Afghanistan

[CarolinaBengalFanGuy]

(08-18-2021, 10:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Afghanistan, strategy, and disaster tend to ride together, sadly. 

That's a loser mentality right there.

[Dill]

(08-18-2021, 09:40 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Very interesting attempt to flip the script.  I don't think calling out a religion that routinely subjugates and tortures women, murders homosexuals and demonizes all other religious beliefs is an especially "right wing" position.  I would hope all freedom loving people would do so.  But if not tolerating the subjugation and torturing of women and murdering homosexuals makes me a bad person in your eyes then so be it, I guess.

I don't think Islam "routinely subjugates and tortures women, murders homosexuals and demonizes all other religious beliefs." Casting it as such IS a "right wing" position. (It wasn't "leftists" who outlawed Sharia in Oklahoma  )
I have explained to you before the structural analogy between types of scapegoating based upon race, religion and ethnicity. 

While I have known, worked and lived with dozens of Muslims in four countries, I have never met one who fits your description of Islam.

I would hope all "freedom loving people" do not follow you in this demonization of the religious beliefs of hundreds of millions. 

(08-18-2021, 09:40 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:So save this post for when I actually equate "modern Christianity" to "radical Islam" (which, by the way, is also "modern"). 

I am pleased that you finally acknowledge radical Islam as a prevalent "modern" form of the religion.

Notice that you ADDED the word "prevalent." I acknowledged no such thing. 

(08-18-2021, 09:40 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote:

Quote: Wrote:I took Mike's intent to be humorous (at least partly).   And so 

So you ignored his actual point?  Also, your post does not come of as an attempt at humor.  While I certainly allow for text not always accurately translating such intent if that was your objective it was an especially poor effort.

Oh Brother . . . taking Mike's intent to be partly humorous does not "ignore his actual point."

(08-18-2021, 09:40 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:I thought I might balance it by emphasizing an aspect of the current "anti-tyranny" 2A defense that seems to get little notice--
namely that some such defenders might themselves be quite "tyranical" and anti-democratic, embracing constitutional fundamentalism on the model of religious fundamentalism (regardless of religion). And at a time when large numbers of the Republican party support a leader who has indeed sought to circumvent democracy.  

Oh, to be sure.  Owning a firearm does not magically imbue one with a sense of democratic or enlightened principles.  But attempting to conflate Christians in this country, or pretty much any country for that matter, with the actions of millions of radical Islamists in Afghanistan and elsewhere should be called out as absurd whenever the attempt to do so is made.

The point of my comparison, to explain again, was to remind people that defense of the 2A can be quite compatible with anti-democratic impulses. And there are far more than "100,000" US citizens now exhibiting such. You converted that to an equation of levels of religiosity and numbers. 

That indicates difficulty with recognizing common forms in differing religious practices, as in the above-mentioned structural analogy between bases of scapegoating. The logic of fundamentalism is pretty much similar everywhere, without everywhere driving the same political extremes. Pointing out the "fundamentalist" practice of some 2A defenders in this case does identify something in common with religious and anti-democratic Taliban, but it doesn't claim all or even many "modern Christians" are like fundamentalists Muslims in Afghanistan in this regard. You just made up that claim. 

So you are imputing to me points I did not make, adding words to change points I did make, and generally riding your own hobby horse which consists in making ALL Islam as despicably "radical" as possible. Tolerating the religion of millions of kind, decent, and honorable people = tolerating "subjugation and torturing of women" etc. If enough Americans follow your hyperbole in this, then the result is intolerance and persecution of a religious minority. 

Which do you hate more--"bigotry," Islam or "inconsistency"? You've regularly spoken out against all three. 

But you cannot consistently hate all three. 

[Dill]

(08-18-2021, 07:02 PM)Nately120 Wrote: So short version, Muslim leader says "kill/fight/die for my cause or life won't be worth living soon" and Trump says "donate for my cause or life won't be worth living soon."  Maybe that's too cynical a view, even for me.

Not just Trump. I was listening to Larry Elder and Hugh Hewitt this afternoon.

They say we HAVE to take back our country.

One caller to Elder said the blood of all Christians killed in A-stan is now on Biden's hands,
and on the hands of everyone who voted for him. 

In both cases people feel foreign forces are eradicating their values, and see the struggle
to maintain their identities as a kind of culture war--a war over who gets to define the
values by which they live and raise families.  Religion is also central to those identities.

Those (neo) liberal globalist forces.  Afghanistan for the Afghans.  Auslaender 'raus!

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2021, 12:55 AM)CarolinaBengalFanGuy Wrote: That's a loser mentality right there.

I'd say after 20 years it's more the acceptance of reality. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(08-18-2021, 10:25 PM)Nately120 Wrote: Afghanistan, strategy, and disaster tend to ride together, sadly. 

What I find interesting with this situation is that a lot of people are chalking it up to "Eh, what else was Biden supposed to do, it was going to be bad no matter what we did"........ Basically giving Biden a pass on one of the most, if not the most embarrassing thing to watch the US do in the last 20 years.

I can only imagine what the headlines would be had Trump did this. 

"Trump shows our allies we cannot be trusted after embarrassing exjt from Afghanistan"

"Trumps exit from Afghanistan is a horrifying reminder of the impulsivity of an unhinged president"

"Trump flees with tail tucked as thousands left to die in Afghanistan"

"Trump steps on the graves of all the American lives that were lost in America's longest war"

"Trump shows he's no real leader when it comes to war time decisions. Should impeachment be on the table?"


Oddly enough, I must say I am utterly shocked to see that CNN has ACTUALLY done some fair reporting on this event. Even their top news headline this morning reads "Biden can no longer get credit simply for not being Trump". Nevermind the fact that CNN literally just admitted Biden was getting a pass simply because he wasn't Trump, but it seems like even they now are realizing the magnitude of what has unfolded under Biden.

I don't care if people hate Trump, that's "whatever" to me at this point. But for people to take this situation and twist and turn it around to either blame Trump or just throw their hands up and go "Eh, what else could we do" is absolutely appalling. People want to talk about how Trump destroyed American credibility around the world during his 4 years in office? Well, Biden in my opinion just won the "losing credibility" gold medal and did it in record time.

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2021, 01:22 AM)Dill Wrote: Not just Trump. I was listening to Larry Elder and Hugh Hewitt this afternoon.

They say we HAVE to take back our country.

One caller to Elder said the blood of all Christians killed in A-stan is now on Biden's hands,
and on the hands of everyone who voted for him. 

In both cases people feel foreign forces are eradicating their values, and see the struggle
to maintain their identities as a kind of culture war--a war over who gets to define the
values by which they live and raise families.  Religion is also central to those identities.

Those (neo) liberal globalist forces.  Afghanistan for the Afghans.  Auslaender 'raus!

Right, well when "the war" was more of a talking point in the 2000s I used televangeslists as my example for people asking for sacrifices for "the greater good" because stuff is getting bad.  People over here can sacrifice with money...over there not so much.  

The GOP has adopted a decent amount of the doomsday preaching and asking for donations from the Jim Bakker school of thought. 

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2021, 07:02 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: What I find interesting with this situation is that a lot of people are chalking it up to "Eh, what else was Biden supposed to do, it was going to be bad no matter what we did"........ Basically giving Biden a pass on one of the most, if not the most embarrassing thing to watch the US do in the last 20 years.

I can only imagine what the headlines would be had Trump did this. 

"Trump shows our allies we cannot be trusted after embarrassing exjt from Afghanistan"

"Trumps exit from Afghanistan is a horrifying reminder of the impulsivity of an unhinged president"

"Trump flees with tail tucked as thousands left to die in Afghanistan"

"Trump steps on the graves of all the American lives that were lost in America's longest war"

"Trump shows he's no real leader when it comes to war time decisions. Should impeachment be on the table?"


Oddly enough, I must say I am utterly shocked to see that CNN has ACTUALLY done some fair reporting on this event. Even their top news headline this morning reads "Biden can no longer get credit simply for not being Trump". Nevermind the fact that CNN literally just admitted Biden was getting a pass simply because he wasn't Trump, but it seems like even they now are realizing the magnitude of what has unfolded under Biden.

I don't care if people hate Trump, that's "whatever" to me at this point. But for people to take this situation and twist and turn it around to either blame Trump or just throw their hands up and go "Eh, what else could we do" is absolutely appalling. People want to talk about how Trump destroyed American credibility around the world during his 4 years in office? Well, Biden in my opinion just won the "losing credibility" gold medal and did it in record time.

Biden and Trump are just short term players in the long term mess that is Afghanistan. The Soviets and the USA both took their cracks at this and both ended up walking away and seeing things regress. 

The warhawks backed Biden in 2020, so the whole 21st century slate of politicians are culpable in perpetuating this ill advised venture, in my mind.  It's just the way it is. 

As far as Biden goes, maybe he's juat taking the inevitable lumps since he's a one term president who knows he's an instant lame duck.  May be he thinks this is a great move and hrs going to run for a 2nd term...time will tell. 

I'm still hoping for a two party reboot in 2024 but that's genuine delusion on my part, im sure.  

[Matt_Crimson]

(08-19-2021, 07:24 AM)Nately120 Wrote: Biden and Trump are just short term players in the long term mess that is Afghanistan. The Soviets and the USA both took their cracks at this and both ended up walking away and seeing things regress. 

The warhawks backed Biden in 2020, so the whole 21st century slate of politicians are culpable in perpetuating this ill advised venture, in my mind.  It's just the way it is. 

As far as Biden goes, maybe he's juat taking the inevitable lumps since he's a one term president who knows he's an instant lame duck.  May be he thinks this is a great move and hrs going to run for a 2nd term...time will tell. 

I'm still hoping for a two party reboot in 2024 but that's genuine delusion on my part, im sure.  

The thing for me is I agree with the idea that Afghanistan was going to be a mess no matter how we left, but the one thing we could absolutely NOT do was leave like this.

Sure, no matter how we left, our operations in Afghanistan would have been seen as a failure, but the problem is since we left the way we did the conversation has shifted from just being a failed operation, to the US leaving its allies to die so we can save ourselves. That's a really bad look on our part.

Instead of getting out with some dignity we now have videos and images of people falling to their deaths from our warplanes trying to save themselves.

Like you said, Biden could be doing this as a one off presidency decision, but at what cost? We were always going to leave knowing we failed, but we should never have left looking like failures.

[GMDino]

Too many good (and bad posts) to respond to.

I think the majority of us here know that this isn't just a Democrat or Republican thing.  That Bush bear much of the weight and the rest were enablers.  That said if Biden wants to take the heat for the "failure" then so be it.  That might give him thismuch more credit than the rest.

We have had incompetent leadership in the country for a long time.  We still have it but now the cult of personality has overtaken what was left of logical thinking by voters and many elected officials.

And I'm not surprised that a bunch of armchair Monday morning qbs on a message board think THEY know how it should have been handled...or that there are arguments about Islam vs Christianity and militias vs the Taliban.  In the current world (and this board) you pick a side, defend it by calling the other side dumb (uninformed/biased) and then claim you aren't taking a political side.  There's a disingenuity about it but that's not going to change and most on here are guilty of it, including me at times.

I'll add that it is not at all surprising to me to see people suddenly find out that war is bad for the people in the country where the war was.  Bad when it is happening and bad when there is no strategy for being there or how to leave.  

[GMDino]

(08-19-2021, 06:59 AM)Nately120 Wrote: I'd say after 20 years it's more the acceptance of reality. 

And an  understanding of history.

[jj22]

(08-18-2021, 10:17 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: I dont understand why people are arguing whether Trumps exit strategy would have been better. The fact of the matter is Bidens exit strategy is the one that actually happened, and it has been an absolute disaster.

I don't think the argument is that Trumps would be better. What we are learning is that this is Trumps exit strategy in the deal he signed to withdrawal. All Biden did was push the date up. But as people are saying 2 more months or a year wouldn't have changed anything. Especially now that we know the Taliban taking over Afghanistan was apart of the deal signed by Trump who spoke about it to the support of those now upset about the results.

Truth is this was one of Trumps good policies, and it is the craziest thing to see his supporters turn on him and not credit him anymore for it. As it stands right now and what you can't tell from the media coverage who want us to go back to war as it makes for good TV is that over 90% of Americans agree with Biden on the withdrawal. They agreed with Trump too, but his supporters have snatched back the policy win from him in an amazing turn of events. Biden will happily take it tho. 

[Matt_Crimson]

(08-19-2021, 10:10 AM)jj22 Wrote: I don't think the argument is that Trumps would be better. What we are learning is that this is Trumps exit strategy in the deal he signed to withdrawal. All Biden did was push the date up. But as people are saying 2 more months or a year wouldn't have changed anything. Especially now that we know the Taliban taking over Afghanistan was apart of the deal signed by Trump who spoke about it to the support of those now upset about the results.

Truth is this was one of Trumps good policies, and it is the craziest thing to see his supporters turn on him and not credit him anymore for it. As it stands right now and what you can't tell from the media coverage who want us to go back to war as it makes for good TV is that over 90% of Americans agree with Biden on the withdrawal. They agreed with Trump too, but his supporters have snatched back the policy win from him in an amazing turn of events. Biden will happily take it tho. 

Wouldn't have changed anything in terms of what though?

There's two arguments going on right now.

1. Whether or not we should have withdrawn at all.
2. How we should have withdrawn.

These are two different things and people seem to be combining the two into one issue.

People continue to bring up (and when I say people I'm more so talking about general discussion amongst the public/media and not this message board specifically)  that Trump was going to withdraw anyway, but that seems to be beside the point of the real issue which is that we did not have a sound exit strategy and executed the withdrawal anyway.

Trump did in fact have a plan to withdraw, but to say "This was his plan" is not true.

Also, it seems very strange to me that Americans (and the President himself) are openly saying that the President of the United States had his hands tied with a terrorist group. Regardless of whatever Trumps plan was, the fact of the matter is Biden could have changed anything Trump wanted to do in terms of retreating from Afghanistan. To say the Presidents hands were tied is laughable.

However, Biden made clear that he was "tied to the deal" because he didn't want to end up sending more troops to Afghanistan if he were to change the deal.

Well isn't that convenient? Biden was basing his decision on a self fulfilling prophecy that he imagined himself. Ironically what is Biden doing now to save face for the disaster he started just days ago? Sending more troops back to get people out safely.

Oh...... so that thing you didn't want to happen if you renegotiated with the Taliban is.....well......now happening without the renegotiation part. This is genius stuff.

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2021, 11:17 AM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: Wouldn't have changed anything in terms of what though?

There's two arguments going on right now.

1. Whether or not we should have withdrawn at all.
2. How we should have withdrawn.

These are two different things and people seem to be combining the two into one issue.

People continue to bring up (and when I say people I'm more so talking about general discussion amongst the public/media and not this message board specifically)  that Trump was going to withdraw anyway, but that seems to be beside the point of the real issue which is that we did not have a sound exit strategy and executed the withdrawal anyway.

Trump did in fact have a plan to withdraw, but to say "This was his plan" is not true.

Also, it seems very strange to me that Americans (and the President himself) are openly saying that the President of the United States had his hands tied with a terrorist group. Regardless of whatever Trumps plan was, the fact of the matter is Biden could have changed anything Trump wanted to do in terms of retreating from Afghanistan. To say the Presidents hands were tied is laughable.

However, Biden made clear that he was "tied to the deal" because he didn't want to end up sending more troops to Afghanistan if he were to change the deal.

Well isn't that convenient? Biden was basing his decision on a self fulfilling prophecy that he imagined himself. Ironically what is Biden doing now to save face for the disaster he started just days ago? Sending more troops back to get people out safely.

Oh...... so that thing you didn't want to happen if you renegotiated with the Taliban is.....well......now happening without the renegotiation part. This is genius stuff.

I think the main issue is how this forces us to look beyond Biden v Trump and get back into the past 40+ years of Afghanistan occupation and recall that we sided with the Taliban against both the Soviets in the 80s and Sadaam Hussein in the early 2000s.  It's just such a long-term slog that even assuming Trump winning in 2020 would have led to the most graceful exit ever seems unlikely.

I just don't see where anyone could get a slightly optimistic take out of this.

[Dill]

(08-19-2021, 10:10 AM)jj22 Wrote: I don't think the argument is that Trumps would be better. What we are learning is that this is Trumps exit strategy in the deal he signed to withdrawal. All Biden did was push the date up. But as people are saying 2 more months or a year wouldn't have changed anything. Especially now that we know the Taliban taking over Afghanistan was apart of the deal signed by Trump who spoke about it to the support of those now upset about the results.

Truth is this was one of Trumps good policies, and it is the craziest thing to see his supporters turn on him and not credit him anymore for it. As it stands right now and what you can't tell from the media coverage who want us to go back to war as it makes for good TV is that over 90% of Americans agree with Biden on the withdrawal. They agreed with Trump too, but his supporters have snatched back the policy win from him in an amazing turn of events. Biden will happily take it tho. 

Actually, Biden pushed the date back. Trump wanted to be out by last year, then by May of this year.  Not possible.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-19-2021, 01:08 AM)Dill Wrote: I don't think Islam "routinely subjugates and tortures women, murders homosexuals and demonizes all other religious beliefs."

Yes, we all know that's what you believe.

Quote:Casting it as such IS a "right wing" position. (It wasn't "leftists" who outlawed Sharia in Oklahoma  )

Yes, we all know that's what you believe.

Quote:I have explained to you before the structural analogy between types of scapegoating based upon race, religion and ethnicity. 

Pointing out facts is not scapegoating.

Quote:While I have known, worked and lived with dozens of Muslims in four countries, I have never met one who fits your description of Islam.

I didn't describe "Islam" I described radical Islam.  I'd think you'd be the most aware of that distinction.

Quote:I would hope all "freedom loving people" do not follow you in this demonization of the religious beliefs of hundreds of millions. 

I would hope no one demonizes a whole group because of the actions of some.  After all, you'd never do that with a group like Trump voters, would you?  You are once again equating legitimate criticism of radical Islam, which is practiced by tens of millions, with an attack on the religion as a whole.  

Quote:Notice that you ADDED the word "prevalent." I acknowledged no such thing. 

Yeah, duh.  hence it being in my post.  You would never acknowledge radical Islam's prevalence and we all know why.

Quote:Oh Brother . . . taking Mike's intent to be partly humorous does not "ignore his actual point."

No, making a post that obviously misses his point does.

Quote:The point of my comparison, to explain again, was to remind people that defense of the 2A can be quite compatible with anti-democratic impulses.

Ahahha, precious!

 

Quote:And there are far more than "100,000" US citizens now exhibiting such. You converted that to an equation of levels of religiosity and numbers. 

There are?  I don't suppose you'd care to enlighten us?

Quote:That indicates difficulty with recognizing common forms in differing religious practices, as in the above-mentioned structural analogy between bases of scapegoating. The logic of fundamentalism is pretty much similar everywhere, without everywhere driving the same political extremes. Pointing out the "fundamentalist" practice of some 2A defenders in this case does identify something in common with religious and anti-democratic Taliban, but it doesn't claim all or even many "modern Christians" are like fundamentalists Muslims in Afghanistan in this regard. You just made up that claim. 

I inferred it from the obvious inference in your post.

Quote:So you are imputing to me points I did not make, adding words to change points I did make, and generally riding your own hobby horse which consists in making ALL Islam as despicably "radical" as possible. Tolerating the religion of millions of kind, decent, and honorable people = tolerating "subjugation and torturing of women" etc. If enough Americans follow your hyperbole in this, then the result is intolerance and persecution of a religious minority. 

This is an outright lie, and you should be ashamed to be saying it.  In no way shape or form did I say "ALL Islam" (your words) was "desicably radical" (again your words).  You're in full Fred mode, blatantly making shit up to try and win an internet argument.

Quote:Which do you hate more--"bigotry," Islam or "inconsistency"? You've regularly spoken out against all three. 

But you cannot consistently hate all three. 

I hate bigotry, radical Islam and inconsistency.  I will always hate all three and will be consistent in my hatred for all three.  The fact that you cannot separate criticism of radical Islam, and it's millions of adherents, from normal Muslims is your character flaw to resolve, not mine.


If you choose to respond to this kindly do so without blatantly lying about what I've said, as you did before.  Not only are you putting words in people's mouths like Fred, you're becoming as chronically dishonest as Fred.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-19-2021, 01:22 AM)Dill Wrote: Not just Trump. I was listening to Larry Elder and Hugh Hewitt this afternoon.

They say we HAVE to take back our country.

One caller to Elder said the blood of all Christians killed in A-stan is now on Biden's hands,
and on the hands of everyone who voted for him. 

In both cases people feel foreign forces are eradicating their values, and see the struggle
to maintain their identities as a kind of culture war--a war over who gets to define the
values by which they live and raise families.  Religion is also central to those identities.

Those (neo) liberal globalist forces.  Afghanistan for the Afghans.  Auslaender 'raus!

Straight out of the Bill Ayers playbook, equate your political opponents with terrorists who are committing vile atrocities.  

[Matt_Crimson]

(08-19-2021, 11:59 AM)Nately120 Wrote: I think the main issue is how this forces us to look beyond Biden v Trump and get back into the past 40+ years of Afghanistan occupation and recall that we sided with the Taliban against both the Soviets in the 80s and Sadaam Hussein in the early 2000s.  It's just such a long-term slog that even assuming Trump winning in 2020 would have led to the most graceful exit ever seems unlikely.

I just don't see where anyone could get a slightly optimistic take out of this.

That's the thing though, nobody really knows what Trump would have done, nor should we care. We should care about what actually happened.

There is an optimistic take on this if you're willing to look at it from the perspective of what we can't control vs what we can control.

There are two outcomes that come from withdrawing from Afghanistan but only one of them we can control. The other we cannot.

Outcome 1: Afghanistan's stability once we leave.
Outcome 2: The US getting its soldiers and allies out in as safe a manner as possible.

Outcome 1 we cannot control, therefore it is difficult to look at it optimistically.

Outcome 2 however IS what we can control, therefore we can have an optimistic outlook on it based on the fact that we have control over how safely we can get our soldiers and allies out of Afghanistan. The problem is we botched outcome 2, something we actually had control over..

Had we developed a plan to get everyone out safely and initiated it, things would have been a lot better. 

Is it really too much to ask the Taliban to let us get out safely? If it is too much to ask that, then what kind of precedent are we setting here?

It's like we're literally telling our allies that if they're ever in a situation where an armed force is coming to take over we won't do our best to make sure that everyone who will be targeted for helping us won't get out safely

If I'm an Afghan, no way in hell would I ever help the US after this..

[masonbengals fan]

 We can only assume how Trump would or wouldn't have withdrawn the troops or what would have unfolded. The fact of the matter is we KNOW EXACTLY how Biden did it, and the results have been catastrophic. Biden has done nothing since he became President but undo every single thing Trump did while he was in office, and to suggest Trump's deal with the Taliban was some unbreakable bond he was powerless to overturn, is absolutely ridiculous on Biden's behalf. He's just saying that because he completely screwed it up. 

 

[*Nately120*]

(08-19-2021, 12:57 PM)Matt_Crimson Wrote: That's the thing though, nobody really knows what Trump would have done, nor should we care. We should care about what actually happened.

There is an optimistic take on this if you're willing to look at it from the perspective of what we can't control vs what we can control.

There are two outcomes that come from withdrawing from Afghanistan but only one of them we can control. The other we cannot.

Outcome 1: Afghanistan's stability once we leave.
Outcome 2: The US getting its soldiers and allies out in as safe a manner as possible.

Outcome 1 we cannot control, therefore it is difficult to look at it optimistically.

Outcome 2 however IS what we can control, therefore we can have an optimistic outlook on it based on the fact that we have control over how safely we can get our soldiers and allies out of Afghanistan. The problem is we botched outcome 2, something we actually had control over..

Had we developed a plan to get everyone out safely and initiated it, things would have been a lot better. 

Is it really too much to ask the Taliban to let us get out safely? If it is too much to ask that, then what kind of precedent are we setting here?

It's like we're literally telling our allies that if they're ever in a situation where an armed force is coming to take over we won't do our best to make sure that everyone who will be targeted for helping us won't get out safely

If I'm an Afghan, no way in hell would I ever help the US after this..

I get it, and I understand what you are saying but we have 40+ years of history showing us that getting of there in as safe a manner as possible is impossible to define, if not actually impossible to do.  It's like healthcare reform...everyone has the perfect plan when they aren't in power and then when they are in power they just sort of shuffle their feet and kick the can down the road.

I'm also letting myself look at this in a current political manner because there has been so much talk about the danger of refugees and granting asylum, America First initiatives, the skyrocketing national debt, and the overall idea that you need to remove the safety nets from people of all types and if they fail it is on them and them alone.

How long is it going to take Americans to just convince themselves that it would be nice to protect Afghanistan from the taliban, but they need to stop failing the second western forces leave the area?

[Matt_Crimson]

(08-19-2021, 01:19 PM)Nately120 Wrote: I get it, and I understand what you are saying but we have 40+ years of history showing us that getting of there in as safe a manner as possible is impossible to define, if not actually impossible to do.  It's like healthcare reform...everyone has the perfect plan when they aren't in power and then when they are in power they just sort of shuffle their feet and kick the can down the road.

I'm also letting myself look at this in a current political manner because there has been so much talk about the danger of refugees and granting asylum, America First initiatives, the skyrocketing national debt, and the overall idea that you need to remove the safety nets from people of all types and if they fail it is on them and them alone.

How long is it going to take Americans to just convince themselves that it would be nice to protect Afghanistan from the taliban, but they need to stop failing the second western forces leave the area?

But that's my point. In my opinion our concern shouldn't have even been about what happens once we leave.

Our concern should have been getting everyone out safely. 

If Afghanistan falls, yes, you're right that's on them. But you cannot let Afghanistan fall AND botch the exit. That's a double negative.