3 ms·

> the strategic purpose of invading Afghanistan was to demonstrate to every country that shielding those who commit acts of war against the United States is its

by jMyles 9y ago

> the strategic purpose of invading Afghanistan was to demonstrate to every country that shielding those who commit acts of war against the United States is itself an act of war against the United States In hindsight (actually, even it seemed even at the time) it was probably better to offer a more mature presentation to the world community about what we knew about Al Qaeda, why we believed some of its associates to be in Afghanistan, etc. Rumsfeld and Bush didn't across as authors of some thought-out strategy; they seemed like buffoons. Underground fortresses? [0] Watch this drive? [1] As it is, most of the world now doesn't believe that the US had any idea what it was doing. We also now know that some well-connected Saudis were directly responsible for some of the planning of the attack. So I don't think that this "strategic value" panned out in the slightest. 0: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGhGHxw0mSo https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FGhGHxw0mSo 1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCm9788Tb5g https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TCm9788Tb5g

euyyn 9y ago
> what we knew about Al Qaeda, why we believed some of its associates to be in Afghanistan, etc. I was living in Spain and no one needed the US to explain why they "believed some of Al-Qaeda's associates were in Afghanistan". I'm not sure if you didn't watch the news through that time or what, but the Taliban were very upfront about having Bin Laden. E.g.: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taliban-wont-turn-over-bin-laden/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taliban-wont-turn-over-bin-lade...
- jMyles 9y ago
  They were up-front about having Bin Laden, but not about harboring "Al Qaeda" - a phrase which Bin Laden didn't use in any public media appearance until a month later. They wanted evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with the attacks (which of course he denied). Why not deliberatively and carefully provide this evidence to the world instead of rushing into a war? What's the strategic value there?
  - RUG3Y 9y ago
    Capturing one guy is a symbolic gesture anyway. "Well, we had thousands of civilian and US military casualties, but we got Bin Laden! It was totally worth it!"
  - maxxxxx 9y ago
    "They wanted evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with the attacks (which of course he denied)." What are you talking about? Bin Laden took credit for 9/11 immediately and it was pretty clear that they had their training camps in Afghanistan. Nobody denied that. Iraq was a different situation. to go there the US had to make up things.
    - ashark 9y ago
      > What are you talking about? Bin Laden took credit for 9/11 immediately Both my recollection and Wikipedia (admittedly neither being authoritative) agree that Bin Laden denied involvement for some time after the attacks (Wiki says he didn't claim responsibility until 2004). The Taliban denounced the attacks the day of and, separately, stated Bin Laden wasn't involved (which might seem weird, but there's some background there that makes it less suspicious than it seems, though of course it could have all been deception). They also volunteered that they'd turn him over if we turned up evidence that he'd been involved, on Sept. 13th (again, of course they could have been lying or stalling, just getting the events/statements straight) The US demand (Sept. 14th) wasn't that they hand over Bin Laden, it was that they hand over all of Al Qaeda in their territory, all their intelligence on them, and Bin Laden. Given that there were a lot of fighters on their side of the civil war who'd been through Al Qaeda camps, this was probably impossible to do without losing the civil war, between the loss of manpower, the risk (I'd hazard it was a near-certainty) of opening a new and dangerously ill-defined front in the civil war, and the loss of said training resources/facilities. It was never going to happen, and we'd been considering covertly or overtly pitching in with the other side of their civil war for a few months prior (that part I didn't know until just a few minutes ago) anyway. [EDIT] reading over the sequence of events and the public statements of both sides the Taliban comes off as even more reasonable than I remember them seeming at the time, which was already "fairly reasonable". Could have all been lies, of course, but if you just look at the public statements and the timeline of events—how quickly it escalated—just, wow. At the very least it was terrible PR management on the US' part that we came off looking like unhinged lunatics compared with such genuine shitbags as the Taliban.

by jMyles 9y ago

euyyn 9y ago

> what we knew about Al Qaeda, why we believed some of its associates to be in Afghanistan, etc. I was living in Spain and no one needed the US to explain why they "believed some of Al-Qaeda's associates were in Afghanistan". I'm not sure if you didn't watch the news through that time or what, but the Taliban were very upfront about having Bin Laden. E.g.: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taliban-wont-turn-over-bin-laden/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/taliban-wont-turn-over-bin-lade...

jMyles 9y ago
They were up-front about having Bin Laden, but not about harboring "Al Qaeda" - a phrase which Bin Laden didn't use in any public media appearance until a month later. They wanted evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with the attacks (which of course he denied). Why not deliberatively and carefully provide this evidence to the world instead of rushing into a war? What's the strategic value there?
- RUG3Y 9y ago
  Capturing one guy is a symbolic gesture anyway. "Well, we had thousands of civilian and US military casualties, but we got Bin Laden! It was totally worth it!"
- maxxxxx 9y ago
  "They wanted evidence that Bin Laden had anything to do with the attacks (which of course he denied)." What are you talking about? Bin Laden took credit for 9/11 immediately and it was pretty clear that they had their training camps in Afghanistan. Nobody denied that. Iraq was a different situation. to go there the US had to make up things.
  - ashark 9y ago
    > What are you talking about? Bin Laden took credit for 9/11 immediately Both my recollection and Wikipedia (admittedly neither being authoritative) agree that Bin Laden denied involvement for some time after the attacks (Wiki says he didn't claim responsibility until 2004). The Taliban denounced the attacks the day of and, separately, stated Bin Laden wasn't involved (which might seem weird, but there's some background there that makes it less suspicious than it seems, though of course it could have all been deception). They also volunteered that they'd turn him over if we turned up evidence that he'd been involved, on Sept. 13th (again, of course they could have been lying or stalling, just getting the events/statements straight) The US demand (Sept. 14th) wasn't that they hand over Bin Laden, it was that they hand over all of Al Qaeda in their territory, all their intelligence on them, and Bin Laden. Given that there were a lot of fighters on their side of the civil war who'd been through Al Qaeda camps, this was probably impossible to do without losing the civil war, between the loss of manpower, the risk (I'd hazard it was a near-certainty) of opening a new and dangerously ill-defined front in the civil war, and the loss of said training resources/facilities. It was never going to happen, and we'd been considering covertly or overtly pitching in with the other side of their civil war for a few months prior (that part I didn't know until just a few minutes ago) anyway. [EDIT] reading over the sequence of events and the public statements of both sides the Taliban comes off as even more reasonable than I remember them seeming at the time, which was already "fairly reasonable". Could have all been lies, of course, but if you just look at the public statements and the timeline of events—how quickly it escalated—just, wow. At the very least it was terrible PR management on the US' part that we came off looking like unhinged lunatics compared with such genuine shitbags as the Taliban.