9 ms·
US Forces Being “Rushed” to Kabul Airport as Embassy Evacuation Underway
- cf100clunk 5y agoOnce again, Afghanistan is the graveyard of empires.
- melling 5y agoAmerica wasn’t there to create an empire. We were supposed to leave long ago
- justinzollars 5y agoHow is the United States different than Rome or The British Empire?
- LatteLazy 5y agoThe Romans lasted 100s of years. Us Brits made over 100. The US is flagging barely 30 years after outlasting communism...
- chaostheory 5y agoTechnically, our "empire" started after WWII, so it's more like 80 years.
- LatteLazy 5y agoI'm not sure when the clock starts exactly. After ww2 the ussr looked like the biggest badest empire. Doubly so after sputnik and their first atomic bombs. Maybe the 70s?
- chaostheory 5y agoMultiple empires can co-exist simultaneously. The US actually already had colonies since 1898 so it would already qualify as an empire at that point. You can even make a case that the US started in empire in 1848 when it annexed Mexican land. The 1970's is way too late. Even my initial guess of post-WWII is late.
- krapp 5y agoAmerica was an actual empire (as in actually taking over other countries and colonizing them) back in the 19th century. America's "empire" after WW2 is more of a redefinition of the term.
- chaostheory 5y agoGood point. Puerto Rico, Guam, and maybe even the Virgin Islands are proof of that. The Philippines too, but we didn't keep that island chain. 1898 is that birth of the US empire.
- finiteseries 5y agoIt’s essentially an entire continent unto itself that stays completely geographically insulated as long as a single power doesn’t coopt all of Eurasia. The territorial ambitions are slightly different to a colonial maritime power within spitting distance of no fewer than 3 other maritime powers, or one in control of the Mediterranean with a very large front door open to the North European Plain.
- LatteLazy 5y agoThe US was meant to be nation building. Everyone knew that would take a generation or 3. Thats why the US couldnt and didn't leave after 2 weeks.
- adventured 5y agoThe US was not in Afghanistan to nation build. It went there to dismantle Al Qaeda and kill bin Laden, which it did. Preventing the Taliban from retaking the nation would have been a bonus certainly. The US didn't leave after two weeks because it took a lot longer than that to find and kill bin Laden and wipe out Al Qaeda in the country. The US didn't leave after killing bin Laden because Afghanistan was a relatively inexpensive sandbox for the military industrial complex to play in, train its soldiers in, and deploy/test weapons in. US & allied troop deaths in Afghanistan have been fairly low since 2013. So Afghanistan got to act as a war training ground with low risk of losing a lot of soldiers, an exceptionally rare commodity as far as the Pentagon is concerned. Now they have to find another country to occupy.
- the_only_law 5y ago20 years and trillions of dollars later, and they did a hell of a job.
- frozenport 5y agoAfghanistan: waste of time
- melling 5y agoI wonder if instead we had taken $2 trillion and 20 years to cure cancer(s) instead, how close we would have come.
- Barrin92 5y agoGiven the amount of money that has flown into cancer research already, probably not a lot closer. Cancer research is actually historically one of the largest wastes of money with some of the worst outcomes in terms of life expectancy increase. And I'm not just being quip, the actual point here is that these generic takes about "military spending bad, xy good" are kind of shallow.
- justinzollars 5y agoor infrastructure
- philwelch 5y agoThe Senate just passed a bill to spend trillions of dollars on infrastructure.
- underseacables 5y agoAnd regulate digital currency, require drunk driving detection systems in cars, that infrastructure bill was so helpful!
- philwelch 5y agoExactly. If you wish for the government to spend a couple trillion dollars on something, be careful what you wish for.
- 5y ago
- pradn 5y agoThis trope belies two thousand years of present-day Afghanistan being part of flourishing empires or being the seat of empires itself. Read this to learn more: https://twitter.com/Alex_Khaleeli/status/1425608335726940166?s=20 https://twitter.com/Alex_Khaleeli/status/1425608335726940166... Maybe the calculus has changed in the past two centuries?
- cf100clunk 5y agoMaybe the calculus does not rely on metronomic time frames but rather historical push-pull factors from surrounding empires? That's the nuanced, complex reality of Afghan history - a place that exists on/as a natural invasion/trade route, much like Laos, Armenia, Poland, etc. The list of rebuffed invaders is long, and we can now add the U.S.A. and its allies who are now leaving. It is, indeed, the graveyard of empires: https://thediplomat.com/2017/06/why-is-afghanistan-the-graveyard-of-empires/ https://thediplomat.com/2017/06/why-is-afghanistan-the-grave...
- belter 5y agoLess than 32 days ago I posted in this thread and was hit with a barrage of downvotes. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27800432 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27800432 Here is part of the post: "...They better have a good plan for a pull off in a hurry of the current US Embassy. As soon as the wind changes it is pretty clear to what allegiance the current Afghan Army will go with..." So much for the wisdom of the crowds.
- belter 5y agoJust saw this, in the NY times coverage of the situation: "American negotiators are trying to extract assurances from the Taliban that they will not attack the embassy" Oh boy.... Edit: White is what is controlled by the government, Orange dark is already under control of the Taliban, other orange contested. https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2021/08/08/taliban-afghanistan-territory/c37d9977dabad90f2a1128cf2dc59acfd514fd07/taliban-afghanistan-territory-720.png https://static01.nyt.com/newsgraphics/2021/08/08/taliban-afg...
- seanicus 5y agoPity on anyone who was fool enough to work with the Americans.
- anonfornoreason 5y agoNot sure why this person is being downvoted, but it's well known that any informant that works with an occupying force is on the chopping block once that force is no longer there. This is especially true in the middle east as many cultures there have a history of generational feuds. In other words, they don't easily forget "traitors".
- Animats 5y agoMany of them will be killed by the Taliban. There will be video. Like this from last month.[1] The embassy in Kabul is still hiring.[2] They want a Public Engagement Assistant, a Cultural Affairs Assistant, a truck driver, and a plumber. Really. [1] https://nypost.com/2021/07/13/taliban-executes-afghan-special-forces-soldiers-video/ https://nypost.com/2021/07/13/taliban-executes-afghan-specia... [2] https://erajobs.state.gov/dos-era/vacancysearch/searchVacancies.hms?_ref=ccs1njd3pt0 https://erajobs.state.gov/dos-era/vacancysearch/searchVacanc...
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoThis feels like the fall of Saigon.
- hyperbovine 5y agoSo in barely 30 years Afghanistan will transform into a peaceful, economically prosperous, and basically free society, finally having cast off the yoke of colonialism?
- whoaisme 5y agoYou couldn't Express any more clearly your utter ignorance about vietnam even if you wanted to
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoFree? Not so much (19/100 on Freedom House's freedom score): https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores https://freedomhouse.org/countries/freedom-world/scores Prosperous? They could be doing worse, but $2785 per person per year doesn't overwhelm me with their prosperity: https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.CD So... nice snark, in a very disingenuous kind of way, but not very related to reality.
- forz877 5y agoIt may not be a huge success story, but it hasn't been a failed state either.
- hyperbovine 5y agoNice websites, but try actually visiting Vietnam, as I have. You’ll encounter a people who are fairly prosperous by regional standards, and downright rich compared to the colonial era. Government involvement in their day to day lives is minimal. I chose my words carefully.
- Symbiote 5y agoThere's a little more information about the British evacuation. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/12/taliban-claim-capture-kandahar-grip-on-afghanistan-grows https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/12/taliban-claim-... Edit: and the USA https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/12/us-others-laying-groundwork-afghanistan-embassy-evacuations-kabul-taliban- https://www.theguardian.com/world/2021/aug/12/us-others-layi...
- amanaplanacanal 5y agoHow long do you suppose it will be until the US gets into another crazy Asian adventure? GW Bush ran on a platform against nation building, and still got into two nightmare wars. Who will be the next president to be led down this path?
- justinzollars 5y agoI don't think they are able to. China and Russia beat the United States in war games, so 100% of the forces will be devoted to that.
- philwelch 5y agoIt was about 25 years between Vietnam and Afghanistan, and Americans are far more isolationistic now than they were after Vietnam. Like GW Bush, it will probably be whichever president is the next to preside over a deadly attack on American soil.
- mywittyname 5y agoYou're forgetting about the Gulf War, Kosovo/Bosnia War, and a handful of significant "interventions" and "police actions" around the world. Plus there is the ongoing crisis in Syria, Iraq, and Libya (Not an Asian adventure, but still battling Islamic troops). I would not be surprised if the country is dragged into another war during the current administration. Could be Georgia (the country), Pakistan, Israel, Somalia, Iran, Sudan, or any number of other destabilized nations in the region.
- underseacables 5y agoKosovo/Bosnia was more about taking attention away from the impeachment of President Clinton.
- mywittyname 5y agoNot sure I agree, as the NATO was actively engaged by 1994 after https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banja_Luka_incident https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banja_Luka_incident . After which time, NATO / US forces began active bombing campaigns against Serbian targets.
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y agoI've served there and this hurts. I'm scared to think what will happen to the women of Afghanistan under Taliban rule.
- the-dude 5y agoOh please. Do you really think you were there to liberate the women of Afghanistan? That was cooked up by the CIA to get some liberal EU countries to cooperate.
- CabSauce 5y agoI don't think that's what he said at all...
- iammisc 5y agoRight, by and large the women of Afghanistan supported and enabled the Taliban, along with the men of Afghanistan. The Taliban enjoys little opposition and lots of support. Look... Afghanis have had more than a decade to organize for the eventuality of TAliban take over. They could have done reasonable things while having a democratically elected government, like arming all citizens, forming organized militias, etc. This would have lead to a citizenry actually able to fight. That they did not and that the citizenry is doing nothing to stop the Taliban indicates that the Taliban are more popular than the government. From my perspective as a Westerner, that is very sad. But it's not my country.
- remarkEon 5y ago>They could have done reasonable things while having a democratically elected government I am skeptical this was the "right" path, broadly defined. Democracy was completely foreign to them, conflicted with their deeply hierarchical tribal structure, and was extremely difficult to administer in a country as geographically and culturally diverse as Afghanistan is. If Kharzi had appointed himself King of Afghanistan we probably would've had more luck. Source: was an 11A there in 2012
- alkonaut 5y agoIsn’t the US still maintaining regular attacks from the air over Afghanistan, and the taliban has no advanced AA apart from manpads, meaning the US and allies has full air superiority? How can the taliban operate in that environment? Shouldn’t any camp, convoy or even individual armed pickup truck be the target of air strikes even as the US withdraws ground troops?
- cnlevy 5y agoRemember that kobanî almost fell to ISIS, it only held thanks to the kurdish ground combatants (helped by western air force strikes). If you cannot hold ground, no amount of airstrikes will push a ground army back.
- hpoe 5y agoYou're air superiority means nothing if you don't know who is the enemy and who is not. How can you tell if that truck is carrying boxes of ammo or boxes of clothes? Also you can't surveil everywhere and you cant track everything. Furthermore airplanes can't hold ground they can clear it but that doesn't stop someone from hiding in a cave and coming back out.
- galacticaactual 5y agoThis is the answer.
- philwelch 5y agoThere's no such thing as perfect reconnaissance from the air, let alone unlimited fuel and ammunition. You can't always tell with 100% accuracy whether you're bombing a Taliban camp or a wedding party. Frankly, the policy decision has been made that the fate of Afghanistan is of marginal strategic value to the United States. That's why we're leaving. Why would we try and eradicate an insurgent ground force from the air--a feat that has never been accomplished in all of military history--if keeping a minimal troop presence to deter them from overrunning the rest of the country wasn't considered worthwhile?
- 2OEH8eoCRo0 5y ago
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- bruceb 5y agoThe biggest problem is they live there, we don't. They know we will leave.
- inawarminister 5y agoYou have all the watches in the world, but we have time. - Taliban commander to Hiller, 2001.
- underseacables 5y agoIt’s like Vietnam all over again.
- GoodJokes 5y agoVery relevant to Hackernews.
- forz877 5y agoThis was inevitable. Better to let it happen now than continue to waste resources on a hopeless conflict. A great example of the failure of modern war. The inability of the military to effectively execute total war because of public palatability leads to these outcomes - zombie wars that can never be won, because no one has the stomach to do/say what actually needs to be done. It's hard not to think about the military industrial complex in all of this - a long term war wasting millions on equipment, supplies, energy, with relatively minimal cost to lives compared to total war, is an ideal money maker.
- AlexandrB 5y ago> The inability of the military to effectively execute total war because of public palatability leads to these outcomes - zombie wars that can never be won, because no one has the stomach to do/say what actually needs to be done. What more could have been done in Vietnam? The US deployed napalm, agent orange, reinstituted the draft at home, maintained a policy of inflicting maximum casualties on the enemy, and still failed to achieve victory. It's also hard to justify "total war" when your sovereignty/existence is not at stake and you're effectively an interloper in other people's conflicts.
- forz877 5y agoThe US never committed to total war in Vietnam, likely because of consequences from the USSR and China. Just because harsh agents were used doesn't mean the US couldn't have been harsher. They certainly could have been. > It's also hard to justify "total war" when your sovereignty/existence is not at stake and you're effectively an interloper in other people's conflicts. Yes, that's my point - so instead you end up in 20 year zombie wars that bleed over time and accomplish little.
- a11r 5y agoAlmost exactly 25 years ago, the Taliban captured Kabul for the first time. I still remember the sense of foreboding while following the coverage in the Times of India in Aug-Sep 1996. We all know how that played out. The situation is very different now, and there will be much less violence this time, at least initially when Kabul falls. But it is difficult to imagine how this round plays out in a fundamentally different way. History may judge Biden very harshly for this withdrawal.
- forz877 5y agoI don't see how history can judge him harshly. Of course there is no way of knowing. But this is what everyone wants. No one wants to fight this war anymore, it's unwinnable, and staying any longer will just delay the inevitable. I think history will look harshly upon the instigators of this war than the ones who decided enough was enough.
- FabHK 5y agoPrecedence: 1975 US embassy, Phnom Penh: Operation Eagle Pull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle_Pull https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eagle_Pull 1975 US embassy, Saigon: Operation Frequent Wind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Frequent_Wind https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Frequent_Wind 1991 US embassy, Mogadishu: Operation Eastern Exit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eastern_Exit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Eastern_Exit 1997 German embassy, Tirana: Operation Libelle ("Dragonfly") https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Libelle https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Libelle