7 ms·
How the Taliban Overran the Afghan Army, Built by the U.S. over 20 Years
- gibbsnich 5y agohttps://archive.is/2021.08.15-155605/https://www.wsj.com/articles/afghanistan-army-collapse-taliban-11628958253 https://archive.is/2021.08.15-155605/https://www.wsj.com/art...
- justicezyx 5y agoUS have failed to build up any decent military outside of US, since its founding moment. I am actually not surprised that US had not learned much over the years. The learning at US now is almost stagnant, especially in the political arena.
- drocer88 5y agoSouth Korea? Japan? Free France? Taiwan? Israel? Australia?
- justicezyx 5y ago... South Korea was never decent, in Korea war or after. Japan was already a world power. If you compare what Japan was capable in WWII and nowadays, then your conclusion should be that US ruined Japanese military, not built it. Free France? General De Gaulle was the true architect. Not USA. Sorry... Taiwan? LAMO, https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/15/china-threat-invasion-conscription-taiwans-military-is-a-hollow-shell/ https://foreignpolicy.com/2020/02/15/china-threat-invasion-c... Are you still living in 1990s... Israel, WTF, Israel is the master nation of US... Australia... https://www.npr.org/2021/04/25/989546260/i-remember-them-screaming-afghans-detail-alleged-killings-by-australian-military#:~:text=via%20Getty%20Images-,Australia%20has%20sent%20more%20than%2025%2C000%20troops%2C%203%2C000%20of%20them,to%20cover%20up%20the%20incidents https://www.npr.org/2021/04/25/989546260/i-remember-them-scr.... A military that cannot discipline themselves. This is a not a military, it's a gangster mob...
- gengelbro 5y ago> Israel, WTF, Israel is the master nation of US... Seriously please take this somewhere else.
- justicezyx 5y agoSure, name some counter example.
- yyyk 5y ago* Japan - preexisting army with a long tradition. * France - preexisting army (also, De Gaule was a good military officer and knew what he wanted). * Taiwan - preexisting army from the 'Nationalist' side of the Chinese civil war. * Australia - army was built by the UK long before the US was involved. * Israel - when it was established the US placed an arms embargo. Most support came from USSR, but a strong influence was service in the UK army during WW2. So out of all examples, only South Korea maybe fits, and I'm not sure about that, just not so familiar with the history and what role the US played (it could be that they were modeled after the Japanese army which previously occupied the country?)
- oblio 5y ago> * Japan - preexisting army with a long tradition. > * France - preexisting army (also, De Gaule was a good military officer and knew what he wanted). One could argue that France had a preexisting army with an even longer history :-) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_France https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_wars_involving_Franc...
- mytailorisrich 5y agoTaiwan is the Republic of China and its military that relocated from the mainland to Taiwan. Free France was a part of the French military that split. I suppose that Australia is an offshoot of the British military.
- andrewnicolalde 5y agoNot really sure that’s true, given the creation of the Bundeswehr shortly after the Second World War, though it was not purely the US’s creation.
- mopsi 5y agoNot to embellish too much, but one could even say that the Germans had on their own plenty of experienced personnel, significant expertise and deep traditions in military matters.
- coliveira 5y agoNow it is very clear that the US military spent 20 years wasting tax payer money for nothing! No plan, no exit strategy, only a ruse to fritter money away and kill innocents. A complete tragedy.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- INTPenis 5y agoSome people gained tremendously from all that tax payer money though. That's why it's called the military industrial complex. Like it or not but it also employs millions (not thousands) of civilians directly or indirectly. I can't even begin to imagine what would happen to the United States if they weren't constantly involved in some conflict somewhere around the world.
- Hamuko 5y ago>I can't even begin to imagine what would happen to the United States if they weren't constantly involved in some conflict somewhere around the world. That one old Simpsons joke comes to mind. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2VxpTMAbas https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2VxpTMAbas
- INTPenis 5y agoI thought you were going to link the Bear Patrol clip where they have fighter jets looking for bears. But seriously it would probably collapse their entire economy, unless they could find another use for the military. And really I wouldn't want them to considering what a huge polluter the Pentagon is. There is no place for it in any reasonably bright future.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- barbacoa 5y ago> it also employs thousands of civilians directly or indirectly You're off by an order of magnitude, the MIC employs MILLIONS of people directly and indirectly. Each of the government agencies that make up the security state are as large as some of the largest private company. DOD has 700,000 civilian employees alone.
- beaner 5y agoNote the NYT's total absence of criticism of Biden for this disaster. Under a Trump leadership the headlines would primarily have been of the style, "As Trump team struggles to do anything competent, Afghanistan crumbles." Whereas in this case, the headlines are kept mostly factual. "President Ghani Flees as Insurgents Enter Capital." (NYT is not the article at hand but is relevant in its coverage of such stories for its cultural influence.) Don't mean to politicize it necessarily, but there's been some discussion here recently about editorialization, thinking for one's own when reading the news, and processing information from different perspectives to identify and compensate for biases. This is a really good opportunity to observe how it works.
- aappleby 5y agobiden was president for how many of those 20 years?
- beaner 5y agoHe presided over the years responsible for the withdrawal and influenced the process, which is what matters.
- selimthegrim 5y agoAs President?
- beaner 5y agoYes, the year 2021.
- Hamuko 5y agoI'm not sure if the withdrawal is the thing that matters most in a 20-year waste of time and money. Unless the idea is to stay in Afganistan forever.
- beaner 5y ago
- m00dy 5y agoAfter 9/11, all operations in Afghanistan, Syria and Iraq are complete disaster. I wonder why all of them failed.
- rich_sasha 5y agoI’d add to this, how come the fight against ISIS worked out, by contrast?
- hindsightbias 5y agoSalafi jihadists have a way of burning themselves out. But there will always be a new wave. And the will of the non-Sunni Syrians and Kurds should not be underestimated. They didn’t roll over and walk to slaughter like the Iraqi Army. Those who make up the Taliban aren’t crazy. They play generational war. Have for millennia.
- the-dude 5y agoWhat what the last success ?
- edoceo 5y agoWW2? But, that was a team effort.
- arthurcolle 5y agoD Day
- maybelsyrup 5y agoAnd you can't even count it fully, really, because of the Russians. WW2 was a joint effort, yes, but the USSR turned the tide and sacrificed the most.
- drocer88 5y agoBattle of Britain turned the tide. And China suffered the most.
- Gunax 5y agoThis is a tactical failure, not a moral one. One's ability to win a war is entirely separate from the justification of that war. My concern is that the American public seem to conflate the two. I don't know what the correct response was to 9/11, but something had to be done. The invasion of Afghanistan wasn't a charitable maneuver--it was America defending itself (and supported by NATO and UN declarations). Obviously any nation cannot just sit by and let thousands of their citizens get killed.
- marcinzm 5y agoYou mean America attacked Afghanistan to protect itself after an attack by 15 Saudi Arabians and 4 others also not from Afghanistan?
- Gunax 5y agoWho were based out of Afghanistan? Yes. Clearly their national origin is not relevant. I was born in Moldova, but if I committed terrorism, no one would think blame a nation I have not lived in since I was 2.
- barbacoa 5y agoIn addition to having 15 national in the plot, the Saudi government was directly involved in planning and funding 9/11. I'm not joking. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_28_pages https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_28_pages
- marcinzm 5y ago>I was born in Moldova, but if I committed terrorism, no one would think blame a nation I have not lived in since I was 2. What if you've all been in Moldova until a year before the attack like the actual terrorists?
- hindsightbias 5y ago> based I think you mean Hamburg, San Diego and Palm Beach.
- 5y ago
- mkl95 5y agoThe Afghanistan war lasted pretty much the same as the Vietnam war. Are there any other major similarities?
- agilob 5y agoThis years 20th anniversary of 11th Setp. will be something else entirely
- beloch 5y ago"The Afghan army fighting alongside American troops was molded to match the way the Americans operate. The U.S. military, the world’s most advanced, relies heavily on combining ground operations with air power, using aircraft to resupply outposts, strike targets, ferry the wounded, and collect reconnaissance and intelligence. In the wake of President Biden’s withdrawal decision, the U.S. pulled its air support, intelligence and contractors servicing Afghanistan’s planes and helicopters. That meant the Afghan military simply couldn’t operate anymore." Bottom line, the U.S. trained and armed the Afghan army as a colonial auxiliary force, able to do boots-on-the-ground scutwork under the guidance and support of the U.S. military, but totally unprepared to stand on its own. Biden unthinkingly yanked that support away and the Taliban were ready. The picture would be far less tragic if the U.S. had done a competent job of building the Afghans up to the point where they could defend themselves, and then their forces turned traitor and joined the Taliban. Then we could say the Taliban are the rulers that Afghan's really want, and quietly fortify the borders, apply sanctions, etc.. However, we (and I include allies of the U.S. such as the U.K. and Canada) really pulled the rug out from underneath Afghans. Yes, the government we propped up was corrupt and inept, but we sold Afghans on the lie that, if they wanted to, they could enjoy some semblance of a secular Western democracy. Everyone the least bit progressive who stuck their necks out to educate girls, etc. is now going to get beaten down, or worse. We lured them out for the Taliban and abandoned them. They're now in a worse position than they would have been if the U.S. led coalition had simply bombed the bejeezus out of Afghanistan and then buggered off without spending two decades trying to build something. There is a lesson here that the victims of any future "nation building" efforts will be forced to remember.
- esotericimpl 5y agoFor anyone speaking of concern with the Afghan people, do not be troubled. In a week like always no one will give a shit. The only fair and just war is total war, the American people have never signed up for that since ww2 and will continue to lose until there is something worth fighting for. 9/11 was bankrolled by the saudis.
- richardfey 5y ago20 years of contractors-heavy operations, what did we expect? The only good thing is that the party is over for now.
- AwaAwa 5y agoI'm sure the next intervention isn't very far. There's no train, like the gravy train.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Animats 5y agoThe article is clear. The US built an army on the US model, reliant on heavy logistic and air support from outside. Without that support, the army collapsed.
- richardfey 5y agoAt the very least I would have modeled it by looking at successful neighbouring armies.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- Goety 5y agoAll armies run on logistics. Not building a replacement is irresponsible.
- hindsightbias 5y agoThe heroin trade has excellent logistics.
- Goety 5y agoI would assume they do
- hindsightbias 5y ago10/2000 Presidential Campaign Debate: “MR. BUSH -- Somalia. It started off as a humanitarian mission then changed into a nation-building mission and that's where the mission went wrong. The mission was changed. And as a result, our nation paid a price, and so I don't think our troops ought to be used for what's called nation building. I think our troops ought to be used to fight and win war. I think our troops ought to be used to help overthrow a dictator when it's in our best interests. But in this case, it was a nation-building exercise. And same with Haiti. I wouldn't have supported either. … MR. BUSH -- I don't think so. I think what we need to do is convince people who live in the lands they live in to build the nations. Maybe I'm missing something here. I mean we're going to have kind of a nation-building corps from America. Absolutely not. Our military is meant to fight and win war. That's what it's meant to do and when it gets overextended, morale drops. Well, listen, I strongly believe we need to have a military presence in the Korean peninsula not only to keep the peace in the peninsula but to keep regional stability. And I strongly believe we need to keep a presence in NATO. But I'm going to be judicious as to how to use the military. It needs to be in our vital interest. The mission needs to be clear and the exit strategy obvious.“
- rexreed 5y agoGovernment contractors and suppliers or all sorts were / still are milking the golden cow that is Afghanistan / Syria / Iraq / wherever as much as they can. Cynically they don't care much for the mission, but rather what's in it for them. Our military is in part a war-fighting (not nation-building) enterprise and at the same time a profit-making enterprise for those who know how to work the system.
- twelve40 5y agoThe only possible explanation for this monumental stupidity I can think of is an attempt to surround Iran. Invading Iraq is potentially very profitable because of oil, but invading Afghanistan for $1tr for 20 years "because 911 terrorists" (the official excuse) seemed completely idiotic, if not an attempt to have a foot in the door near Iran.