Big difference between those countries and Afghanistan. We stayed in countries where it was strategically and financially in our interest to stay. Also in countries where our troops are not being shot at or in in danger of being blown up everyday.
Financially it was not in our best interests. Hohenfels GE was the only base to actually make money because we charged European Allies to train with us there. We pay "rent" for all bases we occupy. We are in those countries because of strategic first response ability.
I get your point but I think they also got the point a long time ago. We were long past a major war with the Taliban and have been mostly engaged in Nation building for the last 10 years.
I don't know where you get your information from, but I know first hand that's not true. I know we were engaged until the day we left. USAID failed back in 2010. I spoke with several on their team. ODA was sent out to various districts to recruit ALP which almost always ended in catastrophe. Shaking down farmers, kidnapping allies, burning down cell towers, shooting 105 rockets, VBIEDing check points. You really have no idea what your talking about.
It was Trump that pulled the plug!
Yeahhhh... I don't think so. Baghram was the exit strategy... C5 Galaxies were the exit strategy... not KAF!
Seriously! So you think that in order to advance R&D we have to get into a war every decade?
Absolutely! If you knew how funding worked then you would probably understand. The normal process in peace time takes 10 to 20 years to advance technology. The Pentagon (and Washington) only release funds for R&D to meet mission criticalities in war time and other than war time contingencies. So I don't "think" I know. Sorry you don't like it, but under our bureaucracy (congress yadda yadda) that's what it takes for R2 funding. Trust me, that's not changing anytime soon.
Nope there was really no better way of doing it. We had prepared them for this and armed them to protect themselves. We told them we believed in them and their ability to stand up as a nation and survive. So after that did you expect us to close down the Embassy, fly out the staff and then evacuate every American Citizen and then take away any advance weapon that the Afghan army had?
There was a very good way of doing it. I thought I explained that already. We told them squat... there is no sense of "nationality" or "patriotism" except for a choice few. That's what you get when you have a Mosque on every corner instead of a school. We KNEW they couldn't stand on their own. Training by all accounts met less than 39% of expectations.
I think that move would have had created an immediate panic and sent a clear message to the Afghan people that they are doomed. The only screw up in the withdrawal was that no one could have predicted how spineless the Afghan military and Government was.
I already explained this. They knew. There's a big difference between spineless and unprepared.
If they had actually engaged the Taliban instead of surrendering instantly we would have been able to send back in air support and beaten the Taliban back or at the least bought several months of time to evacuate the people who wanted to leave. I understand your argument is that we should have never left. I just don't agree that we should be propping up nations forever.
Impossible to "beat the Taliban back" when you boxed in (like in KAF) and have to worry about collateral damage. ROE had to be completely impossible by that point. We should have had a "nominal" presence.
Our forces are already in the 21st Century and way ahead of any other country. Your argument may apply to the training and combat experience of troops but the technology is always advancing, war or no war.
Not true...we went into this war with 1984 HMMWV's We came out with IED proof vehicles ran by 7 computers with cell phone blocking DUKE systems accompanied with GYROCAMS that can see 22AWG wire 10 miles out and digitally overlay terrain, we got guys out of the turrets and replaced them with CROW 2 systems, we got microphone technology that triangulates point of fire and return fire on vehicles and on and on and on...
Yes and before Nam we had no way to quickly deforest miles of land. Every war is Unique in some ways and what was designed for one war may not be needed for the next. We certainly did not need Agent Orange V2 in Afghanistan.
No Orange because there was barely any foliage plus the UN frowns on that. We did however utilize Hellfire's with pin point precision flown remotely from halfway around the world.
Anyway Thank you for your service. I get your anger, but this was never going to end any other way. If anything the way the Afghan military bellied up it shows that they had just become completely dependent on us for their survival.
I appreciate it, I'm not angry. More like frustrated because there is so much hidden from the public and they don't make it easy to understand how and why they do things they do.
www.nytimes.com
