4 hours ago, Dumbastheycome said:

I have to agree with your retort in the sense of cause. Unfortunately it is the presence of soldiers that provoke resistance and in Afghanistan that has been so since  British experience in the mid  1800's.

Afghanistan has long been a pawn in foreign political games that have  taken advantage of civil infighting resulting only in magnifying the number of  deaths and human suffering.

A significant irony is that in assisting resistance to the Soviet invasion by the Mujahideen and associates  gave rise to more civil war and eventually to the now so called  Al Qaeda ultra Islamists .

A reduction of 5000 from the nominal 14000 military personel is hardly going to appease a sworn enemy.

 

 

 

Kinda interesting how that Soviet Invasion doesn't get criticized much by those going on and on about USA, NATO and the British Empire.

 

40 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Kinda interesting how that Soviet Invasion doesn't get criticized much by those going on and on about USA, NATO and the British Empire.

 

Is it? Why?

Do you  have something  material to add to that  interest?

British Empire ?

 

I am so glad I am retired! Thank God I am done with that craziness.

 

Off-topic posts and replies removed.  

 

On ‎9‎/‎4‎/‎2019 at 3:33 AM, Morch said:

 

If and when the USA steps out, the country will most likely descend into some sort of civil war. And it's not that things are great even now, with the USA presence keeping things under some semblance of control. 

 

Dealing with Afghanistan on an economic level related to large infrastructure and mining operations would require a stable government. Kinda doubt that the Chinese will have a reliable partner to do business with.

 

China is not all that coy about projecting military might and more, when it suits. More so when the things are (relatively) in its (expanding) neighborhood.

 

And while you may tout the resistance bit, I don't think that all people of Afghanistan are thrilled about the possibility of the USA withdrawing. Nice co-opting effort there.

The people in the pro western camp must be horrified as they probably remember what happened when the Russians abandoned their Afghan allies. Expect thousands of refugees to be knocking on the west's door.

The document is not closed. Because Trump will want to spin it with his personal stamp, so he can boast and steal credit for the deal. Think he'll give credit to anyone else, this King Narcissistic President.?

19 minutes ago, jerojero said:

The document is not closed. Because Trump will want to spin it with his personal stamp, so he can boast and steal credit for the deal. Think he'll give credit to anyone else, this King Narcissistic President.?

President Obama was on the right track before he let himself get hi-jacked, I presume by the Hawks, MIC, and the line of Afghanis at the trough.

 

I presume getting US (and other) troops out of Afghanistan is a higher priority than your petty parrot's rhetoric.  If he gets the job done, great.  If not, then internet tough guys can return to crushing him.  You go, gurl!  ????????

 

Sorry @Morch, get a bit carried away with the internet drama queens. 

 

Otherwise, did I get something wrong?  Obama pulling troops out of Iraq and AFG.  One down, then got way-laid into a surge.  And here we are.  Still.  Just my 5,000' level recollection. 

That’s why we elected Trump to get the hell out of the Middle East. 

On 9/6/2019 at 2:19 AM, 55Jay said:

Sorry @Morch, get a bit carried away with the internet drama queens. 

 

Otherwise, did I get something wrong?  Obama pulling troops out of Iraq and AFG.  One down, then got way-laid into a surge.  And here we are.  Still.  Just my 5,000' level recollection. 

 

Well, I don't know that Obama "let himself get hi-jacked". More like running USA foreign policy being rather more complex and on a grander scale that focusing on single issues allows for. I don't think all those weary of hasty, unconditional pullout can be labeled as "hawks", nor "MIC" being a credible one either. Locals feeding at the trough and having enough pull to alter USA policy on this level? Doubtful.

 

Any USA president needs to contend with multiple foreign policy issues on multiple fronts. And with such issues often effecting one another. That's without getting into political constraints and considerations. While it is tempting to use handy labels, slogans and whatnot, this rarely amounts to a fair or objective take on things.

 

As for praising Trump on this score - why don't we just wait and see, eh?

On 9/6/2019 at 3:02 AM, Guitarzan said:

That’s why we elected Trump to get the hell out of the Middle East. 

 

Whether Afghanistan counts as the ME could be argued. Don't know that there was a significant USA troop reduction in the region. And before citing Syria - not that many troops deployed to begin with, and not all pulled out. In Iraq, figures seem to be unchanged, with possibly an increase in the Gulf.