33 ms·

<remove the note about being sarcastic> Of course, there was intense fighting during June and July. At that point, the Afghan military was deprived of U.S. sup

by nanis 5y ago

<remove the note about being sarcastic> Of course, there was intense fighting during June and July. At that point, the Afghan military was deprived of U.S. support. The U.S. abandoned key positions and reduced support, signaling whoever remained behind would have to come to terms with dealing with the Taliban on their own. Given the fact that resisting the Taliban puts entire extended families at risk for reprisals even if one wins a battle or two, the cost-benefit calculus was clear for a lot of people. And, once that process of unwinding begins, it accelerates. The public in the U.S. were not kept informed of what had been happening in Afghanistan until the disaster unfolded in full. Then, the administration said no one had could have foreseen this possibility and tried to create the impression that Afghans had given up. A show of "we've got your back" could've gone a long way, but, instead, the administration demonstrated with actions "we are with the Taliban, you're on your own."

pjc50 5y ago
The US moving out was part of the agreement, made by you-know-who: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-F... > The United States is committed to withdraw from Afghanistan all military forces of the United States, its allies, and Coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel within fourteen (14) months following announcement of this agreement Perhaps they could have changed their minds and stayed, but then what? Really the evacuation plan should have been clearer from an earlier date.
- janeroe 5y ago
  So there was some kind of agreement and it wasn't supposed to be an unconditional capitulation?
- dudul 5y ago
  Did the agreement mentioned that it had to be done in such a disorganized manner? Without informing said allies and coalition members? Without taking the time to evacuate 10s of thousands of foreigners? There is a difference between agreeing on an outcome and the implentation to get there.
  - nanis 5y ago
    "US left Afghan airfield at night, didn’t tell new commander"[1] comes to mind. > Before the Afghan army could take control of the airfield about an hour’s drive from the Afghan capital Kabul, it was invaded by a small army of looters, who ransacked barrack after barrack and rummaged through giant storage tents before being evicted, according to Afghan military officials. [1]: https://apnews.com/article/bagram-afghanistan-airfield-us-troops-f3614828364f567593251aaaa167e623 https://apnews.com/article/bagram-afghanistan-airfield-us-tr...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- lowkey_ 5y ago
  Exiting after 20 years in Afghanistan is a good choice; if we couldn't build a strong US-backed government there in two decades, we never could. The issue that everybody has is the scrambled and disorganized form of the exit, and that's what the administration is receiving bipartisan flak over. Biden said "this is not Saigon, there will be no helicopters evacuating people from the roofs of embassies," and that is exactly what occurred. This should've been higher on the administration's priority list, and evacuations should have begun much sooner. Here's just a couple of the blaring issues: - US forces should have protected Bagram air base from being surrendered to the Taliban, as it was much more defensible and capable of this scale of evacuations, and we would not be running so close to the August 31st deadline while also failing to evacuate Afghan nationals. - General McKenzie should have stayed in Afghanistan to manage the operations rather than exiting early to CENTCOM in Tampa; our presence completely deteriorated without an effective chain of command. - Maybe we could have spent the past few months working harder to give the Afghans better intelligence capabilities (intel and air support mattered more than our troops on the ground), and ensuring our own intelligence was accurate, as we failed to detect the Taliban's offensive plans.
  - azinman2 5y ago
    > - Maybe we could have spent the past few months working harder to give the Afghans better intelligence capabilities (intel and air support mattered more than our troops on the ground), and ensuring our own intelligence was accurate, as we failed to detect the Taliban's offensive plans. Versus the past 20? It’s pretty amazing to me how quickly they’ve been defeated. It’s not clear there ever was a solid ground for them if it crumbled so easily.
    - lowkey_ 5y ago
      I completely agree, a large part of the issue was the ANA's unwillingness to fight, whether out of Taliban sympathies and sabotage or a desire to just go home. The other two choices are ones I firmly believe were misguided, but it's tough to argue this one as we don't know what the US was unable to provide or why.
- _-david-_ 5y ago
  You can get out without it being a complete mess. You can do it by working with allied Western countries, ensure there is a path to get to the airport, ensure the airport and surrounding area is secure, etc. Leaving millions in weaponry is unforgivable. How about actually take our helicopters and guns with us? Trying to blame Trump when Biden failed at the implementation is ridiculous.
  - _jal 5y ago
    I mean, people think what they're going to think. But the number of arm-chair logistics experts who have been telling us endlessly how easy this is always retreat to hand-wavey vagueness about how they aren't the experts, but clearly somebody could have done better. I understand that from folks who want the political attack, or from folks who are personally invested in either the US military or intelligence. I don't understand it from intelligent folks who can spend a minute or two thinking through the situation.
    - lazyasciiart 5y ago
      I don't understand how you can not list six ways it could have been done better. The US runs it's own visa program. There is nobody except the US to blame for the existence of a single Afghan who worked with them and did not have a permanent US visa for their family before the deadline to leave. And if internal American incompetence prevented that, then every one of them should have had an emergency visa that allowed them to fly out on American planes to America and be processed there.
      - _jal 5y ago
        > then every one of them should have had an emergency visa that allowed them to fly out on American planes to America and be processed there This is fantasy. Even if you could get divided government on board, how are you going to convince the Taliban to let them out? If you think it should have been done in "secret" beforehand, please explain how you get literally thousands of people, many in visible positions, out without being noticed. This is just one example of a demand for something that could not happen. They've evac'ed over 100K people so far. It is the largest such operation in history, and it is actually going relatively well. It is amusing, but not surprising, to see all the 'savvy' media consumers here get rolled.
klyrs 5y ago
> I was being sarcastic, but whoooosh. Your "whoooosh" here is a clear violation of the guidelines. > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. edit: snark deleted, you're welcome
- nanis 5y ago
  I appreciate the consistent application of such guidelines.
eloff 5y ago
It's worse than that. The US taught the Afgan military how to fight the US way with US air support. Then they not only withdraw that support, but also all support for the Afgan air force, including contractors. The Afgan's were trying to do maintenance on their aircraft via Zoom calls with US contractors. There was no transition period, this is the equivalent of teaching some swim classes on the blackboard and then throwing the kids into the ocean and walking away. There's no other way to describe this debacle except as a complete and utter fuckup by the current administration, specifically Joe Biden, because he made the call.
- AlexandrB 5y ago
  > It's worse than that. The US taught the Afgan military how to fight the US way with US air support. That sounds like the US taught the Afghan military how to fight assuming the US would stay there forever. Seems like a either a shortsighted decision or a deliberately political one - "We can't possibly leave! Their military will collapse without US air support." Either way, it's hard to describe anything about a 20 year occupation as "sudden" and having "no transition period". If the US was not able to establish a functional Afghan military after 20 years, what difference would a few weeks/months really make? Edit: > this is the equivalent of teaching some swim classes on the blackboard and then throwing the kids into the ocean and walking away. If you've been teaching swimming exclusively on the blackboard for 20 years it's probably time to retire as a teacher - your students are never going to learn how to swim from you.
  - eloff 5y ago
    > If you've been teaching swimming exclusively on the blackboard for 20 years it's probably time to retire as a teacher - your students are never going to learn how to swim from you. Yes, but sticking to the analogy it says more about you as a teacher than about your students. I think we can agree the US failed pretty badly here to get the Afgans into shape to defend themselves. They shouldn't have left until they achieved that goal. They were down to just 3500 soldiers. Hell they have a bigger troop presence in Germany, and dozens of other countries around the world. The death rate is comparable too, believe it or not. The last soldier to die there was back in 2020. There was no need for this rushed disaster.
mcguire 5y ago
What do you mean by "we've got your back"? Are you arguing for keeping combat troops in Afghanistan in violation of the agreement from February 2020 (https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-F...)?

by nanis 5y ago

pjc50 5y ago

The US moving out was part of the agreement, made by you-know-who: https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-F... > The United States is committed to withdraw from Afghanistan all military forces of the United States, its allies, and Coalition partners, including all non-diplomatic civilian personnel, private security contractors, trainers, advisors, and supporting services personnel within fourteen (14) months following announcement of this agreement Perhaps they could have changed their minds and stayed, but then what? Really the evacuation plan should have been clearer from an earlier date.

janeroe 5y ago
So there was some kind of agreement and it wasn't supposed to be an unconditional capitulation?
dudul 5y ago
Did the agreement mentioned that it had to be done in such a disorganized manner? Without informing said allies and coalition members? Without taking the time to evacuate 10s of thousands of foreigners? There is a difference between agreeing on an outcome and the implentation to get there.
- nanis 5y ago
  "US left Afghan airfield at night, didn’t tell new commander"[1] comes to mind. > Before the Afghan army could take control of the airfield about an hour’s drive from the Afghan capital Kabul, it was invaded by a small army of looters, who ransacked barrack after barrack and rummaged through giant storage tents before being evicted, according to Afghan military officials. [1]: https://apnews.com/article/bagram-afghanistan-airfield-us-troops-f3614828364f567593251aaaa167e623 https://apnews.com/article/bagram-afghanistan-airfield-us-tr...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
lowkey_ 5y ago
Exiting after 20 years in Afghanistan is a good choice; if we couldn't build a strong US-backed government there in two decades, we never could. The issue that everybody has is the scrambled and disorganized form of the exit, and that's what the administration is receiving bipartisan flak over. Biden said "this is not Saigon, there will be no helicopters evacuating people from the roofs of embassies," and that is exactly what occurred. This should've been higher on the administration's priority list, and evacuations should have begun much sooner. Here's just a couple of the blaring issues: - US forces should have protected Bagram air base from being surrendered to the Taliban, as it was much more defensible and capable of this scale of evacuations, and we would not be running so close to the August 31st deadline while also failing to evacuate Afghan nationals. - General McKenzie should have stayed in Afghanistan to manage the operations rather than exiting early to CENTCOM in Tampa; our presence completely deteriorated without an effective chain of command. - Maybe we could have spent the past few months working harder to give the Afghans better intelligence capabilities (intel and air support mattered more than our troops on the ground), and ensuring our own intelligence was accurate, as we failed to detect the Taliban's offensive plans.
- azinman2 5y ago
  > - Maybe we could have spent the past few months working harder to give the Afghans better intelligence capabilities (intel and air support mattered more than our troops on the ground), and ensuring our own intelligence was accurate, as we failed to detect the Taliban's offensive plans. Versus the past 20? It’s pretty amazing to me how quickly they’ve been defeated. It’s not clear there ever was a solid ground for them if it crumbled so easily.
  - lowkey_ 5y ago
    I completely agree, a large part of the issue was the ANA's unwillingness to fight, whether out of Taliban sympathies and sabotage or a desire to just go home. The other two choices are ones I firmly believe were misguided, but it's tough to argue this one as we don't know what the US was unable to provide or why.
_-david-_ 5y ago
You can get out without it being a complete mess. You can do it by working with allied Western countries, ensure there is a path to get to the airport, ensure the airport and surrounding area is secure, etc. Leaving millions in weaponry is unforgivable. How about actually take our helicopters and guns with us? Trying to blame Trump when Biden failed at the implementation is ridiculous.
- _jal 5y ago
  I mean, people think what they're going to think. But the number of arm-chair logistics experts who have been telling us endlessly how easy this is always retreat to hand-wavey vagueness about how they aren't the experts, but clearly somebody could have done better. I understand that from folks who want the political attack, or from folks who are personally invested in either the US military or intelligence. I don't understand it from intelligent folks who can spend a minute or two thinking through the situation.
  - lazyasciiart 5y ago
    I don't understand how you can not list six ways it could have been done better. The US runs it's own visa program. There is nobody except the US to blame for the existence of a single Afghan who worked with them and did not have a permanent US visa for their family before the deadline to leave. And if internal American incompetence prevented that, then every one of them should have had an emergency visa that allowed them to fly out on American planes to America and be processed there.
    - _jal 5y ago
      > then every one of them should have had an emergency visa that allowed them to fly out on American planes to America and be processed there This is fantasy. Even if you could get divided government on board, how are you going to convince the Taliban to let them out? If you think it should have been done in "secret" beforehand, please explain how you get literally thousands of people, many in visible positions, out without being noticed. This is just one example of a demand for something that could not happen. They've evac'ed over 100K people so far. It is the largest such operation in history, and it is actually going relatively well. It is amusing, but not surprising, to see all the 'savvy' media consumers here get rolled.

klyrs 5y ago

> I was being sarcastic, but whoooosh. Your "whoooosh" here is a clear violation of the guidelines. > Be kind. Don't be snarky. Have curious conversation; don't cross-examine. Please don't fulminate. Please don't sneer, including at the rest of the community. edit: snark deleted, you're welcome

nanis 5y ago
I appreciate the consistent application of such guidelines.

eloff 5y ago

It's worse than that. The US taught the Afgan military how to fight the US way with US air support. Then they not only withdraw that support, but also all support for the Afgan air force, including contractors. The Afgan's were trying to do maintenance on their aircraft via Zoom calls with US contractors. There was no transition period, this is the equivalent of teaching some swim classes on the blackboard and then throwing the kids into the ocean and walking away. There's no other way to describe this debacle except as a complete and utter fuckup by the current administration, specifically Joe Biden, because he made the call.

AlexandrB 5y ago
> It's worse than that. The US taught the Afgan military how to fight the US way with US air support. That sounds like the US taught the Afghan military how to fight assuming the US would stay there forever. Seems like a either a shortsighted decision or a deliberately political one - "We can't possibly leave! Their military will collapse without US air support." Either way, it's hard to describe anything about a 20 year occupation as "sudden" and having "no transition period". If the US was not able to establish a functional Afghan military after 20 years, what difference would a few weeks/months really make? Edit: > this is the equivalent of teaching some swim classes on the blackboard and then throwing the kids into the ocean and walking away. If you've been teaching swimming exclusively on the blackboard for 20 years it's probably time to retire as a teacher - your students are never going to learn how to swim from you.
- eloff 5y ago
  > If you've been teaching swimming exclusively on the blackboard for 20 years it's probably time to retire as a teacher - your students are never going to learn how to swim from you. Yes, but sticking to the analogy it says more about you as a teacher than about your students. I think we can agree the US failed pretty badly here to get the Afgans into shape to defend themselves. They shouldn't have left until they achieved that goal. They were down to just 3500 soldiers. Hell they have a bigger troop presence in Germany, and dozens of other countries around the world. The death rate is comparable too, believe it or not. The last soldier to die there was back in 2020. There was no need for this rushed disaster.

mcguire 5y ago

What do you mean by "we've got your back"? Are you arguing for keeping combat troops in Afghanistan in violation of the agreement from February 2020 (https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-For-Bringing-Peace-to-Afghanistan-02.29.20.pdf https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Agreement-F...)?