Taliban Taking Over Afghanistan - Does anyone care?

Do you care?

  • No

    Votes: 41 23.6%

  • Hell No

    Votes: 48 27.6%

  • Yes, we should invade and send in Troops

    Votes: 25 14.4%

  • I like Pie

    Votes: 60 34.5%
  • Total voters
    174
#4,376
#4,376
Weezer said:
I hate that I'm saying this, but it's not that Trump did a horrible job, but that he was a total prick bastard. Things didn't get bad until COVID hit, and even then , he took a lot of the right actions. But he couldn't keep his damn mouth shut or just stay off Twitter.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't have mattered. The media was going to be working against him even if he didn't have twitter. You are being delusional if you think these guys would have acted any differently if we would have had no social media or a less abrasive personality.
 
  • Like
Reactions: InVOLuntary, -GiveHim6-, Vol737 and 4 others
#4,380
#4,380
Velo Vol said:
No, the worst part was that he completely cut out the Afghan government at the time, effectively ceding the country to the Taliban.
Click to expand...
Because they (intelligence community), along with anyone who's ever served or knows people who've served alongside the Afghan army, understood the vast majority would immediately take their weapons and join the Taliban. There was only an Afghan army propping up an unworkable afghan government because we were there.
 
#4,381
#4,381
Rasputin_Vol said:
It wouldn't have mattered. The media was going to be working against him even if he didn't have twitter. You are being delusional if you think these guys would have acted any differently if we would have had no social media or a less abrasive personality.
Click to expand...
Too many fragile feelz were hurt during the Orange man bad administration. Now we're left with a completely incompetent moron and the wheels have run off the road in less than 7 months. You can't make this stuff up about how badly Joe Biden has ran the country into the ground in less than a year. Give him and Kamala a full 4 years and the Mexicans and Canadians will invade us and win.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dovervolz, InVOLuntary, AM64 and 2 others
#4,383
#4,383
Velo Vol said:
No, the worst part was that he completely cut out the Afghan government at the time, effectively ceding the country to the Taliban.
Click to expand...
Are you saying the Taliban would not have taken over had the Afghan government been at the table?
 
#4,389
#4,389
So stupid to have no redundancy built into a military operation. There are obviously people there we need and want to get out and the Taliban are not cooperating. They have either changed the terms of the deal or the deal we made with them didn't include the people we now want to get out.
 
#4,394
#4,394
McDad said:
Afghanistan was different from Vietnam, though. We should have learned lessons from Vietnam but I am not convinced that those lessons were completely applicable to the war on the Taliban.
Click to expand...

Yes, Vietnam was in the larger context of the red scare. Afghanistan was a reaction to 9/11. Clearly the world going red was a bigger felt threat than terrorism.

I don't think politicians have learned anything other than our foreign interventions have to be TV friendly.

I think citizens are recognizing the futility of foreign interventions without clear objectives and are rejecting nation building in any of it's guises (I hope)
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and McDad
#4,395
#4,395
McDad said:
Afghanistan was different from Vietnam, though. We should have learned lessons from Vietnam but I am not convinced that those lessons were completely applicable to the war on the Taliban.
Click to expand...

Same, same. We tried to fight a gorilla war using conventional tactics on their home turf, as in Vietnam we tried to win hearts and minds of people who only wanted to be left alone to live their lives. Only way to win such a war is to out gorilla the gorilla and be merciless.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64 and 825VOL
#4,396
#4,396
marcusluvsvols said:
^^^ wooooooooo! Thats gonna leave a mark.





My Col. Dad always said the real reason we kept forces in afg is because .....everyone here seems to not remember this....the ONLY MUSLIM nation out of the 9 nations that now have nuclear weapons is PAKISTAN...and Pakistan and Afghanistan are about as fluid and interconnected as Texas and Mexico are this month with 200,000 illegals just seriously walking across the Rio Grande and surrendering to Border Patrol.

Where was UBL found? In Pakistan. Where do all the goods, weapons, food etc enter Afghanistan? Pakistan....we had Al Quaeda and Taliban forces a few hundred miles from the ONLY MUSLIM and SYMPATHETIC nuclear nation on Earth and tens of thousands minimum of camel humping goat blowers BEGGING to get their hands on a tactical nuke or even dirty bomb to detonate in the US or EU....thats NOT the TIME for isolationism.

" sure hope the English and Germans keep those crazy goathumpers from giving those OTHER child molestors a NUKE to detonate on US soil after they backpack it in thru Mexico or the 3000 or so miles of unguarded Canadian border nobody but moose and bears ever watch....."

Seem like a good idea? Thankfully, India hates Pakistan more than we hate wasted fireworks so we have a little help keeping tabs on those Nuclear Armed Muslims...those 3 words together dont shrink your ballsack a bit then you desperately need to read the Quran...not the Old Testament part...the other half about lying, killing, lying to, killing, and hating and killing the infidels....which is everyone on Earth EXCEPT muslims.... wonder if they knew that the most wanted man on Earth since Hitler was living in a compound smack dab in their tiny little country the size of Maryland??? A 6ft 6inch tall bearded dude who was on their TV more than Elvis....hmmmm...theres reason to keep a small force very close by

There is ZERO reason to run like scared little beetches when everyone on the ground from your own military leaders to allies tells you the country will collapse. How hard yall think China will work to keep a nuke out of Taliban or ISIS hands for us???
Click to expand...

I hadn't thought about it from that angle. I could see Pakistan maybe helping with a small dirty bomb or something else as nasty, but I can't really see them or another state turning a nuke over to uncontrollable terrorists. However, since Pakistan has been tied together with N Korea (as best I remember), that thought about supporting terrorists might not be sound. I've had the impression Pakistan is just playing both sides for survival - as you said India is next door, and there's still a lot of animosity about how Britain divided things up when they gave it up. It's incredible how many issues we've faced in recent history go back to European colonialism, and British "diplomacy and state building/realignment".
 
  • Like
Reactions: hog88 and marcusluvsvols
#4,397
#4,397
Weezer said:
Disagree. Unless this administration does something to get a big bounce back, it will hurt the Dems in 2024. Unless the GOP stupidly runs Trump again. Biden won't go for a second term, but Harris will want to run. The Dems can't afford to give her the nomination. They'll have to find someone else to step up if they want to have any chance, and part of their struggle will be overcoming how this administration handled this. And let an American life be lost (God willing that does not happen), and they'll not be able to overcome it IMO. This isn't Benghazi where they were able to successfully dodge the unnecessary loss of life by blaming low to mid-level state department officials. Biden's incompetence on this withdraw has been all over the media, even the media that generally supports him. To call this a "mid-level **** up" is a huge understatement. It's wishful thinking.

Honestly, I thought the GOP made a huge blunder by becoming "the party of Trump". I thought it would ultimately cripple them and leave the Dems sitting pretty. But no, just when things looked really bad for the right, Biden says "hold my beer".

Lord, I would love if this somehow killed both parties. It won't. Wishful thinking on my part. But it would be great for our country if it did.
Click to expand...

There would just be two more parties taking their place. Look at football. The SEC gains a couple of teams, and the rest of the big conferences talk about uniting. It always comes down to two in our society, and that's just the way it is. Look at the collage basketball championship; it all funnels down to two. We couldn't be happy with bowl games; we had to pervert that and have two teams trying for the knockout. It's just who we are. The thought of no parties or multiple competing parties is pie in the sky ... not gonna happen. We put rules in place to prevent business monopolies; and then, in spite of it all, the government still allows mergers that lead to loss of real diffused competition.
 
#4,398
#4,398
volinbham said:
Yes, Vietnam was in the larger context of the red scare. Afghanistan was a reaction to 9/11. Clearly the world going red was a bigger felt threat than terrorism.

I don't think politicians have learned anything other than our foreign interventions have to be TV friendly.

I think citizens are recognizing the futility of foreign interventions without clear objectives and are rejecting nation building in any of it's guises (I hope)
Click to expand...

It is easier to go to war against a political ideology than a religious one. We conditioned a new generation of martyrs.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols and AM64
#4,399
#4,399
AM64 said:
I hadn't thought about it from that angle. I could see Pakistan maybe helping with a small dirty bomb or something else as nasty, but I can't really see them or another state turning a nuke over to uncontrollable terrorists. However, since Pakistan has been tied together with N Korea (as best I remember), that thought about supporting terrorists might not be sound. I've had the impression Pakistan is just playing both sides for survival - as you said India is next door, and there's still a lot of animosity about how Britain divided things up when they gave it up. It's incredible how many issues we've faced in recent history go back to European colonialism, and British "diplomacy and state building/realignment".
Click to expand...

Most of the worlds problems go back to European colonialism and our failure to crush the Soviet Union after WWII.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top