuking Trump's announced pullouts from Syria and Afghanistan could damage the Dems and help Trump in 2020.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/syria-afghanistan-vote-788308/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

[Winehole23]

Here’s a crisp little essay by Chas Freeman on our strategically misbegotten, 14 trillion dollars and counting, ongoing wars in west Asia:

https://chasfreeman.net/ready-fire-aim-u-s-interests-in-afghanistan-iraq-and-syria/

[Winehole23]

Some time ago, Iraq was where
We looked for stuff that wasn’t there
We haven’t found it to this day,
And yet we feel obliged to stay.

[TheGreatYacht]

Never Ends

https://mobile.twitter.com/realdaviddees/status/821960230091165696

[TheGreatYacht]

US General Says US Troops To Stay In Afghanistan 'Several More Years'

https://youtu.be/g4MGO-FkZCQ

[Winehole23]

Trump making peace with a vengeance in Afghanistan:



From Jan. 1 through October, U.S.-led forces have used 6,208 missiles and bombs in Afghanistan. That compares with 5,982 for the same period in 2018, which saw the most airstrikes of any year since the Taliban was toppled in 2001.https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4181084002

[Winehole23]

buT hOw ARe wE gOiNg tO PaY fOr iT?


America has spent $6.4 trillion on wars in the Middle East and Asia since 2001, a new study saysPUBLISHED WED, NOV 20 201910:47 AM ESTUPDATED WED, NOV 20 20192:19 PM EST


Amanda Macias (https://www.cnbc.com/amanda-macias/)@AMANDA_M_MACIAS (https://twitter.com/amanda_m_macias)

































KEY POINTS


The U.S. wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Pakistan have cost American taxpayers $6.4 trillion since they began in 2001.
That total is $2 trillion more than all federal government spending during the recently completed fiscal year.
The report, from Watson Institute of International and Public Affairs at Brown University, also finds that more than 801,000 people have died as a direct result of fighting.








https://www.cnbc.com/2019/11/20/us-spent-6point4-trillion-on-middle-east-wars-since-2001-study.html

[TheGreatYacht]

https://mobile.twitter.com/AbbyMartin/status/1197353271955820548

[TheGreatYacht]

US Drone Strike Kills New Mother, Civilians In Afghanistan

https://youtu.be/5qqbka9vuGY

[boutons_deux]

AT WAR WITH THE TRUTH

U.S. officials constantly said they were making progress.

They were not, and they knew it,

A confidential trove of government documents obtained by The Washington Post reveals that

senior U.S. officials failed to tell the truth about the war in Afghanistan throughout the 18-year campaign,

making rosy pronouncements they knew to be false and

hiding unmistakable evidence the war had become unwinnable.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/graphics/2019/investigations/afghanistan-papers/afghanistan-war-confidential-documents/)

[boutons_deux]

U.S. spent $9 billion failing to wipe out Afghan opium (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2019/12/9/1904607/-Open-thread-for-night-owls-U-S-spent-9-billion-failing-to-wipe-out-Afghan-opium)

Afghanistan is far and away the world’s largest opium producer (https://go.ind.media/e/546932/l--up-87-per-cent--survey-html/cbws6q/515915273?h=Sq0JPvjmdVv1-8iRPC04FglIv74VBbc6_yA0_lsGht8) and

has been for the entire period since the US invaded and occupied the country in late 2001.

Afghan farmers were cultivating about 60,700 hectares of opium poppies in the late 1990s,

but around 121,400 hectares a year in the mid-2000s.

As the US occupation dragged on,

opium cultivation generally climbed throughout the 2010s,

peaking at more than 323,700 hectares in 2017.

That equates to about 9 tons of raw opium produced that year,

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1904607 (https://www.dailykos.com/stories/1904607)

[TheGreatYacht]

BOMBSHELL: US LYING For 18 Years About Afghánistan Wár

https://youtu.be/3kEwvxrxCdE

[TheGreatYacht]

Obama/Bush/Trump Lied Repeatedly About Afghan War-- Documents Reveal

https://youtu.be/HGDz_C13GIw

[TheGreatYacht]

"Afghanistan Papers" Only Show Us What We Should Already Know Yet Choose To Ignore & It's Everywhere

https://youtu.be/yPjzKTRfkbU

[TheGreatYacht]

US Bombs Afghan Hospital While The Pentagon Now Refuses To Even Comment On The Afghan War

https://youtu.be/DCShEwJaltQ

[TheGreatYacht]

Pentagon Is Now Outright Dismissing The PROOF That Americans Were Lied To About Afghanistan War

https://youtu.be/cxCX50XfAmA

[TheGreatYacht]

Another American Killed In Afghanistan & Trillion More For War In 2020, Despite All The Exposed Lies
https://youtu.be/OHeRsegput4

[Winehole23]

Trump making peace with a vengeance in Afghanistan:

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4181084002another example:

1340070464366886912

[Winehole23]

CIA death squads no longer sexy

[Winehole23]

https://www.nakedcapitalism.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/part-of-history-1.jpeg

[pgardn]

Add to this that trumps totally uncoordinated pull out is going to get people killed at a very high rate. This is the tragedy taking place right now.

[Winehole23]

Add to this that trumps totally uncoordinated pull out is going to get people killed at a very high rate. This is the tragedy taking place right now.It's also a tragedy that we're still there, tbh.

1341053441867620352

[pgardn]

It's also a tragedy that we're still there, tbh.

1341053441867620352

But we are.

And if we are going to pull out. How about telling the people we "were trying to save" how and when we will pull out so they dont face slaughter. This is not South Vietnam.

[Winehole23]

But we are.

And if we are going to pull out. How about telling the people we "were trying to save" how and when we will pull out so they dont face slaughter. This is not South Vietnam.Sure, an orderly withdrawal is a good idea. :tu

[pgardn]

Sure, an orderly withdrawal is a good idea. :tu

Maybe Trump could help out the military in charge by giving them the logistical time to get out orderly.
This could be an unnecessary slaughter in a large number of villages and for the Afghan military guarding actual citizens who are going to get slayed once the Taliban come in. It must be noted there are a large number of ordinary people who wished we never helped so they at least did not end up on the Taliban's list.

[Winehole23]

for better and for worse, a vote for Biden was a vote for the ongoing US imperial project in South Asia.

1352269689670561793

[FrostKing]

Afghanistan & Polska

Where Empires die

[Winehole23]

MK Bhadrakumar sums it out


The bottom line is that the US had no fixed agenda in the war. It shifted already within the first few weeks from the removal of the Taliban regime to an outright invasion of Afghanistan and soon thereafter to the creation of a puppet regime.

The nadir was reached when Bush began talking about a Marshall Plan to rebuild Afghanistan, as in Germany and Japan – that is, before Iraqis chastened him.

Meanwhile, the occupation of Afghanistan became an end in itself, with war profiteering turning into a roaring business with money, women, drug trafficking, foreign bank accounts, contractors, all thrown into it, spawning mind-boggling corruption and venality and creating a dysfunctional Afghan state.

That’s how, quintessentially, Afghanistan became a low-hanging fruit for the Taliban to pluck in their second coming.
https://asiatimes.com/2021/04/obituary-for-americas-war-in-afghanistan/

[coyotes_geek]

I think the Economist nails it.


Mr Biden had inherited a peace deal from his predecessor. In February 2020 Donald Trump’s administration had signed an agreement with the Taliban in which America committed to reducing forces and ultimately withdrawing from the country entirely by May 1st 2021. In exchange, the Taliban promised to break with al-Qaeda and discuss a political settlement with the Afghan government. There is little sign that the Taliban has fulfilled either of its promises. In January America’s Treasury department noted that al-Qaeda members remained “embedded with the Taliban”, and on April 12th the group said it would not attend a forthcoming meeting in Turkey that would have discussed, among other things, the formation of an interim government.


Once American soldiers and warplanes leave, the Taliban will be able to press its advantage. That does not mean the state will collapse at once, but it will struggle to stave off the insurgents’ advances. The Taliban has been steadily expanding its presence in and around cities, controlling the roads to Kabul and Kandahar. John Sopko, America’s Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, has said that the Afghan army is “a disaster”.


American officials say they will continue to send money to Kabul, mindful of the lessons of the Soviet withdrawal from Afghanistan, when the Soviet-backed government clung onto power in 1989—only to collapse three years later when funding was withdrawn.

Yet America’s departure will create a power vacuum that Pakistan, a longtime supporter of the Taliban, and India, a fervent opponent, will seek to fill, along with China, Iran and Russia. A war that began in 1979, with the Soviet invasion, will take another grim form.

https://www.economist.com/asia/2021/04/13/joe-biden-calls-time-on-americas-longest-ever-war

[Winehole23]

"the way up and the way down are the same"

Number of US troops in Afghanistan could increase to help with drawdown efforts (https://www.stripes.com/news/middle-east/number-of-us-troops-in-afghanistan-could-increase-to-help-with-drawdown-efforts-1.670070)

[Winehole23]

time to bug out

1424022003573567489