4 ms·

This comment made me wonder: if we had to do this again.. I imagine there been lessons learnt, but is there an alternative model to build up a military?

by kuhewa 4y ago

warner25 4y ago
I'm not a strategist, but... I think it's important to remember that the idea wasn't to build up just a military or security force. That was a necessary part of it, so that they could begin providing security for themselves instead of relying on US troops to do it for them indefinitely. But that was supposed to go hand-in-glove with also building up functional government and economic institutions, literacy, faith in democracy and rule-of-law, etc. Two problems: 1. The US military was basically left to do all of the above by itself, with only token commitment from other US government agencies and NATO partners. As a military we are pretty good at fighting, less good at building up another country's military force, and pretty bad at doing all the non-military stuff. We tried, and there was a whole cultural revolution within the Army between about 2005-2012 to get better at this, but we have to balance that with still being able to fight head-to-head against a peer military in large-scale combat. 2. The whole idea of "nation building" may just not be realistic, at least not on any timeline that we'd find acceptable. So the "alternative model" is probably putting up alternative goalposts. I think that's where we've effectively landed. Afghanistan isn't what we hoped it would be, but we can still play whack-a-mole with any Al-Qaeda (and now Islamic State) pockets that gather there to stage attacks on our interests, which is maybe what we should have limited ourselves to doing from the start.
- kuhewa 4y ago
  Thanks! Yeah I suppose the possible scope for substantial military building absent a larger nation building project is limited
mrguyorama 4y ago
There was never any possibility of any success. These people have been small warring tribes forever, and muddled with by outside countries for longer than the US has existed. An entire generation of fighters grew up in an environment where the US had drones buzzing overhead all the time and US bullets kept ending up in their family members heads. Their parents grew up fighting the soviets. They never wanted to be a western democracy, they just want to be left alone, and they should have been given that dignity. If the people of a country don't want to stop being an oppressive religious regime, why would they have rallied behind a godless democracy?
- kuhewa 4y ago
  Sure but it still stands that there were probably lessons learned beyond 'what we did was a bad decision'. Perhaps regarding robust organisational development, since it appears we had attempted to building things up there in the model of a highly industrialized developed nation dependent on steady logistical support.
pengaru 4y ago
If you haven't seen the VICE special This Is What Winning Looks Like [0], watch it. As a sibling comment said, there was no plausible path to success. It was just a tremendous waste of time and resources, many of which just ended up in terrorist hands. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5Q75hf6QI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5Q75hf6QI

This comment made me wonder: if we had to do this again.. I imagine there been lessons learnt, but is there an alternative model to build up a military?

by kuhewa 4y ago

This comment made me wonder: if we had to do this again.. I imagine there been lessons learnt, but is there an alternative model to build up a military?

warner25 4y ago

I'm not a strategist, but... I think it's important to remember that the idea wasn't to build up just a military or security force. That was a necessary part of it, so that they could begin providing security for themselves instead of relying on US troops to do it for them indefinitely. But that was supposed to go hand-in-glove with also building up functional government and economic institutions, literacy, faith in democracy and rule-of-law, etc. Two problems: 1. The US military was basically left to do all of the above by itself, with only token commitment from other US government agencies and NATO partners. As a military we are pretty good at fighting, less good at building up another country's military force, and pretty bad at doing all the non-military stuff. We tried, and there was a whole cultural revolution within the Army between about 2005-2012 to get better at this, but we have to balance that with still being able to fight head-to-head against a peer military in large-scale combat. 2. The whole idea of "nation building" may just not be realistic, at least not on any timeline that we'd find acceptable. So the "alternative model" is probably putting up alternative goalposts. I think that's where we've effectively landed. Afghanistan isn't what we hoped it would be, but we can still play whack-a-mole with any Al-Qaeda (and now Islamic State) pockets that gather there to stage attacks on our interests, which is maybe what we should have limited ourselves to doing from the start.

kuhewa 4y ago
Thanks! Yeah I suppose the possible scope for substantial military building absent a larger nation building project is limited

mrguyorama 4y ago

There was never any possibility of any success. These people have been small warring tribes forever, and muddled with by outside countries for longer than the US has existed. An entire generation of fighters grew up in an environment where the US had drones buzzing overhead all the time and US bullets kept ending up in their family members heads. Their parents grew up fighting the soviets. They never wanted to be a western democracy, they just want to be left alone, and they should have been given that dignity. If the people of a country don't want to stop being an oppressive religious regime, why would they have rallied behind a godless democracy?

kuhewa 4y ago
Sure but it still stands that there were probably lessons learned beyond 'what we did was a bad decision'. Perhaps regarding robust organisational development, since it appears we had attempted to building things up there in the model of a highly industrialized developed nation dependent on steady logistical support.

pengaru 4y ago

If you haven't seen the VICE special This Is What Winning Looks Like [0], watch it. As a sibling comment said, there was no plausible path to success. It was just a tremendous waste of time and resources, many of which just ended up in terrorist hands. [0] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5Q75hf6QI https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ja5Q75hf6QI