The War in Afghanistan

[GoldRanger]

Neither of which was any military or economic threat to any country in Europe of the Americas.

You're also naive. You don't understand that these countries are not floating in a vacuum, that power interconnects and flows between borders, and that things that used to be a certain way are no longer so. I'll repeat and say again: we'll see the consequences of your flight from Afghanistan and other places in the next decade or two, maybe sooner.

 

[Marduk]

And finally... the Pakistanis are apparently whining that they have been left with the Afghan Taliban now... even though they've basically been sponsoring them for the past several decades.



Yes... very unfair to Pakistan I'm sure.

Now that's just cheeky. The DNC should reply with something brand appropriate, like "If you like your Taliban, you can keep your Taliban, and considering that you've been keeping them for decades you must like them a lot."

You're also naive. You don't understand that these countries are not floating in a vacuum, that power interconnects and flows between borders, and that things that used to be a certain way are no longer so. I'll repeat and say again: we'll see the consequences of your flight from Afghanistan and other places in the next decade or two, maybe sooner.

The consequence is that Pakistan is yet again all but officially in charge there.
And once the last US soldier is out of Afghanistan, then US finally gets back an ability to do things that make Pakistan unhappy.

 

[Aldarion]

Just watching Charlemagne's commentary. He's got some good points:

 

[Zachowon]

It's interesting that with their worldwide commitments at lowest in decades, USA can't scrape together enough active duty troops to fill 5000 men task force and has to rely on NG to fill up the ranks.

From the looks of things, it might not be bodies but equipment/doctrine(?) that made that decision--the Minnesota Guard unit is an armored/mechanized-infantry unit that brags on the MinGuard website about training exercises in "base defense, tactical logistical resupply, maintenance operations and convoy and recovery operations."

Though the same question still applies as to why no active-duty folks with similar equipment/experience were around, so...*shrug*

^^This is all just the ignorant notes of someone who's closest experience to military decision-making or organization is Tom Clancy books.

No.
We can easily get more them 5k active duty troops on the ground if needed.

The Army constantly trains every unit in these various tasks.

The National Guard were already federalised for other areas, and were probably already geared up to go.

Probably already have the logistics in place for what would have been a deployment before the pullout.

For instance, the 82md is a force that can be prepped and ready to go in 48 hours. A more conventional non AB force takes longer because you account for the vehicles needed to get over there.

In the end it is what units are available and not currently occupied with other things, and can get over there the fastest.

Also, there is active Duty MPs there as well from 89th.

 

[PsihoKekec]

I'll repeat and say again: we'll see the consequences of your flight from Afghanistan and other places in the next decade or two, maybe sooner.

As opposed to continuous consequences of sustaining presence in unsustainable places? Sometimes you have to cut the cord and move on, accepting the consequences. Even if those who mooch you off, would prefer for you to carry on for eternity.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Some insane graphics from the Kabul Airport runway.



Yeah...

Also Apache Gunships clearing out the runways...

 

[GoldRanger]

As opposed to continuous consequences of sustaining presence in unsustainable places? Sometimes you have to cut the cord and move on, accepting the consequences. Even if those who mooch you off, would prefer for you to carry on for eternity.

Those are negligible compared to what's coming. But yeah, I also admit America didn't handle Afghanistan correctly at all.

 

[Marduk]

Those are negligible compared to what's coming. But yeah, I also admit America didn't handle Afghanistan correctly at all.

What do you think is coming? I think the 90's are back, but with less militias and more China in the background.

 

[AnimalNoodles]

It was for Drugs and Oil. But the oil was for the EU, at least according to @IWD and others who have been looking at the bigger picture of the Iraq war and the fact that the American continent itself shouldn't have a need to import any oil.

The Americans went into afghanistan for the ultimate purpose of creating a client state on the border of Iran.

 

[AnimalNoodles]

You're also naive. You don't understand that these countries are not floating in a vacuum, that power interconnects and flows between borders, and that things that used to be a certain way are no longer so. I'll repeat and say again: we'll see the consequences of your flight from Afghanistan and other places in the next decade or two, maybe sooner.

Consequences for whom? Iran wont be invading the USA or Europe.

 

[GoldRanger]

What do you think is coming? I think the 90's are back, but with less militias and more China in the background.

In the long term: Masses of refugees sweeping through Europe, severe disruption of maritime trade, swathes of territories in the ME and Africa falling into China's sphere of influence, emboldening it elsewhere and potentially igniting a war with the US, mass terrorism on European and US soil, countries being reluctant to cooperate with the US militarily, and probably more besides. It'll take a couple of decades until you start seeing these effects (you already see the refugees in Europe causing severe political turmoil, expect that to get worse), and they're not solely the result of the Afghani debacle, but it's inevitable.

 

[Culsu]

So, basically, everything that's already been happening anway, check.

 

[GoldRanger]

Consequences for whom? Iran wont be invading the USA or Europe.

Iran and others will definitely be flooding Europe with refugees, and flooding both with terrorist attacks, drugs and more.

 

[GoldRanger]

So, basically, everything that's already been happening anway, check.

It began happening because the US started to weaken, and it will intensify a thousand fold as it continues to wither.

 

[GoldRanger]

Consequences for whom? Iran wont be invading the USA or Europe.

For the USA and Europe. Military invasion is by far not the only threat a country can face from other countries, maybe not even in the top 5.

 

[AnimalNoodles]

Iran and others will definitely be flooding Europe with refugees, and flooding both with terrorist attacks, drugs and more.

No, we are being flooded with refugees because the wars destablised the region. Europe never had a problem in this scale until the invasions of iraq set the dominos toppling.

 

[Marduk]

The Americans went into afghanistan for the ultimate purpose of creating a client state on the border of Iran.

Then it was a total failure, they have just poured money in what in effect was a temporary crook state on the verge of being a client state of Pakistan.

In the long term: Masses of refugees sweeping through Europe,

So, tuesday. Both in general and from Afghanistan specifically, refugees were Europe's problem since decades. The core of the problem is Europe's own policy, as for not mysterious at all reason so many refugees choose Europe in favor of geographically closer and more culturally similar countries.

severe disruption of maritime trade,

What the hell does landlocked Afghanistan of all things have to do with maritime trade?

swathes of territories in the ME and Africa falling into China's sphere of influence, emboldening it elsewhere and potentially igniting a war with the US,

Yeah, some extreme isolationists may want to go that far, but i think USA should pick its battles in that regard. Defend what's defensible and worth defending, not everything. Afghanistan is not one of these things.

mass terrorism on European and US soil,

Most of it domestically based, ironically. If they don't want terrorism they should deal with the immigration problem, both first and later generations. Which in turn is completely independent of anything that happens in ME. Why doesn't Japan have an islamic terrorism problem?

countries being reluctant to cooperate with the US militarily, and probably more besides.

Being compliantly led by the nose by Pakistan promotes a kind of cooperation USA should never want. Tolerating and even rewarding treachery for decades in fact makes USA look soft and lose respect. With allies like Pakistan and Afghanistan, USA needs no enemies.

No, we are being flooded with refugees because the wars destablised the region. Europe never had a problem in this scale until the invasions of iraq set the dominos toppling.

The region was never stable to begin with. The flood of refugees came because they saw what awaits them and they liked it more than the alternative options. And what did they see? Merkels and NGOs of Europe inviting them and showering them with caring rhetoric and taxpayer funded welfare. They saw it, they liked it, and they came for their dole.
If Europe wants to not have this problem it needs to start doling out something less encouraging.

 

[GoldRanger]

So, tuesday.

No. Tuesday times one thousand is more like it. What you seen up to this point is only a promo.

What the hell does landlocked Afghanistan of all things have to do with maritime trade?

1. I'm not talking about Afghanistan alone, but American policy in general.

2. Everything is interconnected. The effect of what happened yesterday in Kabul will be felt with dozens of allies and enemies alike for decades to pass. The US will find itself with less allies and more enemies all around the world.

Yeah, some extreme isolationists may want to go that far, but i think USA should pick its battles in that regard. Defend what's defensible and worth defending, not everything. Afghanistan is not one of these things.

There's a difference between saying that you shouldn't have been there in the first place (understandable) and pulling out after making a huge mess of things. What you have broken now cannot be unbroken.

Most of it domestically based, ironically.

Yes, and not without the involvement of your enemies, the same enemies you're encouraging and emboldening with your disgraceful weakness.

If they don't want terrorism they should deal with the immigration problem, both first and later generations. Which in turn is completely independent of anything that happens in ME. Why doesn't Japan have an islamic terrorism problem?

Because they're an ocean and a continent away from the ME, just like the US?

And the refugees already inside are not going to allow Europe to change its ways. And they'll get more and more numerous and radicalized as time passes.

For some reason you think that if you leave the Muslims alone, they'll leave you alone in return and you can wash your hands off of that mess. It doesn't work that way in those cultures. Making you run away from the ME with your tail between your legs is only Phase 1 as far as they're concerned.

 

[Husky_Khan]

Looks like flights out of Kabul have been momentarily suspended due to the masses of people on the tarmac.

No flights leaving Kabul as desperate people crowd tarmac, Germany says

No evacuation flights are leaving Kabul airport at the moment because desperate people trying to flee the country are blocking the tarmac, a spokesperson for the German foreign ministry said on Monday.

www.reuters.com

 

[Culsu]