Taliban Taking Over Afghanistan - Does anyone care?

[InVOLuntary]

If one was to ID as female would one have to submit to the draft? Loophole

If talaban took over I wonder how many transgender (male to female) would transition back right quick?

 

[hog88]

No, that's true. We wouldn't have the ability for a sustained worldwide campaign like WWII unless we completely revamped our economy to a military setting. But make no mistake, we would have the ability to seriously bloody the nose of anyone who challenged us. Sustaining that kind of conflict is another matter entirely.

Sure we could bloody the nose but both of us would be saying "you should see the other guy".

 

[Tyler Durden]

I would like to say I'm surprised that some posters don't want Afghans who helped us out to be allowed in the US. But then I realize who's posting that junk and I'm not surprised at all.

 

[NorthDallas40]

I would like to say I'm surprised that some posters don't want Afghans who helped us out to be allowed in the US. But then I realize who's posting that junk and I'm not surprised at all.

This is scary I agree with you on something. It would be wrong as hell for us to turn our back on any native Afghan who assisted us and their families. They will be slaughtered simply for assisting us.

 

[Orangeburst]

This is scary I agree with you on something. It would be wrong as hell for us to turn our back on any native Afghan who assisted us and their families. They will be slaughtered simply for assisting us.

I am all for it as well and just another indicator how much they screwed up
Now we have tens of thousands that will hopefully be vetted in US but what to do with the ones that are problematic? Hopefully some vetting is done pre boarding

 

[KB5252]

Complete nonsense, the only major military campaign the US arguably lost was Afghanistan and even that wasn't a military defeat but a political one. The US military did its job in Vietnam and was rarely defeated if every on the battlefield. The only real major offensive the NVA launched was TET and it suffered massive losses that it couldn't sustain. The US pulled back in Korea fearing WW3 and it turned into a political stalemate. The military quickly destroyed Iraq in Kuwait and pushed them out. The US quickly removed Saddam Hussein's regime in Iraq the second time. We just had no real answers for a replacement government. The US pushed the Taliban out of power quickly and they fled to Pakistan. The US had no real answers for a replacement government and the Taliban simply waited the US out. I guess we could have invaded Pakistan but that is not really a serious solution.

The goal of the opposition in every single instance you mentioned, except Sadaam's forces in Iraq, was not to defeat the military on the battlefield but to defeat the US's will to fight. And they succeeded in every instance. We never learn.

 

[05_never_again]

The goal of the opposition in every single instance you mentioned, except Sadaam's forces in Iraq, was not to defeat the military on the battlefield but to defeat the US's will to fight. And they succeeded in every instance. We never learn.

You mean their objective is to defeat the US's will to stick around after combat to nation-build. There really never was a lack of a will for the military to fight in any of those conflicts (i.e., it wasn't like in either Iraq War we showed up, Saddam's forces let us have it, and our forces retreated).

To @hog88 point, the military and political goals are always intertwined, so if the political goals fail then the whole effort fails and the conversation is kind of moot. However I wouldn't say that the military failed in any of those instances that were mentioned.

 

[KB5252]

You mean their objective is to defeat the US's will to stick around after combat to nation-build. There really never was a lack of a will for the military to fight in any of those conflicts (i.e., it wasn't like in either Iraq War we showed up, Saddam's forces let us have it, and our forces retreated).

To @hog88 point, the military and political goals are always intertwined, so if the political goals fail then the whole effort fails and the conversation is kind of moot. However I wouldn't say that the military failed in any of those instances that were mentioned.

When I say the will of the US I don't mean specifically the military, but rather the country as a whole. I agree just about everywhere else but a military endeavor is always tied to politics, if one fails the other will too.

 

[landscapingvol]

The goal of the opposition in every single instance you mentioned, except Sadaam's forces in Iraq, was not to defeat the military on the battlefield but to defeat the US's will to fight. And they succeeded in every instance. We never learn.

The goal of North Korea was to unite it into a single country of Korea under Kim Il Sung. Iraq is still decently in control but yes as I have already stated the US tried to prop up feckless governments in Vietnam and Afghanistan but neither of those are the fault of the military

 

[KB5252]

The goal of North Korea was to unite it into a single country of Korea under Kim Il Sung. Iraq is still decently in control but yes as I have already stated the US tried to prop up feckless governments in Vietnam and Afghanistan but neither of those are the fault of the military

I'm not blaming the military, but pointing out any military campaign is tied to politics.

 

[BreatheUT]

Unbelievable: Taliban Troll Biden On TWITTER By Posing With Ice Cream

A new low!

 

[hog88]

The goal of North Korea was to unite it into a single country of Korea under Kim Il Sung. Iraq is still decently in control but yes as I have already stated the US tried to prop up feckless governments in Vietnam and Afghanistan but neither of those are the fault of the military

MacArthur screwed up in Korea by ignoring reports of Chinese crossing the border but of course Truman didn't help.

 

[05_never_again]

When I say the will of the US I don't mean specifically the military, but rather the country ass a whole. I agree just about everywhere else but a military endeavor is always tied to politics, if one fails the other will too.

IMO, the will to fight of the country as a whole has everything to do with the rationale of why we are there in the first place. In a situation where the safety/security of the homeland was obviously directly threatened, I don't doubt that there would be a will to fight. However for the foreseeable future I don't really see that threat.

In situations like Vietnam, where the rationale is something like "We need to do this because bad stuff might happen on the other side of the world if we don't, and if that happened then potentially one day it might pose a threat to our allies," the will to fight is going to be limited.

In all of our post WWII conflicts, the will of the country to fight has been lukewarm at best because all of the rationales as to why we were there were questionable. IMO, the only conflict since WWII where there was a crystal clear reason for being there that the whole country understood and believed in was Afghanistan, but only within the context of destroying al-Qaeda. The overthrow the Taliban/nation-building objective was nebulous at best, which is why it ultimately failed.

 

[Sandman 423]

I am all for it as well and just another indicator how much they screwed up
Now we have tens of thousands that will hopefully be vetted in US but what to do with the ones that are problematic? Hopefully some vetting is done pre boarding

Maybe we could set up an area in the Great Basin for them to stay at. They would feel at home and would be in a low population area while we do the vetting.

 

[DancingOutlaw]

Thats because we have approached everything since then with kid gloves. You dont win wars by worrying about peoples feelings.

But what if they don't like us after this is over????

 

[ClearwaterVol]

This is scary I agree with you on something. It would be wrong as hell for us to turn our back on any native Afghan who assisted us and their families. They will be slaughtered simply for assisting us.

That is the risk they knew going in. I am not in favor of turning our backs on them, but that was the risk and they accepted it thinking their country men would fight. Instead they laid down their weapons at the first sight of toyota pickup.

 

[NorthDallas40]

That is the risk they knew going in. I am not in favor of turning our backs on them, but that was the risk and they accepted it thinking their country men would fight. Instead they laid down their weapons at the first sight of toyota pickup.

I seriously doubt they had enough information at the time to really understand the possible outcomes. Any it’s still no excuse to leave them to die.

 

[landscapingvol]

MacArthur screwed up in Korea by ignoring reports of Chinese crossing the border but of course Truman didn't help.

No, firing him didn't help

 

[hog88]

No, firing him didn't help

His firing was well deserved. Even MacArthur can't get away with ignoring orders and criticizing the CIC.

MacArthur screwed up by not stopping in Pyongyang and ignoring reports of Chinese crossing the Yalu. It almost cost us a Marine Division.

 

[landscapingvol]

His firing was well deserved. Even MacArthur can't get away with ignoring orders and criticizing the CIC.

MacArthur screwed up by not stopping in Pyongyang and ignoring reports of Chinese crossing the Yalu. It almost cost us a Marine Division.

He was right about the Chinese being the main threat

 

[Hunerwadel]

More of CNNs biased coverage of Democrats who won't take their own to task:

Democrats ramp up oversight over Biden's Afghan withdrawal - CNNPolitics

 

[Velo Vol]

IMO, the will to fight of the country as a whole has everything to do with the rationale of why we are there in the first place.

Does the average American still view a major terrorist attack as a legitimate risk?

Should they?

 

[Grand Vol]

Does the average American still view a major terrorist attack as a legitimate risk?

Should they?

Apparently not. It's been going on in Portland for a year now.

 

[KB5252]

Does the average American still view a major terrorist attack as a legitimate risk?

Should they?

I'm not sure they do. But they should, it will happen sooner or later, I expect a dirty bomb.

 

[ClearwaterVol]

I seriously doubt they had enough information at the time to really understand the possible outcomes. Any it’s still no excuse to leave them to die.

When you advocate the overthrow of your government the risks are pretty well known. We simply cannot annex all of the non taliban afghanis out there.