4 ms·

I Commanded Afghan Troops This Year. We Were Betrayed

21 points by WheelsAtLarge 5y ago

google234123 5y ago
Sorry, but if the Afghan people don't care enough about a secular version of their nation to fight back against a small/moderate size Islamist military organization then why should we care.
- huibf 5y ago
  B-b-but the women!
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago
  1. Did the US ask the Afghan people if they wanted a secular democracy before it invaded and decided to try to create one? 2. The Afghan army was basically not designed to function independently on its own. For example, it relied heavily on US air power. Take away the US military assets and it's no surprise that an "army" that was really nothing more than a support apparatus for the US military fell apart.
  - google234123 5y ago
    Not going to argue 1., I'm 100% against the war and I bet you are right, most Afghans actually want Islamic rule or don't care either way. I hope they enjoy their unenlightened society. 2. Again, if you totally outnumber your opponent and still lose, that means you just don't care. Patriots would fight against the odds.
    - LurkingPenguin 5y ago
      > I hope they enjoy their unenlightened society. American hubris at its finest. Invade a country, try to install a Western-style democracy despite the fact that the country has no history of such, bet heavy on corrupt local power-brokers and politicians, predictably fail spectacularly, creating an epic humanitarian disaster in the process, and then...blame the people of that country for being so unenlightened. Here's a thought: if American society was so enlightened, it wouldn't be leaving Afghanistan with its tail between its legs, having squandered thousands of American lives, trillions of dollars and its credibility on the world stage.
michaelmrose 5y ago
>It’s true that the Afghan Army lost its will to fight. But that’s because of the growing sense of abandonment by our American partners and the disrespect and disloyalty reflected in Mr. Biden’s tone and words over the past few months. They had 300k men and an air force after 20 years bulding up their nation and training their forces. They didn't lose the will to fight because of us. Most of them never had it because the people who they were being asked to fight were their uncles, cousins, and brothers and they had little loyalty to their fledgling state. This is utterly unworthy of the new York times and sufficient reason to cancel my subscription.
- google234123 5y ago
  I wonder if they will enjoy being ruled by their "uncles, cousins, and brothers"...
  - baobabKoodaa 5y ago
    I know you are being sarcastic, but many of them probably will.
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago
  From the article: > The Afghan forces were trained by the Americans using the U.S. military model based on highly technical special reconnaissance units, helicopters and airstrikes. We lost our superiority to the Taliban when our air support dried up and our ammunition ran out. > Contractors maintained our bombers and our attack and transport aircraft throughout the war. By July, most of the 17,000 support contractors had left. A technical issue now meant that aircraft — a Black Hawk helicopter, a C-130 transport, a surveillance drone — would be grounded. > The contractors also took proprietary software and weapons systems with them. They physically removed our helicopter missile-defense system. Access to the software that we relied on to track our vehicles, weapons and personnel also disappeared. Real-time intelligence on targets went out the window, too. > The Taliban fought with snipers and improvised explosive devices while we lost aerial and laser-guided weapon capacity. And since we could not resupply bases without helicopter support, soldiers often lacked the necessary tools to fight. Under these conditions, what would you expect members of the Afghan army to do? You are correct that in some cases, surrenders were arranged due to family and tribal considerations. But anyone with a modest understanding of Afghan society and culture could have predicted this so it boggles the mind that the US, after 20 years, seemed utterly clueless about how Afghanistan works.
hindsightbias 5y ago
Non-conservatives just do not understand the Tinker Bell Effect for a standing army. If only we had clapped harder, the Afghan Army would have been more resolute. Anyone know how to say der dolchstoss in Pashto?
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago
  I don't think people really believe the "Afghans should have fought harder" explanation for what has occurred. It's just a convenient American rationalization (excuse) to mask a scary reality: the US, including its massive military, is now consumed by institutional rot and is experiencing significant decline.
  - Gibbon1 5y ago
    They said the same thing about the South Vietnamese. Conservatives tried to use that as a justification for not accepting refugees. Arguing on one hand refuges would include communists who will murder us in our beds. And the ones that aren't communists need to be forced to return to Vietnam and fight. Or that because they ran away they aren't worthy of help.
redis_mlc 5y ago
Oh, another ignorant HN thread on Afghanistan. Before posting, understand this: - most Afghanis are Muslim to their very core. Nothing is as important to them. The very idea of secular is offensive to them. Honor killings of relatives are not to protect their personal honor, it's to protect the honor of Allah and the Prophet - it's a no-brainer to them. - Afghanistan's borders are contrived. Afghanis care about where their tribes live, not what foreigners tell them. Those tribal borders overlap into all of their neighboring countries. - the distraction of the Western media about women's rights is truly bizarre. In Islam, women have rights inside the home but not outside. The Koran prescribes modesty for both men and women. The West will never change that. - the Afghani national army didn't lose because of lack of air power. They just don't care to fight their Islamic brothers. Why would they?
jobigoud 5y ago
Were there women in the Afghan army or in the US support troops? All videos I've seen only had men around.

21 points by WheelsAtLarge 5y ago

Sorry, but if the Afghan people don't care enough about a secular version of their nation to fight back against a small/moderate size Islamist military organization then why should we care.

huibf 5y ago
B-b-but the women!
LurkingPenguin 5y ago
1. Did the US ask the Afghan people if they wanted a secular democracy before it invaded and decided to try to create one? 2. The Afghan army was basically not designed to function independently on its own. For example, it relied heavily on US air power. Take away the US military assets and it's no surprise that an "army" that was really nothing more than a support apparatus for the US military fell apart.
- google234123 5y ago
  Not going to argue 1., I'm 100% against the war and I bet you are right, most Afghans actually want Islamic rule or don't care either way. I hope they enjoy their unenlightened society. 2. Again, if you totally outnumber your opponent and still lose, that means you just don't care. Patriots would fight against the odds.
  - LurkingPenguin 5y ago
    > I hope they enjoy their unenlightened society. American hubris at its finest. Invade a country, try to install a Western-style democracy despite the fact that the country has no history of such, bet heavy on corrupt local power-brokers and politicians, predictably fail spectacularly, creating an epic humanitarian disaster in the process, and then...blame the people of that country for being so unenlightened. Here's a thought: if American society was so enlightened, it wouldn't be leaving Afghanistan with its tail between its legs, having squandered thousands of American lives, trillions of dollars and its credibility on the world stage.

michaelmrose 5y ago

>It’s true that the Afghan Army lost its will to fight. But that’s because of the growing sense of abandonment by our American partners and the disrespect and disloyalty reflected in Mr. Biden’s tone and words over the past few months. They had 300k men and an air force after 20 years bulding up their nation and training their forces. They didn't lose the will to fight because of us. Most of them never had it because the people who they were being asked to fight were their uncles, cousins, and brothers and they had little loyalty to their fledgling state. This is utterly unworthy of the new York times and sufficient reason to cancel my subscription.

google234123 5y ago
I wonder if they will enjoy being ruled by their "uncles, cousins, and brothers"...
- baobabKoodaa 5y ago
  I know you are being sarcastic, but many of them probably will.
LurkingPenguin 5y ago
From the article: > The Afghan forces were trained by the Americans using the U.S. military model based on highly technical special reconnaissance units, helicopters and airstrikes. We lost our superiority to the Taliban when our air support dried up and our ammunition ran out. > Contractors maintained our bombers and our attack and transport aircraft throughout the war. By July, most of the 17,000 support contractors had left. A technical issue now meant that aircraft — a Black Hawk helicopter, a C-130 transport, a surveillance drone — would be grounded. > The contractors also took proprietary software and weapons systems with them. They physically removed our helicopter missile-defense system. Access to the software that we relied on to track our vehicles, weapons and personnel also disappeared. Real-time intelligence on targets went out the window, too. > The Taliban fought with snipers and improvised explosive devices while we lost aerial and laser-guided weapon capacity. And since we could not resupply bases without helicopter support, soldiers often lacked the necessary tools to fight. Under these conditions, what would you expect members of the Afghan army to do? You are correct that in some cases, surrenders were arranged due to family and tribal considerations. But anyone with a modest understanding of Afghan society and culture could have predicted this so it boggles the mind that the US, after 20 years, seemed utterly clueless about how Afghanistan works.

hindsightbias 5y ago

Non-conservatives just do not understand the Tinker Bell Effect for a standing army. If only we had clapped harder, the Afghan Army would have been more resolute. Anyone know how to say der dolchstoss in Pashto?

LurkingPenguin 5y ago
I don't think people really believe the "Afghans should have fought harder" explanation for what has occurred. It's just a convenient American rationalization (excuse) to mask a scary reality: the US, including its massive military, is now consumed by institutional rot and is experiencing significant decline.
- Gibbon1 5y ago
  They said the same thing about the South Vietnamese. Conservatives tried to use that as a justification for not accepting refugees. Arguing on one hand refuges would include communists who will murder us in our beds. And the ones that aren't communists need to be forced to return to Vietnam and fight. Or that because they ran away they aren't worthy of help.

redis_mlc 5y ago

Oh, another ignorant HN thread on Afghanistan. Before posting, understand this: - most Afghanis are Muslim to their very core. Nothing is as important to them. The very idea of secular is offensive to them. Honor killings of relatives are not to protect their personal honor, it's to protect the honor of Allah and the Prophet - it's a no-brainer to them. - Afghanistan's borders are contrived. Afghanis care about where their tribes live, not what foreigners tell them. Those tribal borders overlap into all of their neighboring countries. - the distraction of the Western media about women's rights is truly bizarre. In Islam, women have rights inside the home but not outside. The Koran prescribes modesty for both men and women. The West will never change that. - the Afghani national army didn't lose because of lack of air power. They just don't care to fight their Islamic brothers. Why would they?

jobigoud 5y ago

Were there women in the Afghan army or in the US support troops? All videos I've seen only had men around.